DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Objections
Claim 2-3 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2, line 6 change “the abutment” to “the abutment base”.
Claim 3, change “to coupled to” to “to couple to”.
. Appropriate correction is required.
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 are 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 recites “the top surface of the temporary abutment cap”, however the previous recitation of the abutment cap does not disclose if the abutment cap is temporary or if this is an additional temporary abutment cap. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as the same abutment cap recited earlier in the claim.
Claim 2 recites “the temporary abutment” it is unclear if this is an additional limitation, or if it is the same abutment base recited earlier in the claim. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as the same abutment base recited earlier in the claim.
Claims 3 is rejected based on claim dependency on claim 2.
Claim 4 recites “the scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of a patient's gingival tissue surrounding a temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of an informational marker on the temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the information marker, and/or the patient's dental anatomy surrounding the temporary abutment” it is unclear what data is included or required by the claim and which are optional. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as “scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of a patient's gingival tissue surrounding a temporary abutment, information relating to and/or representative of an informational marker on the temporary abutment, and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the information marker, and/or the patient's dental anatomy surrounding the temporary abutment” where all limitations separated by the commas and the single “and” are required limitation, the first and/or relates to relating to and/or representative of, the second and/or relates to relating to and/or representative of, the third and/or relates to the information markers, emergence profile and/or patient’s dental anatomy. Claims 5-11 and 21 are rejected based on claim dependency on claim 4.
Claim 12 recites “the first scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of the patient's gingival tissue surrounding the temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of an informational marker on the temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the information marker, and/or the patient's dental anatomy surrounding the temporary abutment”, it is unclear what data is included or required by the claim and which are optional. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as
“the first scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of the patient's gingival tissue surrounding the temporary abutment, information relating to and/or representative of an informational marker on the temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the information marker, and/or the patient's dental anatomy surrounding the temporary abutment”, where all limitations separated by the commas and the single “and” are required limitation, the first and/or relates to relating to and/or representative of, the second and/or relates to relating to and/or representative of, the third and/or relates to the information markers, emergence profile and/or patient’s dental anatomy. Claims 13-20 are rejected based on claim dependency on claim 12.
Claim 21, recites “a system as claimed in claim 4”, however claim 4 fails to recite or disclose any system in claim 4. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as a system with a computer that executes instructions.
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 8 and 21 are 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 8 recites “creating, using the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis” which is recited in claim 4, and as such claim 8 fails to further limit previously cited claims 4. Claim 21 recites “system as claimed in claim 4, comprising a computer that executes instructions, the instructions causing the computer to perform the steps of claim 5”, however claim 4 fails to disclose a system and therefore fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 4 (See MPEP section 608.01(n)). 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 10 is rejected based on claim dependency on claim 8.
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 4-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 4 recite a method of developing a dental component, said method comprising: receiving scanning data, the scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of a patient's gingival tissue surrounding a temporary abutment, information relating to and/or representative of an informational marker on the temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the information marker, and/or the patient's dental anatomy surrounding the temporary abutment;
creating, based on the received scanning data, a three-dimensional virtual model of at least a portion of the patient's gingiva tissue, teeth, and the temporary abutment;
determining one or more parameters based on the information marker; and
based on the determined one or more parameters, modifying the three-dimensional virtual model to remove the temporary abutment to provide, in the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a location and orientation of an underlying implant and a relative position of the underlying implant in the patient's gingival tissue for use in creating, using the modified three- dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis.
The abstract idea falling under the enumerated grouping of mental processes includes observation, judgement and evaluation during the limitation “creating, based on the received scanning data, a three-dimensional virtual model of at least a portion of the patient's gingiva tissue, teeth, and the temporary abutment; determining one or more parameters based on the information marker; and based on the determined one or more parameters, modifying the three-dimensional virtual model to remove the temporary abutment to provide, in the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a location and orientation of an underlying implant and a relative position of the underlying implant in the patient's gingival tissue for use in creating, using the modified three- dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis” were the limitation “creating” is interpreted under the broadest reasonable interpretation, which can be performed with an arbitrary tool such as a pen and paper or a computer. Furthermore, wherein the claim under broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification discloses a process which can be performed by the human mind or in combination with the assistance of a physical aid, and there is no specific claim limitation which inhibits a human from performing the disclosed steps, except generic computer implemented steps (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) (IID).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements:
-claim 4 recites “receiving scanning data, the scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of a patient's gingival tissue surrounding a temporary abutment, information relating to and/or representative of an informational marker on the temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the information marker, and/or the patient's dental anatomy surrounding the temporary abutment”, which is considered insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data gathering, which does not amount to an inventive concept (See MPEP 2106.05(g))).
