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 .
Preliminary Amendment
The preliminary amendment submitted on 03/04/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1-51 are canceled. Claims 52-69 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 52-54, 57-63, 67-69 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elazar et al. (US Publication Number 2018/0184891 A1, hereinafter “Elazar”).
(1) regarding claim 52:
As shown in fig. 1, Elazar disclosed a system for generating a three-dimensional representation of a user's dental feature (para. [0095], note that FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating components of an intraoral mirror including an integrated camera, referred to herein as a smart mirror device, according to an embodiment), comprising a device having an elongated body (100, fig. 1 note that a smart mirror device 100 with an elongated body is disclosed) comprising:
a) a head end comprising a face (103, fig. 1, para. [0061], note that the viewfinder mirror 103 is the face attached at the head);
(b) a tail end comprising a wireless electrical connection to a power supply (110, fig. 1, para. [0065], note that hand piece 110 i.e. tail includes a connector 113, a handle 112 and a button 114. Connector 113 is adapted to couple with connector 105 of oral piece 102. The coupling may be electrical. For example, connector 113 may supply power to oral piece 102 through connector 105);
(c) a shaft connecting the head end and the tail end (105, fig. 1, para. [064], note that connector 105 is a physical and electrical connector to connect oral piece 102 with hand piece 110);
wherein: the shaft comprises a shaft central axis through the shaft from the head end to the tail end (para. [0064], note that hand piece 110 can slide or partially slide into a hollow part of appendage 104 to attach hand piece 110 with connector 105. An impermeable lid may be used to seal off connector 105 when oral piece 102 is autoclaved);
the face comprises:
at least one optical sensor having a field of view, wherein the optical sensor has a central optical axis that is perpendicular to the field of view (para. [0067], note that surface 101 is a transparent feature, fig. 1, around a perimeter of mirror surface 206 may be a plurality of light sources 107A-107B. Light sources 107 may be illumination devices which as shown in fig. 2 are orthogonal to the FOV, pare [0068]), wherein the central optical axis is perpendicular to the shaft central axis (see fig. 2, wand is orthogonal to the sensors 107A-108B) and wherein the optical sensor is configured to capture a bidimensional image of the dental feature and comprises a fixed focus lens (para. [0069], note that the viewfinder mirror 103 may have several lenses. The multiple lenses may move or adjust to allow focus at different distances. There may be a mechanism for autofocus or a mechanism to add or remove one or more lenses between the mirror surface and the sensor. Also note that the images captured are 2Dimages, see para. [0061 & 0219]); and
at least one source of illumination oriented to illuminate the field of view (para. [0062], note that the light sources 107 are affixed around the perimeter of viewfinder mirror 103, and possibly concealed behind its reflective surface. Light source 107 may illuminate the intraoral environment.));
the system further comprises a computational unit configured to communicate with the device (para. [0108], note that the smart mirror device 100 transmits images and other information to base station 804), to receive the bidimensional image and to generate the three-dimensional representation of the dental feature based on the bidimensional image (para. [0142], note that while capturing a plurality of images, the active light sources vary, resulting in images of an object (or objects) in the intraoral environment, each captured with distinct illumination conditions. Such plurality of images that differ in illumination conditions may provide information useful for a 3D reconstruction of the scene being captured); and
a scale of the dental feature is determined (para. [0044], note that FIGS. 19A and 19B are diagrams illustrating how varying illumination from the intraoral mirror can provide information on the three-dimensional shape of a patient's teeth) on a basis of:
a brightness of the dental feature in the bidimensional image (para. [0233], note that to collect data in order to generate 3-D impressions employing a technique referred to as shape-from-shadow, embodiments include varying illumination image capturing as illustrated in FIGS. 19A and 19B.), a shape of a shadow casted by the dental feature in the bidimensional image (para. [0233], note that the amount of shadow casted by an object is generally related to the topography of the object. When determining the shape of objects in the mouth, the shadow that objects cast, as recorded in a two-dimensional image, may provide information about their three-dimensional shape. To collect data in order to generate 3-D impressions employing a technique referred to as shape-from-shadow).
Elazar disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching a bokeh generated by the fixed focus lens in the bidimensional image.
