DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues that the Office Action mailed 03/10/2026 appeared to assert that the post 124 in Massad corresponds to the “connecting portion” therefore, further arguing that post 124 does not connect the upper dental tray 104 to the lower dental tray 102 but rather a part used to vary the location at which the post 124 contacts the striking plate 126. Furthermore, the applicant argues regarding claim 2 that the post 124 already corresponds to the “connecting portion” in claim 1, thus it cannot also correspond to the “distance adjustment screw”. Also, the applicant further argued that the claimed “tray” is configured such that the “connecting portion” and the “distance adjustment screw” perform different functions unlike the cited references that do not disclose “the connecting portion” while postulating the relative novelty and utility of the claimed invention.
Regarding the applicant’s arguments above, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s assertions. The Office Action (OA) mailed 03/10/2026 did not reference element 124 as the “connecting portion” rather interpreted the limitation "connecting portion" as presented using broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI). The term "connecting portion" as interpreted is a portion wherein there is a form of interconnection between the inner surfaces of the maxillary and the mandibular trays. The claim limitation does not require there to be a particular means through which the maxillary and the mandibular trays are interconnected but rather requires a "portion" where the inner surfaces of the trays are connected. Furthermore, as admitted by the applicant, the striking plate and the contact plate are integral parts of the respective trays to which they are removably secured and thus, interpreted as such by the examiner. The term "connect" means: to join, attach, link objects so they touch, hold or work with each other. While the claim limitation does not require "the means" by which the trays are connecting in the connection portion, the annotated “connecting portion” as presented in the OA mailed 03/10/2026 clearly defines a portion where the inner surface of the maxillary and the mandibular trays are interconnected, reference to element 124 was only giving clarity as to the means through which the inner sides of the trays are interconnected/linked/joined. Also, it seems the applicant is conflicting elements 131 with element 130.
Furthermore, the applicant’s argument regarding claim 2 is moot because as referenced above, element 124 was not defined as the "connecting portion" in the OA mailed 03/10/2026. Also, In response to applicant's argument that that the claimed “tray” is configured such that the “connecting portion” and the “distance adjustment screw” perform different functions unlike the cited references that do not disclose “the connecting portion” while postulating the relative novelty and utility of the claimed invention, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Finally, the amendment of claim 1 changes the scope of the claim than was previously presented (12/27/2024) thus, necessitating new search, new interpretation of the prior arts, and new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8-10, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Leathers (US 2562106 A).
Regarding claim 1, Leathers discloses a maxillomandibular registration tray (Figs. 1-3), comprising: a maxillary portion (10 Figs. 1-3) configured to contact a patient's maxilla; a mandibular portion configured (12 Fig. 3) to contact a patient's mandible; a connecting portion interconnecting an inner surface of the maxillary portion and an inner surface of the mandibular portion (see annotated Fig. 3: the portion between elements 14/26 and 16/18; see that in the annotated connecting portion, the inner surfaces of elements 10 and 12 are interconnected by elements 52/54/56/70. Note the limitation “connecting portion” is interpreted by the examiner as a portion with a means: to join, attach, link objects so they touch, hold or work with each other), the connecting portion connecting the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion to each other (see Figs. 1-3) and maintaining a separation distance between the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion (see that there is a separation distance between elements 14/26 of the maxillary portion (10) and elements 16/18 of the mandibular portion as illustrated in Figs. 1-3); and a distance adjustment screw (22 Figs. 1-3) separate from the connecting portion and configured to adjust the separation distance between the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion when rotated about an axis of the distance adjustment screw (Col. 2 lines 16-20: element 22 separate from elements 52/54/56/70, can be used to adjust the vertical distance between elements 10 and 12), wherein the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion connected by the connecting portion are configured to be completely separated from each other by an external force separating the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion, without rotating the distance adjustment screw (Figs. 1-4; elements 70 of the connecting portion are configured with a spring that biases it to engage or impinge against element 26 (Col. 3 lines 30-37) thus interconnecting the undersides of elements 12 and 10 in such a configuration that can be completely separated from each other by external force without rotating element 22 since elements 10 and 12 are not affixed
PNG
media_image1.png
210
642
media_image1.png
Greyscale
permanently via the connecting portion).
Regarding claim 2, Leathers discloses the claimed invention substantially as set forth in claim 1. Leathers further discloses the tray of claim 1, wherein one of the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion includes a screw hole (24 Figs. 1-3) formed in a central portion of said one of the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion, and the distance adjustment screw is configured to be inserted into the screw hole (see Figs. 1-3: see that the screw hole (24) is formed on the central portion of element 18 of the mandibular portion (see Figs. 1-3) as best illustrated in Fig. 5, and the distance adjustment screw is configured to be inserted into the screw hole (24); see Col. 2 lines 16-21).
Regarding claim 3, Leathers discloses the claimed invention substantially as set forth in claim 2. Leathers further discloses the tray of claim 2, wherein the distance adjustment screw (22 Figs. 1-3) applies pressure to the inner surface of the other of said one of the maxillary portion and mandibular portion as the distance adjustment screw is inserted into the screw hole (see Figs. 1-3: as disclosed, element 22 would apply some degree of pressure to element 26 as the vertical dimension between elements 10 and 12 is adjusted; also element 22 engages element 26 as element 22 traces the Gothic arch 28 to give various relationship data of the mandible (Col. 2 lines 28-31)).
Regarding claim 4, Leathers discloses the claimed invention substantially as set forth in claim 2 above. Leathers further discloses the tray of claim 2, wherein the separation distance (see annotated Fig. 3; the distance between element 26 of element 10 and element 18 of element 12) between the maxillary portion (10 Fig. 3) and the mandibular portion (12 Fig. 3) is according to an insertion distance of the distance adjustment screw into the screw hole (see Fig. 3; see that the distance between element 26 of element 10 and element 18 of element 12 is according to the insertion distance of element 22, i.e., as the insertion distance through the screw hole increases, the separation distance increases).