-claim 5 recites “the information marker comprises one or more of a positive informational marker, negative informational marker, raised projection, recess, notch, line, etch, and alphanumeric character, wherein the informational marker indicates one or more characteristics of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant and wherein the information marker indicates one or more of a rotational orientation of a non-rotational feature of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant, a height of the temporary abutment, an x, y or z position of a table or seating surface of the underlying implant, an angle that the underlying implant rests with respect to a vertical axis within the patient's jawbone, and a size and/or shape of the temporary abutment and/or implant, and a manufacturer of the underlying implant” which is considered a further elaboration of the insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data gathering, which does not amount to an inventive concept (See MPEP 2106.05(g))).
-claim 6 recites “the information marker comprises one or more of a positive informational marker, negative informational marker, raised projection, recess, notch, line, etch, and alphanumeric character, wherein the informational marker indicates one or more characteristics of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant, and wherein the informational marker is part of a binary marking system that identifies a unique characteristic of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant” which is considered a further elaboration of the insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data gathering, which does not amount to an inventive concept (See MPEP 2106.05(g))).
-claim 7 recites “the binary marking system comprises an array of digits, the array of digits comprising "0" and "1", wherein the presence of absence of an informational marker is a "0" or "1" and the absence of an informational marker is the other of "0" or "1", and further comprising: grouping sets of "1"s and "0"s starting from a known starting location to determine information associated with the informational marker” which is considered a further elaboration of the insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data gathering, which does not amount to an inventive concept (See MPEP 2106.05(g))).
-claim 8 recites “creating, using the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis” which is considered a further elaboration of the abstract idea of mental processes set forth above.
-claim 9 recites “transferring the modified three-dimensional virtual model to a milling machine to fabricate a rapid prototype model of the patient's mouth, the rapid prototype model comprising a replica of the patient's gingival contours” this limitation is interpreted as providing the model to a milling machine and does not positively recite the step of fabricating a rapid prototype model of the patient’s mouth, and is therefore considered insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data outputting (See MPEP 2106.05(g))).
-claim 10 recites “transferring the three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis to a milling machine to fabricate the patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis”, this limitation is interpreted as providing the model to a milling machine and does not positively recite the step of fabricating the patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prostheses and is therefore considered insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data outputting (See MPEP 2106.05 (g))).
-claim 11 recites “the determining one or more parameters based on the information marker comprises: mapping the informational marker in the scanning data in a look-up table indexing the informational marker against corresponding parameters to determine the one or more parameters” which is considered a further elaboration of the abstract idea of mental processes set forth above.
Claim 12 recites a method of developing a dental component, said method comprising: before healing of a patient's gingival tissue after installation of a temporary abutment and underlying implant, receiving first scanning data, the first scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of the patient's gingival tissue surrounding the temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of an informational marker on the temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the information marker, and/or the patient's dental anatomy surrounding the temporary abutment; before healing of the patient's gingival tissue after installation of the temporary abutment and underlying implant, receiving second scanning data, the second scanning data comprising anatomical information related to and;/or representative of the temporary prosthesis and/or temporary abutment cap while located outside of the patient's mouth; merging the first and second scanning data to create a three-dimensional virtual model of at least a portion of the patient's gingiva tissue, teeth, and the temporary abutment; determining one or more parameters based on the information marker; and based on the determined one or more parameters, modifying the three-dimensional virtual model to remove the temporary abutment to provide, in the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a location and orientation of the underlying implant and a relative position of the underlying implant in the patient's gingival tissue for use in creating, using the modified three- dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis.
