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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 13 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 16 change “fabricated based on the determined shapes” to “fabricated based on the determined shape of each aligner of the series of aligners”.
Claim 13, line 21 change “fabricated based on the determined shapes” to “fabricated based on the determined shape of each aligner of the series of aligners”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained through the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 5, 7-10, 13, 16-17 and 19 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Morton et al (US 2010/0138025) in view of Huang (US 2018/0325626).
Regard to claim 1, Morton discloses a method of forming a series of aligners for orthodontic treatment of a patient’s dentition (par 7 discloses the method/system of modifying and forming an attachment and orthodontic appliance for repositioning force in a series or system to elicit tooth movement), the method comprising:
accessing a library of prefabricated dental attachments, wherein the prefabricated dental attachments have predetermined characteristics (par 9 discloses a group of non-custom attachment and par 61 discloses the attachment parameters can be selected according to parameters or features of the attachment, this is interpreted as existing dental attachments with established parameters);
generating an orthodontic treatment plan for moving the patient’s teeth from an initial configuration toward a target configuration by applying repositioning forces to the patient’s teeth according to a series of treatment stages (par 55 discloses creating a treatment plan which changes the teeth from “their initial tooth arrangement to a final tooth arrangement by placing a series of incremental position adjustment appliances over the patient’s teeth”);
selecting one or more prefabricated dental attachments from the library of prefabricated dental attachments for applying the repositioning forces to the patient’s teeth according to the series of treatment stages (par 9 discloses selecting a first attachment from a group of non-custom attachments and a first force system is applied to a tooth having the first attachment engaged to the orthodontic appliance being modeled and par 60-61 discloses the selection of the attachment provides a desired or specific movement in the planned treatment, as such the selected first attachment is provided from the library of known or generic dental attachments for a planned repositioning stage and the parameter that can be modified include positioning);
determining a shape of each aligner of the series of aligners, wherein each aligner is configured to apply repositioning forces to the patient’s teeth according to a corresponding stage of the orthodontic treatment plan (par 63 discloses selecting a shape or design of the aligner based on the attachment design and par 55 discloses the creation of appliances for a plurality of steps in a treatment plan),
Morton fails to disclose determining the shape of each aligner of the one or more aligners includes one or more attachment cavities to accommodate the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments and causing the series of aligners to be fabricated based on the determined shapes.
Huang teaches a method of one or more of the aligners includes one or more attachment cavities to accommodate the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments and causing the series of aligners to be fabricated based on the determined shapes (par 7 discloses designing an aligner designed to conformally fit over the teeth and the attachment affixed thereto and is manufactures, wherein the aligner is “conformally shaped to cover at least some of the teeth and to engage with the attachment” and par 9 discloses the aligner conforming to the shape of the teeth, engaging with the attachment and exerting force on one or more teeth urging them towards a desired alignment) for the purpose of improving the efficacy of an aligner system combined with an attachment (par 30).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Morton to have the determination of the shape of one or more of the aligners include one or more attachment cavities to accommodate the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments and causing the series of aligners to be fabricated based on the determined shapes as taught by Huang for the purpose of improving the efficacy of an aligner system combined with an attachment.
Regarding claim 2, Morton discloses the prefabricated dental attachments have different characteristics including one or more of: a shape, a size, a rigidity, an elasticity, a deformability, and a material (par 61 discloses the attachment parameters can be geometry, shape, sizing composition or positioning).
Regarding claim 5, Morton discloses the one or more prefabricated attachments are configured to be bonded at one more predetermined locations on the patient’s teeth (par 63 discloses the attachment is bonded to a specific area and par 67 discloses the generic attachment shape is bonded to the tooth).
Regarding claim 7, Morton discloses receiving a scan of the patient’s teeth without the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments bonded to the patient’s teeth, wherein the orthodontic treatment plan is generated based on the scan (par 77 discloses collecting patient data for the creation of the treatment plan and par 79 discloses that data is collected by scanning the patient’s teeth and mouth tissue).