However, it would have been obvious for Elazar to teach a bokeh generated by the fixed focus lens in the bidimensional image (para [0208], note that the lighting, clarity, and focus may vary at each image. Thus, portions of the various images may be selected and blended together. In diagram 1600, portion 1606 of image 1602A, portion 1608 of image 1602B, and portion 1610 of image 1602C are selected. The selected portions are blended together to form a final composite image that is captured).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach a bokeh generated by the fixed focus lens in the bidimensional image. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide an efficient way to record and display what is visible to the healthcare provider in the mirror (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious for Elazar to obtain the invention as specified in claim 55.
(2) regarding claim 53:
Elazar further disclosed the system of claim 52, wherein the face further comprises an additional optical sensor (para. [0074], note that smart mirror device 302 includes an image sensor, and the image sensor captures light refracted by a lens with field of view 208).
(3) regarding claim 54:
Elazar further disclosed the system of claim 52, wherein the fixed focus lens is an autofocus lens emulating a fixed focus lens (para. [0069], note that the viewfinder mirror 103 may have several lenses. The multiple lenses may move or adjust to allow focus at different distances. There may be a mechanism for autofocus).
(4) regarding claim 57:
Elazar further disclosed the system of claim 52, wherein the source of illumination is a light emitting diode (LED) (para. [0120], note that light source 107 is a led emitting diode (LED)).
(5) regarding claim 58:
Elazar further disclosed the system of claim 57, wherein the scale of the dental feature is determined also on the basis of a pattern and size of reflections of the LED (para. [0073], note that a plurality of rays of light spanning from ray 414 to ray 416 travel from teeth 306 to mirror surface 304. Each of the rays, which we shall call incident rays, reach mirror surface 304 at an incidence angle, for example ray 422 at incidence angle 404. Then, according to the so-called “law of reflection”, the rays are reflected from the mirror surface 304 so that each reflected ray, the respective incident ray and the normal to the surface at the incidence point).
(6) regarding claim 59:
Elazar further disclosed a method for generating a three-dimensional representation of a user's dental feature using the system of claim 52, comprising: a) obtaining by the optical sensor a set of bidimensional images of the dental feature (fig. 16, para. [0206], note that FIG. 16 is a diagram 1600 illustrating how images from a stream of images in a video from the intraoral mirror are selected for capture); and b) generating the three-dimensional representation of the dental feature based at least in part on the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature (para. [0233], note that the amount of shadow casted by an object is generally related to the topography of the object. When determining the shape of objects in the mouth, the shadow that objects cast, as recorded in a two-dimensional image, may provide information about their three-dimensional shape. To collect data in order to generate 3-D impressions employing a technique referred to as shape-from-shadow, as shown in FIGS. 19A and 19B.).
(7) regarding claim 60:
Elazar further disclosed the method of claim 59, wherein the generating the three dimensional representation of the dental feature comprises comparing the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature to a reference image of a reference dental feature (para. [0212], note that the photo generated during a treatment may be compared to those previously recorded, and subsequently used for patient identification. If recognition of the patient being treated is achieved, the system may thereafter assign any photos and/or other information collected during the treatment to the patient, effectively selecting the patient's record), the reference image of the reference dental feature being associated with a pre-determined, three-dimensional structure of the reference dental feature (para. [0286], note that the capturing and image processing of one or more images is performed to establish a desired illumination intensity for a one or more light sources. Such processing may include, but is not limited to, identifying areas of an image that have an intensity above or below a threshold, estimating from images or receiving saturation and/or blooming data from an imaging sensor, comparing a plurality of images possibly with variable illumination and the like).
(8) regarding claim 61:
Elazar further disclosed the method of claim 60, wherein the reference image of the reference dental feature is taken by the optical sensor (para. [0286], note that the capturing and image processing of one or more images is performed to establish a desired illumination intensity for one or more light sources).
(9) regarding claim 62:
Elazar further disclosed the method of claim 60, wherein the reference image of the reference dental feature is synthetically generated (para. [0212], note that the photo (or part thereof) generated during a treatment may be compared to those previously recorded, and subsequently used for patient identification).
(10) regarding claim 63:
Elazar further disclosed the method of claim 60, further comprising adopting the pre determined, three-dimensional structure of the reference dental feature as the three dimensional representation of the dental feature (para. [0231], note that generating dental status, embodiments generate highly accurate digital dental 3D impressions, even in the case where the source for depth measurements are images).