The abstract idea falling under the enumerated grouping of mental processes includes observation, judgement and evaluation during the limitation “; merging the first and second scanning data to create a three-dimensional virtual model of at least a portion of the patient's gingiva tissue, teeth, and the temporary abutment; determining one or more parameters based on the information marker; and based on the determined one or more parameters, modifying the three-dimensional virtual model to remove the temporary abutment to provide, in the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a location and orientation of the underlying implant and a relative position of the underlying implant in the patient's gingival tissue for use in creating, using the modified three- dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis” were the limitation “creating” is interpreted under the broadest reasonable interpretation, which can be performed with an arbitrary tool such as a pen and paper or a computer. Furthermore, wherein the claim under broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification discloses a process which can be performed by the human mind or in combination with the assistance of a physical aid, and there is no specific claim limitation which inhibits a human from performing the disclosed steps, except generic computer implemented steps (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) (IID).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements:
-claim 12 recites “before healing of a patient's gingival tissue after installation of a temporary abutment and underlying implant, receiving first scanning data, the first scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of the patient's gingival tissue surrounding the temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of an informational marker on the temporary abutment and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the information marker, and/or the patient's dental anatomy surrounding the temporary abutment; before healing of the patient's gingival tissue after installation of the temporary abutment and underlying implant, receiving second scanning data, the second scanning data comprising anatomical information related to and/or representative of the temporary prosthesis and/or temporary abutment cap while located outside of the patient's mouth” which is considered insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data gathering, which does not amount to an inventive concept (See MPEP 2106.05(g))).
-claim 13 recites “the information marker comprises one or more of a positive informational marker, negative informational marker, raised projection, recess, notch, line, etch, and alphanumeric character, wherein the informational marker indicates one or more characteristics of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant, and wherein the information marker indicates one or more of a rotational orientation of a non-rotational feature of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant, a height of the temporary abutment, an x, y or z position of a table or seating surface of the underlying implant, an angle that the underlying implant rests with respect to a vertical axis within the patient's jawbone, and a size and/or shape of the temporary abutment and/or implant, and a manufacturer of the underlying implant” which is considered insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data gathering, which does not amount to an inventive concept (See MPEP 2106.05(g))).
-claim 14 recites “the information marker comprises one or more of a positive informational marker, negative informational marker, raised projection, recess, notch, line, etch, and alphanumeric character, wherein the informational marker indicates one or more characteristics of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant and wherein the informational marker is part of a binary marking system that identifies a unique characteristic of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant” which is considered insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data gathering, which does not amount to an inventive concept (See MPEP 2106.05(g))).
-claim 15 recites “the binary marking system comprises an array of digits, the array of digits comprising "0" and "1", wherein the presence of absence of an informational marker is a "0" or "1" and the absence of an informational marker is the other of "0" or "1", and further comprising: grouping sets of "1"s and "0"s starting from a known starting location to determine information associated with the informational marker” which is considered a further elaboration of the insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data gathering, which does not amount to an inventive concept (See MPEP 2106.05(g))).
-claim 16 recites “transferring the modified three-dimensional virtual model to a milling machine to fabricate a rapid prototype model of the patient's mouth, the rapid prototype model comprising a replica of the patient's gingival contours” this limitation is interpreted as providing the model to a milling machine and does not positively recite the step of fabricating the patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prostheses and is therefore considered insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data outputting (See MPEP 2106.05 (g))).
-claim 17 recites “creating, using the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis transferring the three- dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis to a milling machine to fabricate the patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis” this limitation is interpreted as providing the model to a milling machine and does not positively recite the step of fabricating the patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prostheses and is therefore considered insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, more specifically data outputting (See MPEP 2106.05 (g))).
-claim 18 recites “the determining one or more parameters based on the information marker comprises: mapping the informational marker in the scanning data in a look-up table indexing the informational marker against corresponding parameters to determine the one or more parameters” which is considered a further elaboration of the abstract idea of mental processes set forth above.
-claim 19 recites “merging the first and second scanning data comprises: aligning data sets representing the first and second scanning data by one or more of aligning corresponding informational markers on the temporary abutment and temporary abutment cap, evaluating portions of non-rotational features of the temporary abutment and temporary abutment cap, and using third scanning data of the temporary abutment cap installed on the temporary abutment.” which is considered a further elaboration of the abstract idea of mental processes set forth above.
-claim 20 recites “the emergence profile of the patient's gingival tissue adjacent to an implantation site of the underlying implant is predicted based on the contours of the temporary prosthesis and/or temporary abutment cap” which is considered a further elaboration of the abstract idea of mental processes set forth above.
-claim 21 recites “a computer that executes instructions, the instructions causing the computer to perform the steps of claim 5”, which only additionally discloses a general purpose computer and is therefore only a further elaboration of the abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claim 4-10 and 21 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Powell (US 2007/0092854).