Regarding claim 6, Leathers discloses the claimed invention substantially as set forth in claim 2 above. Leathers further discloses the tray of claim 2, further comprising a passageway (34 Fig. 6) extending from the surface of the screw hole to an edge of said one of the maxillary portion and mandibular portion (see that the passage way extends from the central hole to the edge of element 26, which is a recording or bearing plate of element 10, as illustrated in Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image2.png
348
642
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Leathers discloses the claimed invention substantially as set forth in claim 1. Leathers further discloses the tray of claim 1, wherein the connecting portion (see annotated Fig. 3: the portion between elements 14/26 and 16/18; see that in the annotated connecting portion, the inner surfaces of elements 10 and 12 are interconnected by elements 52/54/56/70. Note the limitation “connecting portion” is interpreted by the examiner as a portion with a means: to join, attach, link objects so they touch, hold or work with each other) includes a plurality of posts (54/70; 52/70; 56/70 Figs. 1, 3 and 5) and wherein the plurality of posts connect the inner surface of the maxillary portion and the inner surface of the mandibular portion (see annotated Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 9, Leathers discloses the claimed invention substantially as set forth in claim 8. Leathers further discloses the tray of claim 8, wherein the plurality of posts are detachable from at least one of the maxillary portion and mandibular portion by an external force separating the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion (Figs. 1-4; elements 70 of the connecting portion are configured with a spring that biases it to engage or impinge against element 26 (Col. 3 lines 30-37) thus interconnecting the undersides of elements 12 and 10 in such a configuration that can be completely separated from each other by external force without rotating element 22 since elements 10 and 12 are not affixed
permanently via the connecting portion, i.e., element 74 of 70 which us adapted to engage the inner side of the maxillary portion can be detached from said inner side of the maxillary portion by external force).
Regarding claim 10, Leathers discloses the claimed invention substantially as set forth in claim 8. Leathers further discloses the tray of claim 8, wherein one of the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion includes a screw hole (24 Figs. 1-3) into which the distance adjustment screw is configured to be inserted (see Figs. 1-3: see that the screw hole (24) is formed on the central portion of element 18 of the mandibular portion (see Figs. 1-3) as best illustrated in Fig. 5, and the distance adjustment screw is configured to be inserted into the screw hole (24); see Col. 2 lines 16-21), and wherein the inner surfaces of the maxillary portion and mandibular portion include a first region adjacent to the screw hole (24 Figs. 3 and 5) and a second region excluding the first region, and wherein the plurality of posts (54/70; 52/70; 56/70 Fig. 5 and annotated Fig. 5) are disposed only in the second region (see annotated Figs. 3 and 5).
PNG
media_image3.png
456
346
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Leathers discloses the claimed invention substantially as set forth in claim 2. Leathers further discloses the tray of claim 2, wherein the distance adjustment screw (22 Fig. 3) is configured to apply pressure to the inner surface of the other of said one of the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion in a direction away from said one of the maxillary portion and the mandibular portion having the screw hole, thereby increasing the separation distance (see Figs. 1-3: as disclosed, element 22 would apply some degree of pressure to element 26 as the vertical dimension between elements 10 and 12 is adjusted; also element 22 engages element 26 as element 22 traces the Gothic arch 28 to give various relationship data of the mandible (Col. 2 lines 28-31); see that the tip of element 22 engaging the inner side (element 26) of the maxillary portion applies pressure in a direction away from the mandibular portion (12) to increase the vertical dimension between elements 10 and 12).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leathers (US 2562106 A) in view of Kofford et al. (US 20230200950 A1) and further in view of Halstorm et al. (US 20070209666 A1).
Leathers discloses the claimed invention substantially as set forth in claim 2 above. Leathers is silent regarding claim 5, wherein the distance adjustment screw includes one or more numerical markings extending longitudinally along the surface of the distance adjustment screw to indicate an insertion distance of the distance adjustment screw into the screw hole.
Kofford et al. teaches an analogous screw member (10 paragraph 0181) including one or more numerical markings extending longitudinally along the surface of the distance adjustment screw (paragraph 0181; The temporary attachment post 10 may include indicators (not shown) in the end by the cap 11 to provide intermediate visual and/or tactile feedback on the depth of threaded engagement of the post during screw attachment of the coping to the implant abutment. The indicators as interpreted by the examiner serves as an indication of the extent to which element 10 is inserted through the screw hole (element 18). The limitation as stated is functional thus, while Kofford et al. does not teach the limitation as claimed, it clearly demonstrates that the device of Kofford et al. is capable of functioning as claimed, therefore satisfies the claimed limitation).
While Kofford et al. does not explicitly teach said visual indicators to be numerical markers, Halstorm et al. teaches a mandible positioning device wherein the visual indicator of depth of screw (34 Fig.5) are numerical markings (70 Fig. 5) on element 26 (Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the distance adjustment screw of Leathers to be configured to include one or more numerical markings extending longitudinally along the surface of the distance adjustment screw to function as an indication of an insertion distance of the distance adjustment screw into the screw, as taught by Kofford et al. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify said visual indicators as taught by Kofford et al. to be configured as numerical markings, as taught by Halstorm et al, thus providing an easy numeric reading of the screw’s depth when in use. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to create a distance adjustment screw that provides visual and/or tactile feedback on the depth of the threaded engagement of the screw during screw attachment process thus, ensuring effective engagement of the screw to the corresponding dental components.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIEMERIE C AZUBUOGU whose telephone number is (571)272-0664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:00 AM - 6:00PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eric Rosen can be reached at (571)270-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C.A./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/ERIC J ROSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
