DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2, line 4 recites “a dental implant” , it is unclear if this is the same dental implant as recited inline 3. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as the same dental implant. A suggested amendment is “the dental implant”.
Claim 2, line 11 recites “the temporary abutment”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as the previously cited temporary abutment cap
Claim 3 recites “the dental component is one of a prosthetic tooth and an abutment configured to be coupled to the prosthetic tooth”, it is unclear how the dental component can only be one a prosthetic tooth and an abutment, when the limitation requires the abutment be configured to be coupled to the prosthetic tooth. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as the dental component can be either the prosthetic tooth or the abutment, and the abutment is configured to be coupled to a prosthetic tooth which is not the same as the previously recited prosthetic tooth. A suggested amendment is “the dental component is one of a prosthetic tooth or an abutment configured to be coupled to a prosthetic tooth”.
Claim 4, line 14-15 recites “receiving scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of the patient’s gingival tissue surrounding the attached prosthetic assembly, information relating to and/or representative of the one or more information markers on the temporary abutment cap, and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the one or more information markers, and/or the patient’s dental anatomy surrounding the attached prosthetic assembly”, it is unclear how the scanning data relates to the “at least two characteristics of the prosthetic assembly” which is disclosed as being used to gather information for the manufacturing the dental component in claim 2. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as the scanning data is considered characteristics of the prosthetic assembly.
Claim 4, line 18-19 recites “an underlying implant”, it is unclear if this is different than the previously recited dental implant that is attached to the abutment/prosthetic assembly. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as the same implant.
Claims 5-11 and 21 are rejected based on claim dependency on claim 4
Claims 5-6 further recite “underlying implant” and it is unclear if the implant is referencing to the implant introduced in claim 2 or the underlying implant in claim 4.
Claim 12, line 4 recites “underlying implant”, it is unclear if this is different than the previously recited dental implant that is attached to the abutment/prosthetic assembly. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as the same implant.
Claim 12 recites “receiving first scanning data…” and “receiving second scanning data….” it is unclear how the scanning data relates to the “at least two characteristics of the prosthetic assembly” which is disclosed as being used to gather information for the manufacturing the dental component in claim 2. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as the scanning data is considered characteristics of the prosthetic assembly.
Claim 12, line 29-30 “three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis”, it is unclear how this relates to the “dental component” of claim 2.For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as the dental component being either patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis.
Claims 13-20 are rejected based on claim dependency on claim 12.
Claims 13-14 further recite “underlying implant” and it is unclear if the implant is referencing to the implant introduced in claim 2 or the underlying implant in claim 12.
Claim 21 recites “computer that executes instructions, the instructions causing the computer to perform the steps of claim 5”, it is unclear which steps are performed by the computer, as preceding claim 2 requires physical steps such as “installing a dental implant into a jawbone of a patient” and “attaching a prosthetic assembly” which are not instructions which can be executed solely by a computer.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 17 recites “creating, using the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of the patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis transferring the three-dimensional virtual model of the patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis to a milling machine to fabricate the patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis” which is recited in previous claim 12 . Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 21 recites “computer that executes instructions, the instructions causing the computer to perform the steps of claim 5”, however the steps of claim 5 include steps such as preceding claim 2 that require “installing a dental implant into a jawbone of a patient” and “attaching a prosthetic assembly” which would require physical interaction with the patient and the computer does not disclose structure or means of performing the steps, as such the claim fails to limit the disclosure of claim 5. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-21 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: See non-final rejection mailed 3/11/2026 for detailed reason for allowance.
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 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
8/25/2026
Prosecution Insights