Regarding claim 8, Morton discloses determining attachment bonding zones corresponding to approximate bonding locations of the selected one or more dental attachments on the patient’s teeth, and providing the attachment bonding zones to a user (par 150 discloses determining the positioning of attachments on specific positions on the tooth with the selected attachment, par 152 discloses the zone of attachment being defined by characteristics on the tooth such as “the distance to the gingival curve, the distance to the interproximal zone or region (IP zone or IPR), the distance to the incisal edge, etc.” par 153-154 discloses determining the attachments position and discloses applying the solution to the patient; and par 121 discloses the attachment being bonded based on the treatment stage and desired tooth movement).
Regarding claim 9, Morton discloses causing the series of aligner to be fabricated comprises transmitting instructions for fabricating the series of aligners based on the determined shape of each aligner (par 86 discloses the manufacturing of the appliance based on electronic information produced during the process of creating).
Regarding claim 10, Morton discloses causing the series of aligners to be fabricated comprises fabricating the series of aligners based on the instructions using by direct fabrication or a molding process (par 118 discloses the manufacturing of the aligner based on the determined design and computational techniques, par. 120).
Regarding claim 13, Morton discloses a system for forming a series of aligners for orthodontic treatment of a patient’s dentition (par 7 discloses the method/system of modifying and forming an attachment and orthodontic appliance for repositioning force in a series or system to elicit tooth movement), the system comprising:
one or more processors (par 168 discloses the implementation of the invention on a device having a processor); and
one or more memory stores coupled to one or more processors (par 168 discloses the implement of the invention on a device having a processor that receives instruction and data from a memory), the one or more memory stores configured to store computer instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, perform a computer-implemented method (par 168) comprising:
accessing a library of prefabricated dental attachments, wherein the prefabricated dental attachments have predetermined characteristics (par 9 discloses a group of non-custom attachment and par 61 discloses the attachment parameters can be selected according to parameters or features of the attachment, this is interpreted as existing dental attachments with established parameters);
generating an orthodontic treatment plan for moving the patient’s teeth from an initial configuration toward a target configuration by applying repositioning forces to the patient’s teeth according to a series of treatment stages (par 55 discloses creating a treatment plan which changes the teeth from “their initial tooth arrangement to a final tooth arrangement by placing a series of incremental position adjustment appliances over the patient’s teeth”);
selecting one or more prefabricated dental attachments from the library of prefabricated dental attachments for applying the repositioning forces to the patient’s teeth according to the series of treatment stages (par 9 discloses selecting a first attachment from a group of non-custom attachments and a first force system is applied to a tooth having the first attachment engaged to the orthodontic appliance being modeled and par 60-61 discloses the selection of the attachment provides a desired or specific movement in the planned treatment, as such the selected first attachment is provided from the library of known or generic dental attachments for a planned repositioning treatment);
determining a shape of each aligner of the series of aligners, wherein each aligner is configured to apply repositioning forces to the patient’s teeth according to a corresponding stage of the orthodontic treatment plan (par 63 discloses selecting a shape or design of the aligner based on the attachment design and par 55 discloses the creation of appliances for a plurality of steps in a treatment plan),
Morton fails to disclose further wherein one or more of the aligners includes one or more attachment cavities to accommodate the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments; and causing the series of aligners to be fabricated based on the determined shapes.
Huang teaches a method of one or more of the aligners includes one or more attachment cavities to accommodate the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments and causing the series of aligners to be fabricated based on the determined shapes (par 7 discloses designing an aligner designed to conformally fit over the teeth and the attachment affixed thereto and is manufactures, wherein the aligner is “conformally shaped to cover at least some of the teeth and to engage with the attachment” and par 9 discloses the aligner conforming to the shape of the teeth, engaging with the attachment and exerting force on one or more teeth urging them towards a desired alignment) for the purpose of improving the efficacy of an aligner system combined with an attachment (par 30).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Morton to have the determination of the shape of one or more of the aligners include one or more attachment cavities to accommodate the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments and causing the series of aligners to be fabricated based on the determined shapes as taught by Huang for the purpose of improving the efficacy of an aligner system combined with an attachment.