In regard to claim 4, Powell discloses a method of developing a dental component (par 63 discloses a method of creating a permanent prosthesis by first scanning the dental area), said method comprising:
receiving scanning data, the scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of a patient's gingival tissue surrounding a temporary abutment (par 65 discloses the generation of three dimensional image data of the emergence profile contours of the healed abutment using software), information relating to and/or representative of an informational marker on the temporary abutment (par 66 discloses the addition of information via software including information markers) and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the information marker, and/or the patient's dental anatomy surrounding the temporary abutment (par 65-66 discloses the different information markers in combination with the information of the edentulous site and emergence profile to create the three dimensional image for the imaging software) ;
creating, based on the received scanning data, a three-dimensional virtual model of at least a portion of the patient's gingiva tissue, teeth, and the temporary abutment (par 63, 65-66 discloses using scanned data to generate three dimensional images of the healing abutment and edentulous area);
determining one or more parameters based on the information marker (par 73 discloses scanning or visual inspection to determine information about the implant or healing abutment); and
based on the determined one or more parameters, modifying the three-dimensional virtual model to remove the temporary abutment to provide in the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a location and orientation of an underlying implant and a relative position of the underlying implant in the patient's gingival tissue for use in creating, using the modified three- dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis (figure 13 discloses the removal of the healing abutment from the CAD model, par 92 discloses the removal of the healing abutment 1002 to reveal the position of the healing abutment and par 93 discloses the attachment of a patients specific custom abutment using the known information).
In regard claim 5, Powell discloses the information marker comprises one or more of a positive informational marker, negative informational marker, raised projection, recess, notch, line, etch, and alphanumeric character, wherein the informational marker indicates one or more characteristics of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant (positive information markers 20 and 120, see par 53 discloses the markers being raised projections as seen in figure 1a-b and recessed as seen in figure 2a-b and par 55) and wherein the information marker indicates one or more of a rotational orientation of a non-rotational feature of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant, a height of the temporary abutment, an x, y or z position of a table or seating surface of the underlying implant, an angle that the underlying implant rests with respect to a vertical axis within the patient's jawbone, and a size and/or shape of the temporary abutment and/or implant, and a manufacturer of the underlying implant (par 53 discloses the information markers 20 being indicative to the height of the healing abutment).
Regarding claim 6, Powell discloses the information marker comprises one or more of a positive informational marker, negative informational marker, raised projection, recess, notch, line, etch, and alphanumeric character, wherein the informational marker indicates one or more characteristics of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant (positive information markers 20 and 120, see par 53 discloses the markers being raised projections as seen in figure 1a-b and recessed as seen in figure 2a-b and par 55), and wherein the informational marker is part of a binary marking system that identifies a unique characteristic of the temporary abutment and/or underlying implant (par 73 discloses the use of binary code to identify characteristics of the abutment).
Regarding claim 7, Powell discloses the binary marking system comprises an array of digits, the array of digits comprising "0" and "1", wherein the presence of absence of an informational marker is a "0" or "1" and the absence of an informational marker is the other of "0" or "1", (par 73 discloses the binary code of the system and the absence and presence meaning)and further comprising: grouping sets of "1"s and "0"s starting from a known starting location to determine information associated with the informational marker (par 77 discloses the code being used in location).
Regarding claim 8, Powell discloses creating, using the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis (figure 13 discloses the removal of the healing abutment from the CAD model, par 92 discloses the removal of the healing abutment 1002 to reveal the position of the healing abutment and par 93 discloses the attachment of a patient’s specific custom abutment using the known information).
Regarding claim 9, Powell discloses transferring the modified three-dimensional virtual model to a milling machine to fabricate a rapid prototype model of the patient's mouth, the rapid prototype model comprising a replica of the patient's gingival contours (par 14 disclose the transfer of the model to a milling machine and fabricating the prototype for custom abutment/prosthesis).
Regarding claim 10, Powell discloses transferring the three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis to a milling machine to fabricate the patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis (par 14 disclose the transfer of the model to a milling machine and fabricating the prototype for custom abutment/prosthesis).
Regarding claim 21, Powell discloses a computer that executes instructions, the instructions causing the computer to perform the steps of claim 5 (par 77 discloses the computer performing the steps of scanning and executing instructions).
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 though 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.
Claim 11 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Powell et al as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Yau et al (US 2009/0104583).
Regarding claim 11, Powell discloses the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 6, but fails to disclose the determining one or more parameters based on the information marker comprises: mapping the informational marker in the scanning data in a look-up table indexing the informational marker against corresponding parameters to determine the one or more parameters.