(11) regarding claim 67:
Elazar further disclosed the method of claim 59, wherein the set of bidimensional images is three images of the dental feature, in particular comprising a buccal image of the dental feature, an occlusal image of the dental feature, and a lingual image of the dental feature (para. [0222], note that such panorama images can be created for various surfaces of a patient's teeth. Front, top and back for the upper and lower teeth (facial/buccal, inscisal/occlusal).).
(12) regarding claim 68:
Elazar further disclosed the method of claim 59, wherein in the set of bidimensional images, each bidimensional image overlaps with at least one other bidimensional image, in particular by at least about 10% (para. [0219], note that 0219] Based on associated position information for the respective photographs and the matching features, images 1732, 1734, 1736, 1738, 1740, 1742, and 1744 are aligned to represent a series of adjacent teeth. In particular, images 1732-1744 may be adjusted such that the overlapping portions appear similar).
(13) regarding claim 69:
Elazar further disclosed the method of claim 59, wherein the three-dimensional representation of the dental feature is a 3D point cloud (para. [0268], note that point cloud generator module 2214 generates a point cloud from position information and aligns it to previously generated point clouds, to allow the alignment of images captured at different dental sessions. Point cloud generator module 2214 may operate as described above with respect to FIG. 20, 21).
Claim(s) 55-56 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elazar in view of Pesach et al. (US Publication Number 2015/0348320 A1, hereinafter “Pesach”).
(1) regarding claim 55:
Elazar disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein the optical sensor is a RGB sensor.
However, Pesach teaches wherein the optical sensor is a RGB sensor (para. [0123], note that the imager includes an image sensor (e.g., CMOS sensor, CCD (Charge Coupled Device) sensor). In some embodiments, the imager includes a plenoptic camera i.e. RGB).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the optical sensor is a RGB sensor. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to accurately measure surface of the tooth (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Elazar with Pesach to obtain the invention as specified in claim 55.
(2) regarding claim 56:
Elazar disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the RGB sensor has a frame rate of at least 5 hz and at most 60 hz.
However, Pesach teaches wherein the RGB sensor has a frame rate of at least 5 hz and at most 60 hz (para. [0259], note that if the imager scanning rate is 10-60 frames per second, to image at least 500 scan positions around the tooth, the stylus is moved around path 219 in 8-50 seconds).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the RGB sensor has a frame rate of at least 5 hz and at most 60 hz. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to accurately measure surface of the tooth (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Elazar with Pesach to obtain the invention as specified in claim 55.
Claim(s) 64-66 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elazar in view of Saphier et al. (US Publication Number 2023/0068727 A1, hereinafter “Saphier”).
(1) regarding claim 64:
Elazar disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the generating the three dimensional representation of the dental feature comprises: 1) comparing the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature to a plurality of reference images, wherein each of the reference images is independently of a corresponding reference dental feature, wherein each reference image is associated with a pre-determined, three-dimensional structure of the corresponding reference dental feature; and 2) determining which reference image of the plurality is most similar to the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature.
However, Saphier disclosed wherein the generating the three dimensional representation of the dental feature comprises: 1) comparing the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature to a plurality of reference images (para. [0266], note that processing logic may compare multiple intraoral images (e.g., 2D intraoral images) and/or intraoral scans and determine a distance between a same point or sets of points that are represented in each of the multiple intraoral images and/or intraoral scans), wherein each of the reference images is independently of a corresponding reference dental feature (para. [0334], note that the AOI determiner 1474 may, in identifying an AOI, analyze intraoral scans (e.g., 3D image point clouds), 3D surfaces, 2D images and/or one or more virtual 3D models of the patient alone and/or relative to reference data), wherein each reference image is associated with a pre-determined, three-dimensional structure of the corresponding reference dental feature (para. [0335], note that the data regarding the at-hand patient may include X-rays, 2D intraoral images, 3D intraoral scans, 2D models, and/or virtual 3D models corresponding to the patient visit during which the scanning occurs); and 2) determining which reference image of the plurality is most similar to the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature (para. [0360], note that Scanning technique teacher 1492 may match the scan data and/or one or more virtual 3D models arising from scanning performed by the user to scan data and/or virtual 3D models).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the generating the three dimensional representation of the dental feature comprises: 1) comparing the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature to a plurality of reference images, wherein each of the reference images is independently of a corresponding reference dental feature, wherein each reference image is associated with a pre-determined, three-dimensional structure of the corresponding reference dental feature; and 2) determining which reference image of the plurality is most similar to the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide real-time and post-scan visualization of intraoral scan data, which may include 3D images, 3D scans, 3D surfaces and/or 3D models (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Elazar with Saphier to obtain the invention as specified in claim 64.