Regarding claim 16, Morton discloses the one or more prefabricated attachments are configured to be bonded at one more predetermined locations on the patient’s teeth (par 63 discloses the attachment is bonded to a specific area and par 67 discloses the generic attachment shape is bonded to the tooth).
Regarding claim 17, Morton discloses the prefabricated dental attachments have different characteristics including one or more of: a shape, a size, a rigidity, an elasticity, a deformability, and a material (par 61 discloses the attachment parameters can be geometry, shape, sizing composition or positioning).
Regarding claim 19, Morton discloses receiving a scan of the patient’s teeth without the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments bonded to the patient’s teeth, wherein the orthodontic treatment plan is generated based on the scan (par 77 discloses collecting patient data for the creation of the treatment plan and par 79 discloses that data is collected by scanning the patient’s teeth and mouth tissue).
Claims 3-4 and 14-15 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Morton et al in view of Huang et al as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Sachdeva (US 2002/0156652).
Regarding claim 3, Morton/Huang disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1. Morton further discloses determining an optimized attachment based on the initial and target configuration (see par 62 which discloses improving the attachment with parameters that control the force delivered to the tooth, such as location or orientation), but fails to explicitly disclose providing a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth.
However, Sachdeva teaches a recommendation of a prefabricated dental attachments (bracket) from the library based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth (see par 12-13 where a library of shelf brackets is incorporated into a treatment planning program, which allows the user to select the bracket from the library, when the treatment plan is updated or modified the program modifies the prescription bracket and then searches through the library for a bracket that most closely matches the modified bracket, this newly selected bracket is then presented to the user and par 45 discloses the prescription is based on the initial and target teeth situation of the patient) for the purpose of eliminating guessing the initial attachment and save time by requiring fittings of the attachment (par 7).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Morton/Huang to use the determined optimization of the attachment to provide a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth as taught by Sachdeva for the purpose of eliminating guessing the initial attachment and save time by requiring fittings of the attachment.
Regarding claim 4, Morton/Huang disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1. Morton further discloses displaying a user interface that allows a user to enter one or more types of malocclusions, one or more chief concerns, or one or more types of malocclusions and one or more chief concerns (par 79 discloses the initial step of obtaining information about the position and structure of the teeth, jaw, gums and other orthodontically relevant tissue/arrangement where this information or the initial teeth position is considered the chief concern, par 61 discloses inputting information regarding the patient including characteristics of the individual patient and par 169 discloses a user interface to interact or enable input of data by the user) and determining an optimized attachment based on provided parameters by the user (see par 62 which discloses improving the attachment with parameters that control the force delivered to the tooth, such as location or orientation), but fails to disclose providing a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select based at least partially on information entered in the user interface.
However, Sachdeva teaches a recommendation of a prefabricated dental attachments (bracket) from the library based at least partially on information entered by the user (see par 12-13 where a library of shelf brackets is incorporated into a treatment planning program, which allows the user to select the bracket from the library, when the treatment plan is updated or modified the program modifies the prescription bracket and then searches through the library for a bracket that most closely matches the modified bracket, this newly selected bracket is then presented to the user and par 48 discloses the prescription/treatment plan being based on information entered about the patient such as the malocclusion, desired outcome etc.) for the purpose of eliminating guessing the initial attachment and save time by requiring fittings of the attachment (par 7).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Morton/Huang to use the determined optimization of the attachment to provide a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially based at least partially on information entered in the user interface as taught by Sachdeva for the purpose of eliminating guessing the initial attachment and save time by requiring fittings of the attachment.
Regarding claim 14, Morton/Huang disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 13. Morton further discloses the computer-implemented method further comprises providing determining an optimized attachment based on the initial and target configuration (see par 62 which discloses improving the attachment with parameters that control the force delivered to the tooth, such as location or orientation), but fails to explicitly disclose providing a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth.
