DETAILED ACTION
This action is in reference to the communication filed on 7 JAN 2025.
Claims 1-20 are present and have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. As explained below, the claim(s) are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step One: Is the Claim directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? YES
With respect to claim(s) 1-20 the independent claim(s) 1, 8, 15 recite(s) a method, a system, and a computer readable medium, each of which is a statutory category of invention.
Step 2A – Prong One: Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon (product of nature) or an abstract idea? YES
With respect to claim(s) 1-20 the independent claim(s) (claims 1, 8, 15) is/are directed, in part, to:
A method of providing a dental service to a patient comprising:
Obtaining one or more x-rays, intraoral images, or other images of a patient's mouth,
teeth, and gums;
using one or more trained image processing models to identify a type, location, size , or dimension of a dental pathology or non-pathology in the x-rays, intraoral images, or other images;
generating one or more images or animations illustrating a likely progression over time of the dental pathology for that patient if not treated; and
generating one or more images or animations illustrating a likely outcome of a proposed treatment plan for the dental pathology for that patient.
These claim elements are considered to be abstract ideas because they are directed to mental processes, which include concepts performed in the human mind such as observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion. Obtaining images, using a model to determine a pathology, and generating images regarding the likely progression if treated or untreated, are all concepts which can be reasonably performed in the human mind. These involve observation of the images, judgement/evaluation of the conditions, and opinion regarding outcome of treating/not treating the condition. Examiner also notes that he use or application of the model itself is an example of a mathematical concept – i.e. mathematical relationships/formulas/equations/calculations.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers concepts performed in the human mind, then it falls within the “mental processes” grouping of abstract idea. If a claim limitation under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mathematical relationships/formulas/calculations, it falls within the mathematical concepts grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A – Prong Two: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? NO.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim(s) recite(s) additional elements: Examiner notes that as currently written, claim 1 is devoid of any additional elements for consideration at this step. Claims 8, 15 recites a non-transitory computer readable medium, and one or more processors to perform the claimed steps. The non transitory computer readable medium and one or more processors in claims 8, 15, are recited at a high level of generality and as such amount to no more than adding the words “apply it” to the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05f), or generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological field of use/computing environment (see MPEP 2106.05h). Examiner finds no improvement to the functioning of the computer or any other technology or technical field in the above identified elements as currently claimed (see MPEP 2106.05a), nor any other application or use of the judicial exception in some meaningful way beyond a general like between the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (see MPEP 2106.05e). In the interest of compact prosecution, Examiner notes that the sending and receiving of data, i.e. the steps executed by the processors in claims 8, 15, is generally found to be analogous to adding insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception(s) identified (see MPEP 2106.05g).
Accordingly, this/these additional element(s) do(es) not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? NO.
The independent claim(s) is/are additionally directed to claim elements such as: Claims 8, 15 recites a non-transitory computer readable medium, and one or more processors to perform the claimed steps. Examiner notes claim 1 as currently written is devoid of any additional elements for consideration at this step. When considered individually, the non-transitory computer readable medium, and one or more processors claim elements only contribute generic recitations of technical elements to the claims. It is readily apparent, for example, that the claim is not directed to any specific improvements of these elements. Examiner looks to Applicant’s specification in:
[0056] For example, in some embodiments, one or more of the operations, functions, processes, or methods disclosed and/or described herein may be implemented by a suitable processing element or elements (such as a processor, microprocessor, co-processor, CPU, GPU, TPU, QPU, state machine, or controller, as non-limiting examples) that are part of a client device, server, network element, remote platform (such as a SaaS platform), an “in the cloud” service, or other form of computing or data processing system, device, or platform.
[0247] As shown in FIG. 2(a), system 200 may represent a server or other form of computing or data processing system, server, platform, or device. Modules 202 each contain a set of executable instructions, where when the set of instructions is executed by a suitable electronic processor or processors (such as that indicated in the figure by “Physical Processor(s) 230”), system (or server, platform, or device) 200 operates to perform a specific process, operation, function, or method. Modules 202 are stored in a non-transitory memory 220, which typically includes an Operating System module 204 that contains instructions used (among other functions) to access and control the execution of the instructions contained in other modules.
[0350] Any of the software components, processes or functions described in this application may be implemented as software code to be executed by a processor using any suitable computer language such as Python, Java, Javascript, C++, or Perl using procedural, functional, object-oriented, or other techniques. The software code may be stored as a series of instructions, or commands in (or on) a non-transitory computer-readable medium, such as a random-access memory (RAM), a read only memory (ROM), a magnetic medium such as a hard-drive, or an optical medium such as a CD-ROM. In this context, a non-transitory computer-readable medium is almost any medium suitable for the storage of data or an instruction set aside from a transitory waveform. Any such computer readable medium may reside on or within a single computational apparatus and may be present on or within different computational apparatuses within a system or network.