Yau teaches determining one or more parameters based on the information marker (the reference abutment device 30 having a readable/ reference marker feature 32 which is associated with a parameter such as angle, direction etc par 34) comprises: mapping the informational marker in the scanning data in a look-up table indexing the informational marker against corresponding parameters to determine the one or more parameters (par 31-32 discloses the feature 32 being associated with data within a database to a desired positioning information).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was made of the claimed invention as set forth above in Powell to the determining one or more parameters based on the information marker comprises: mapping the informational marker in the scanning data in a look-up table indexing the informational marker against corresponding parameters to determine the one or more parameters as taught by Yau for the purpose of enabling direct reading of a desired feature.
Double Patenting
Claims 12 and 16 of this application is patentably indistinct from claim 14 and 20 of Application No. 17/837,971. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.78(f), when two or more applications filed by the same applicant or assignee contain patentably indistinct claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their retention during pendency in more than one application. Applicant is required to either cancel the patentably indistinct claims from all but one application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822.
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 12 and 16 provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 14 and 20 of copending Application No. 17/837,971 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 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.
Claims 12-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, the prior art of record Regarding claim 2, Porter et al (US 6,558,162) discloses a method of developing a dental component (col 1, line 20-21 discloses the implant system that enables the construction of a permanent dental component), said method comprising:
installing a dental implant into a jawbone (col 10, line 16);
attaching a prosthetic assembly to the dental implant (col 3, lines 15-20 discloses the attachment of a healing abutment assembly to the implant, see also claim 1), the prosthetic assembly including an abutment base (such as healing abutment 600, details seen as healing abutment 10 as seen in figure 1a) having a lower region (first tapered section 17 and second tapered section 21) and an upper region (main body 15), the lower region configured to couple with the dental implant (see figure 1c); and
an abutment cap (cap 602) configured to be coupled to the upper region of the abutment (see figure 7 and col 9, lines 47-50 discloses the coverage of the abutment by the cap), the prosthetic assembly discloses including one or more informational markers (notches 604/606) providing information concerning the temporary abutment or the dental implant (col 10, lines 60-64 discloses the notches representing information concerning the abutment or dental implant)
generating scan data including at least informational marker data (col 5, lines 14-22 discloses the scanner taking the information directly from the mouth of the patient to collect the information);
determining at least two characteristics of the prosthetic assembly to gather information for manufacturing the dental component (col 8, lines 53-57 discloses the scan of the attached component being used to create a permanent prosthesis and col 8, lines 63-67 discloses the collected information from the information marker and scans are entered into the software program to create the permanent or final dimensions of the permanent prosthesis), and
developing the dental component based on said at least two characteristics (col 8, lines 24-34 discloses the use of the different information markers to incorporate into the final prosthesis are included).
Porter fails to disclose the top surface of the abutment cap having the one or more informational markers, the prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious positioning informational markers on the top surface of an abutment which are used to provide information concerning the temporary abutment or dental implant and generating scan data including at least informational marker data. Claim 3 is indicated allowable subject matter based on claim dependency on claim 2.
Regarding claim 12, prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious a method of developing a dental component, comprising before healing of a patient's gingival tissue after installation of a temporary abutment and underlying implant, receiving first scanning data, the first scanning data comprising an anatomically shaped emergence profile of the patient's gingival tissue surrounding the temporary abutment, information relating to and/or representative of an informational marker on the temporary abutment, and information relating to and/or representative of a geometrical relationship between the anatomically shaped emergence profile, the information marker, and/or the patient's dental anatomy surrounding the temporary abutment;
before healing of the patient's gingival tissue after installation of the temporary abutment and underlying implant, receiving second scanning data, the second scanning data comprising anatomical information related to and/or representative of the temporary prosthesis and/or temporary abutment cap while located outside of the patient's mouth;
merging the first and second scanning data to create a three-dimensional virtual model of at least a portion of the patient's gingiva tissue, teeth, and the temporary abutment; determining one or more parameters based on the information marker; and based on the determined one or more parameters, modifying the three-dimensional virtual model to remove the temporary abutment to provide, in the modified three-dimensional virtual model, a location and orientation of the underlying implant and a relative position of the underlying implant in the patient's gingival tissue for use in creating, using the modified three- dimensional virtual model, a three-dimensional virtual model of a patient-specific abutment and/or permanent tooth prosthesis. Claims 13-20 are indicated allowable based on claim dependency on claim 12.
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