However, Sachdeva teaches a recommendation of a prefabricated dental attachments (bracket) from the library based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth (see par 12-13 where a library of shelf brackets is incorporated into a treatment planning program, which allows the user to select the bracket from the library, when the treatment plan is updated or modified the program modifies the prescription bracket and then searches through the library for a bracket that most closely matches the modified bracket, this newly selected bracket is then presented to the user and par 45 discloses the prescription is based on the initial and target teeth situation of the patient) for the purpose of eliminating guessing the initial attachment and save time by requiring fittings of the attachment (par 7).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Morton/Huang the computer-implemented method to further use the determined optimization of the attachment to provide a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth as taught by Sachdeva for the purpose of eliminating guessing the initial attachment and save time by requiring fittings of the attachment.
Regarding claim 15, Morton/Huang disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 13. Morton discloses displaying a user interface that allows a user to enter one or more types of malocclusions, one or more chief concerns, or one or more types of malocclusions and one or more chief concerns (par 79 discloses the initial step of obtaining information about the position and structure of the teeth, jaw, gums and other orthodontically relevant tissue/arrangement where this information or the initial teeth position is considered the chief concern, par 61 discloses inputting information regarding the patient including characteristics of the individual patient and par 169 discloses a user interface to interact or enable input of data by the user), and determining an optimized attachment based on provided parameters by the user (see par 62 which discloses improving the attachment with parameters that control the force delivered to the tooth, such as location or orientation), but fails to disclose providing a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select based at least partially on information entered in the user interface.
However, Sachdeva teaches a recommendation of a prefabricated dental attachments (bracket) from the library based at least partially on information entered by the user (see par 12-13 where a library of shelf brackets is incorporated into a treatment planning program, which allows the user to select the bracket from the library, when the treatment plan is updated or modified the program modifies the prescription bracket and then searches through the library for a bracket that most closely matches the modified bracket, this newly selected bracket is then presented to the user and par 48 discloses the prescription/treatment plan being based on information entered about the patient such as the malocclusion, desired outcome etc.) for the purpose of eliminating guessing the initial attachment and save time by requiring fittings of the attachment (par 7).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Morton/Huang to use the determined optimization of the attachment to provide a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially based at least partially on information entered in the user interface as taught by Sachdeva for the purpose of eliminating guessing the initial attachment and save time by requiring fittings of the attachment.
Claims 3-4 and 14-15 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Morton et al in view of Huang et al as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, in further view of Paehl et al (US 2024/0033044)
Regarding claim 3, Morton/Huang disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1. Morton further discloses determining an optimized attachment based on the initial and target configuration (see par 62 which discloses improving the attachment with parameters that control the force delivered to the tooth, such as location or orientation), but fails to explicitly disclose providing a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth.
However, Paehl teaches recommending a prefabricated dental attachments from a plurality of predetermined attachment designs based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth (see par 80-81 which presents a plurality of attachment designs 550-558 and that an attachment can be selected by software based on the planned orthodontic treatment, where the software selection is interpreted as also providing a recommendation) for the purpose of determining the precise movement of each tooth (par 82)
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Morton/Huang to use the determined optimization of the attachment to provide a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth as taught by Paehl for the purpose of improving the treatment plan by having the determined movement of each tooth during the treatment.
Regarding claim 4, Morton/Huang disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1. Morton further discloses displaying a user interface that allows a user to enter one or more types of malocclusions, one or more chief concerns, or one or more types of malocclusions and one or more chief concerns (par 79 discloses the initial step of obtaining information about the position and structure of the teeth, jaw, gums and other orthodontically relevant tissue/arrangement where this information or the initial teeth position is considered the chief concern, par 61 discloses inputting information regarding the patient including characteristics of the individual patient and par 169 discloses a user interface to interact or enable input of data by the user) and determining an optimized attachment based on provided parameters by the user (see par 62 which discloses improving the attachment with parameters that control the force delivered to the tooth, such as location or orientation), but fails to disclose providing a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select based at least partially on information entered in the user interface.