These passages, as well as others, makes it clear that the invention is not directed to a technical improvement. When the claims are considered individually and as a whole, the additional elements noted above, appear to merely apply the abstract concept to a technical environment in a very general sense – i.e. a generic computer receives information from another generic computer, processes the information and then sends information back. The most significant elements of the claims, that is the elements that really outline the inventive elements of the claims, are set forth in the elements identified as an abstract idea. The fact that the generic computing devices are facilitating the abstract concept is not enough to confer statutory subject matter eligibility.
As per dependent claims 2-7, 9-24, 16-20:
Dependent claims 2-7, 9-24 are not directed any additional abstract ideas and are also not directed to any additional non-abstract claim elements. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above – such as the types of information identified in the modeling, the additional information used to make a determination about the condition, and the locations of the information collection/image generation. While these descriptive elements may provide further helpful context for the claimed invention these elements do not serve to confer subject matter eligibility to the invention since their individual and combined significance is still not heavier than the abstract concepts at the core of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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)(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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Cramer et al (US 20240189078 A1, hereinafter Cramer).
In reference to claim 1, 8, 15:
Cramer teaches: A method of providing a dental service to a patient, comprising:
A non-transitory computer readable medium including a set of computer-executable instructions; one or more electronic processors configured to execute the set of computer-executable instructions wherein when executed the instructions cause the one or more electronic processors to (at least [fig 12 and related text]):
One or more non-transitory computer readable media including a set of computer-executable instructions that when executed by one or more programmed electronic processors, (at least [fig 12 and related text]) cause the processors to:
Obtain[ing] one or more x-rays, intraoral images, or other images of a patient's mouth,
teeth, and gums (at least [048] “…a dentist or doctor (terms used interchangeably herein) and/or their technicians may gather various information about a patient. Such information may include image data corresponding to one or more imaging modalities, including, but not limited to, intraoral 3D scans of the patient's dental arches, x-rays of the patient's teeth (e.g., optionally including bitewing x-rays of the patient's teeth, panoramic x-rays of the patient's teeth, periapical and occlusal x-rays, etc.), cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans of the patient's jaw, infrared images of the patient's teeth, or color 2D images of the patient's teeth and/or gums.” At [fig 9 and related text] “At block 905, processing logic receives current, most recent, or previous image data of a patient's intraoral cavity. In at least one embodiment, the image data corresponds to one or more imaging modalities comprising, for example, an imaging modality selected from an intraoral scan, a radiograph, or a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan.” See also [fig 1A, 4 and related text] for discussion of the image obtaining, )
us[ing] one or more trained image processing models to identify a type, location, size , or dimension of a dental pathology or non-pathology in the x-rays, intraoral images, or other images (at least [049] “In at least one embodiment, a customizable decision tree model is implemented to support the clinical decision process for identifying a tooth requiring a restoration and helping to identify the restoration type... In at least one embodiment, a restorative decision system can identify a tooth having an associated dental condition based on a set of parameters derived from image data of an intraoral cavity of a patient. A 2D or 3D image of the intraoral cavity can be presented in a graphical user interface (GUI), for example, of a diagnostics hub, along with an indication of the associated dental condition. ” at [0166] “At block 1110, processing logic applies a trained machine learning model to the image data to derive a plurality of parameters from the image data. In at least one embodiment, the trained machine learning model is adapted to compute or estimate a volume of restorative material present on or in a tooth in the image data, “ see also [fig 1c and related text] “The dental diagnostics summary 103 provides a single view showing multiple different types of possible dental conditions and assessments as to the presence and/or severity of each of the types of dental conditions.”)
generat[ing] one or more images or animations illustrating a likely progression over time of the dental pathology for that patient if not treated (at least [0118] “The doctor may select a time-based simulation function to launch a time-based simulation for the selected dental condition (e.g., for caries). The time-based simulation may use information about AOIs as they existed at different points in time from the patient's record history (e.g., intraoral scans, NIRI images, color images, x-rays, etc. from different points in time) to project progression of the dental condition into the future and/or into the past. The time-based simulation may generate a video showing the start of the dental condition and progression of the dental condition over time to the present status of the dental condition and into the future. The time-based simulation may further include one or more treatment options, and may show what the areas of interest into the future after one or more selected treatments are performed.” At [0121] “The educational information may show what happens when the tooth decay reaches the patient's dentin and/or pulp, indicating an amount of pain that the patient can expect at various stages of tooth decay. The educational information may be shown to a patient to show that patient the stages of tooth decay for their teeth and what will happen if they don't treat the tooth decay."); and
generat[ing] one or more images or animations illustrating a likely outcome of a proposed treatment plan for the dental pathology for that patient (at least [0118] “. The time-based simulation may generate a video showing the start of the dental condition and progression of the dental condition over time to the present status of the dental condition and into the future. The time-based simulation may further include one or more treatment options, and may show what the areas of interest into the future after one or more selected treatments are performed.”).