(2) regarding claim 65:
Elazar disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching further comprising: 3) adopting as the three-dimensional representation of the dental feature the pre determined, three-dimensional structure of the reference dental feature associated with the reference image that is most similar to the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature.
However, Saphier disclosed adopting as the three-dimensional representation of the dental feature the pre determined, three-dimensional structure of the reference dental feature associated with the reference image that is most similar to the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature (para. [0360], note that scanning technique teacher 1492 may match the scan data and/or one or more virtual 3D models arising from scanning performed by the user to scan data and/or virtual 3D models of the training guidance data pool, access corresponding information describing scanning technique changes, and present such scanning change technique information to the user).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach adopting as the three-dimensional representation of the dental feature the pre determined, three-dimensional structure of the reference dental feature associated with the reference image that is most similar to the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide real-time and post-scan visualization of intraoral scan data, which may include 3D images, 3D scans, 3D surfaces and/or 3D models (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Elazar with Saphier to obtain the invention as specified in claim 65.
(3) regarding claim 66:
Elazar disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the comparing the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature to the plurality of reference images comprises using a trained, machine-learning model to match a portion of the bidimensional images of the dental feature with a portion of a reference image, wherein the trained, machine-learning model is trained on at least a subset of the plurality of reference images.
However, Saphier disclosed wherein the comparing the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature to the plurality of reference images comprises using a trained, machine-learning model to match a portion of the bidimensional images of the dental feature with a portion of a reference image, wherein the trained, machine-learning model is trained on at least a subset of the plurality of reference images (para. [0287], note that at block 1102 of method 1100, processing logic may input a set of intraoral scans into a trained machine learning model. At block 1104, the machine learning model may then output one or more parameters for at least one surface for projection of the intraoral 2D images. Also see para. [0360], note that Scanning technique teacher 1492 may match the scan data and/or one or more virtual 3D models arising from scanning performed by the user to scan data and/or virtual 3D models of the training guidance data pool, access corresponding information describing scanning technique changes, and present such scanning change technique information to the user).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the comparing the set of bidimensional images of the dental feature to the plurality of reference images comprises using a trained, machine-learning model to match a portion of the bidimensional images of the dental feature with a portion of a reference image, wherein the trained, machine-learning model is trained on at least a subset of the plurality of reference images. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide real-time and post-scan visualization of intraoral scan data, which may include 3D images, 3D scans, 3D surfaces and/or 3D models (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Elazar with Saphier to obtain the invention as specified in claim 66.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sabina et al. (US Publication Number 2019/0231492 A1) disclosed methods and apparatuses for taking, using and displaying three-dimensional (3D) volumetric models of a patient's dental arch. A 3D volumetric model may include surface (e.g., color) information as well as information on internal structure, such as near-infrared (near-IR) transparency values for internal structures including enamel and dentin.
Fridman et al. (US Patent Number 12,011,337 B2) disclosed an intraoral scanner comprises a body, a probe at one end of the body, the probe comprising a scanner head, a wireless communication module disposed within the body, one or more optical sensor, and a touchscreen disposed on the body.
Atiya et al. (US Publication Number 2023/0025243 A1) disclosed an intraoral scanner includes a probe with a sensing face, patterned light sources that are coupled to the probe, un-patterned light sources coupled to the probe, near infrared (NIR) light sources couple to the probe, cameras coupled to the probe, and a processing device coupled to the probe. The processing device is configured to control an operation of the patterned light sources, the un-patterned light sources, and the NIR light sources.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Hilina K Demeter whose telephone number is (571) 270-1676.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, King Y. Poon could be reached at (571) 270- 0728. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about PAIR system, see http://pari-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HILINA K DEMETER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2617
Prosecution Insights