However, Paehl teaches recommending a prefabricated dental attachments from a plurality of predetermined attachment designs based at least partially on inputted patient information (see par 80-81 which presents a plurality of attachment designs 550-558 and that an attachment can be selected by software based on the planned orthodontic treatment, where the software selection is interpreted as also providing a recommendation) for the purpose of determining the precise movement of each tooth (par 82)
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Morton/Huang to use providing a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select based at least partially on information entered in the user interface the determined optimization of the attachment to provide a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially based at least partially on information entered in the user interface as taught by Paehl for the purpose of eliminating guessing the initial attachment and save time by requiring fittings of the attachment.
Regarding claim 14, Morton/Huang disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 13. Morton further discloses the computer-implemented method further comprises providing determining an optimized attachment based on the initial and target configuration (see par 62 which discloses improving the attachment with parameters that control the force delivered to the tooth, such as location or orientation), but fails to explicitly disclose providing a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth.
However, Paehl teaches recommending a prefabricated dental attachments from a plurality of predetermined attachment designs based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth (see par 80-81 which presents a plurality of attachment designs 550-558 and that an attachment can be selected by software based on the planned orthodontic treatment, where the software selection is interpreted as also providing a recommendation) for the purpose of determining the precise movement of each tooth (par 82)
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Morton/Huang to use the determined optimization of the attachment to provide a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially on the initial configuration and the target configuration of the patient’s teeth as taught by Paehl for the purpose of improving the treatment plan by having the determined movement of each tooth during the treatment.
Regarding claim 15, Morton/Huang disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 13. Morton discloses displaying a user interface that allows a user to enter one or more types of malocclusions, one or more chief concerns, or one or more types of malocclusions and one or more chief concerns (par 79 discloses the initial step of obtaining information about the position and structure of the teeth, jaw, gums and other orthodontically relevant tissue/arrangement where this information or the initial teeth position is considered the chief concern, par 61 discloses inputting information regarding the patient including characteristics of the individual patient and par 169 discloses a user interface to interact or enable input of data by the user), and determining an optimized attachment based on provided parameters by the user (see par 62 which discloses improving the attachment with parameters that control the force delivered to the tooth, such as location or orientation), but fails to disclose providing a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select based at least partially on information entered in the user interface.
However, Paehl teaches recommending a prefabricated dental attachments from a plurality of predetermined attachment designs based at least partially on inputted patient information (see par 80-81 which presents a plurality of attachment designs 550-558 and that an attachment can be selected by software based on the planned orthodontic treatment, where the software selection is interpreted as also providing a recommendation) for the purpose of determining the precise movement of each tooth (par 82)
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Morton/Huang to use providing a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select based at least partially on information entered in the user interface the determined optimization of the attachment to provide a recommendation as to which of the prefabricated dental attachments to select from the library based at least partially based at least partially on information entered in the user interface as taught by Paehl for the purpose of eliminating guessing the initial attachment and save time by requiring fittings of the attachment.
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morton et al in view of Huang et al as applied to claim 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Kopelman et al (US 2019/0046297).
Regarding claim 6, Morton/Huang fail to disclose comprising receiving a scan of the patient’s teeth with the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments bonded to the patient’s teeth, wherein the shape of each aligner is based on the scan.
Kopelman teaches scanning an attachment attached to the patient’s teeth to design or determine the shape of a dental appliance (par 117 and par 177) for the purpose of providing data for estimating forces or creating a model or treatment plan (par 177).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Morton/Huang to receive scan of the patient’s teeth with the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments bonded to the patient’s teeth, wherein the shape of each aligner is based on the scan as taught by Kopelman for the purpose of providing data for estimating force and modifying or updating the treatment plan.
Regarding claim 18, Morton/Huang fails to disclose the computer-implemented method further comprises receiving a scan of the patient’s teeth with the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments bonded to the patient’s teeth, wherein the shape of each aligner is based on the scan.