In reference to claim 2, 9, 16
Cramer further teaches: a model or models that operate to:
Classify the type of x-ray or image (at least [059-064] “ For example, processing logic may register x-ray images, CBCT scan data, ultrasound images, panoramic x-ray images, 2D color images, NIRI images, and so on to the 3D model. Each of the different imaging modalities may contribute different information about the patient's dentition.”),
Determine the potential severity of a pathology [fig 1c and related text] “The dental diagnostics summary 103 provides a single view showing multiple different types of possible dental conditions and assessments as to the presence and/or severity of each of the types of dental conditions.”;
Identify a tooth number or identifier associated with each tooth (at least [fig 1E and related text} tooth numbers 165, 186);
Determine a measurement of bone levels (at least [110] “bone loss dental category 170 may launch a dental analysis tool illustrating the respective dental condition that was selected on the patient's dentition.”) ; and
Identify one or more anatomical tooth structures (at least [0111] pulp/dentin).
In reference to claim 3, 10, 17:
Cramer further teaches: Wherein the dental pathology is one or more of caries, periapical radiolucency, calculus, and furcation (at least [fig 1c and related text] caries, plaque, and the non-pathology is one or more of a previous restorative treatment, wisdom tooth removal, and inferior alveolar nerve treatment (at least [0112] “In at least one embodiment, restorative/prosthodontic category 162 includes one or more types of restorative and/or prosthodontic conditions. Prosthodontic dental conditions or issues may include a failing, failed or broken/cracked prosthesis, a worn prosthesis, a loose prosthesis, an ill-fitting prosthesis, and so on.”).
In reference to claim 4, 11, 18:
Cramer further teaches: wherein the anatomical tooth structure is one or more of dentin, enamel, and pulp (at least [0111, 119-121] dentin/enamel identified.)
In reference to claim 5, 12, 19:
Cramer further teaches: accessing a dental or health record of the patient and using information in the dental or health record as part of assessing the patients dental condition or planning a treatment (at least [fig 4 and related text] Past intraoral scan data 438, Additional past dental data 448).
In reference to claim 6, 13:
Cramer further teaches: Initially obtaining the x-rays intraoral images, or other images in a dental service provider’s office and providing them to a remote server or platform, the remote server or platform hosting a set of services that include using the one or more trained image processing models and generating the images or animations (at least [fig 4 and related text] Scanner 450 obtains the images as obtained in an office setting, and sends them to computing device 405 for scan application 408 to communicate with dental health analyzers 434 on dental diagnostics hub 430, at [058] “In at least one embodiment, intraoral scanning may be performed on a patient's oral cavity during a visitation of a dentist's office. “ at [0128] cloud computing, i.e. remotely located, see also [fig 1d and related text] “ FIG. 1D illustrates a user interface for navigating diagnostics results provided to a mobile device 158 by a dental diagnostics hub, in accordance with at least one embodiment of the present disclosure. The dental diagnostics summary 103 generated by a dental diagnostics hub may be sent to a device of a patient, which may be a mobile device 158 or a traditionally stationary device. Examples of mobile devices include mobile phones, tablet computers, laptops, and so on.”).
In reference to claim 7, 14:
Cramer further teaches: Receiving the generated images or animations from the remote server or platform at an application or workstation located in the dental service provider’s office (at least [figs. 1d and related text] showing the user’s mobile device access to the information from the platform, i.e. remotely received, and see also [fig 1b and related text] time lapse feature 142 is visible to the practitioner).
In reference to claim 20:
Cramer further teaches: wherein the instructions cause the x-rays, intraoral images, or other images to initially be obtained in a dental service provider’s office and providing them to a remote server or platform, the remote server or platform hosting a set of services that include using the one or more trained image processing models and generating the images or animations (at least [fig 4 and related text] Scanner 450 obtains the images as obtained in an office setting, and sends them to computing device 405 for scan application 408 to communicate with dental health analyzers 434 on dental diagnostics hub 430, at [058] “In at least one embodiment, intraoral scanning may be performed on a patient's oral cavity during a visitation of a dentist's office. “ at [0128] cloud computing, i.e. remotely located, see also [fig 1d and related text] “ FIG. 1D illustrates a user interface for navigating diagnostics results provided to a mobile device 158 by a dental diagnostics hub, in accordance with at least one embodiment of the present disclosure. The dental diagnostics summary 103 generated by a dental diagnostics hub may be sent to a device of a patient, which may be a mobile device 158 or a traditionally stationary device. Examples of mobile devices include mobile phones, tablet computers, laptops, and so on.”), and further cause the generated images or animations to be received at an application or workstation located in the dental service provider’s office (at least [figs. 1d and related text] showing the user’s mobile device access to the information from the platform, i.e. remotely received, and see also [fig 1b and related text] time lapse feature 142 is visible to the practitioner).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20240212153 A1, to Golay, describes a method of using AI to detect a dental condition and plan a treatment course.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE KOLOSOWSKI-GAGER whose telephone number is (571)270-5920. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Mamon Obeid can be reached at 571-270-1813. 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.
/KATHERINE . KOLOSOWSKI-GAGER/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3687
/KATHERINE KOLOSOWSKI-GAGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3687