Kopelman teaches scanning an attachment attached to the patient’s teeth to design or determine the shape of a dental appliance (par 117 and par 177) for the purpose of providing data for estimating forces or creating a model or treatment plan (par 177).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the computer implemented method of Morton/Huang to receive scan of the patient’s teeth with the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments bonded to the patient’s teeth, wherein the shape of each aligner is based on the scan as taught by Kopelman for the purpose of providing data for estimating force and modifying or updating the treatment plan.
Claims 11-12 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morton et al in view of Huang et al as applied to claim 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Matty (US 2019/0239983).
Regarding claims 11-12, Morton/Huang fail to disclose generating a virtual attachment placement template device having a shape configured to fit on the patient’s teeth and position the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments at corresponding bonding locations of the patient’s teeth and transmitting instructions for fabricating an attachment placement template device based on the virtual attachment placement template device, wherein the attachment placement template device includes the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachment attached thereto.
Matty teaches generating a virtual attachment placement template device having a shape configured to fit on the patient’s teeth and position the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments at corresponding bonding locations of the patient’s teeth (par 85 discloses digitally designing staged aligners on a computer and that one of the aligners being non-treatment and designed for the placement and bonding of the attachments to the teeth of the patient, par 92 discloses the attachments being pre-formed) and transmitting instructions for fabricating an attachment placement template device based on the virtual attachment placement template device, wherein the attachment placement template device includes the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachment attached thereto (par 17 discloses three dimensionally printing the non-treatment aligner, the non-treatment aligner being for mounting or positioning the anchor and par 96 discloses the non-treatment aligner being attached to the dental attachment) for the purpose of precisely positioning the attachment for the treatment plan (par 94).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Morton/Huang to include the steps of generating a virtual attachment placement template device having a shape configured to fit on the patient’s teeth and position the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments at corresponding bonding locations of the patient’s teeth and transmitting instructions for fabricating an attachment placement template device based on the virtual attachment placement template device, wherein the attachment placement template device includes the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachment attached thereto as taught by Matty for the purpose of precisely positioning the attachments to enable accurate prediction and determination when creating the treatment plan.
Regarding claim 20-21, Morton/Huang fails to disclose the computer-implemented method further comprises generating a virtual attachment placement template device having a shape configured to fit on the patient’s teeth and position the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments at corresponding bonding locations of the patient’s teeth and further comprises transmitting instructions for fabricating an attachment placement template device based on the virtual attachment placement template device, wherein the attachment placement template device includes the selected prefabricated one or more dental attachment attached thereto.
Matty teaches generating a virtual attachment placement template device having a shape configured to fit on the patient’s teeth and position the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments at corresponding bonding locations of the patient’s teeth (par 85 discloses digitally designing staged aligners on a computer and that one of the aligners being non-treatment and designed for the placement and bonding of the attachments to the teeth of the patient, par 92 discloses the attachments being pre-formed) and transmitting instructions for fabricating an attachment placement template device based on the virtual attachment placement template device, wherein the attachment placement template device includes the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachment attached thereto (par 17 discloses three dimensionally printing the non-treatment aligner, the non-treatment aligner being for mounting or positioning the anchor and par 96 discloses the non-treatment aligner being attached to the dental attachment) for the purpose of precisely positioning the attachment for the treatment plan (par 94).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the computer implemented method of Morton/Huang to include the steps of generating a virtual attachment placement template device having a shape configured to fit on the patient’s teeth and position the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachments at corresponding bonding locations of the patient’s teeth and transmitting instructions for fabricating an attachment placement template device based on the virtual attachment placement template device, wherein the attachment placement template device includes the selected one or more prefabricated dental attachment attached thereto as taught by Matty for the purpose of precisely positioning the attachments to enable accurate prediction and determination when creating the treatment plan.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached references cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHANNEL N BELK whose telephone number is (571)272-9671. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. -Fri. 11:30 am - 3:30 pm.
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at (571) 270-5614. 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.
/S.N.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/HEIDI M EIDE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
4/20/2026
Prosecution Insights