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
This office action is responsive to the preliminary amendment received on 06/24/2025. Claims 4-6, 8-11, 13, 17-18, 21-26, 29-31, 33-35, 38-39, and 44-51 are canceled. Claims 1, 7, 12, 14-16, 19-20, 27, 32, 36-37, and 40-43 have been amended. Claims 1-3, 7, 12, 14-16, 19-20, 27-28, 32, 36-37, and 40-43 remain pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 10335A-D.
The drawings are objected to because:
In Figure 3A, the top box cuts off the words inside the box.
Figure 10B is too light to be viewed and reproduced easily.
In Figures 11A and 11B the words are too blurry to be read.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 32 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the plurality of coronal grooves” should be “a plurality of coronal grooves”, as the claim depends from claim 27.
Claim 40 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a root portion” should be “the root portion”.
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 7, 15, 19, 32, and 41 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.
The term “a clinician preference” in claims 7, 15, 19, 32, and 41 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “a clinician preference” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the metes and bounds of the limitation and therefore of the claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the sake of examination, this term will not be considered to be part of the list of attributes to which the dental implant is responsive, since each time the term appears it is a part of a list of potential attributes to which the dental implant is responsive.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1-3, 12, 14-16, 19-20, 27-28, 36-37, and 40-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cottrell (US 2004/0142304).
Regarding Claim 1, Cottrell discloses a root-analog dental implant (implant 72) configured to replace a tooth extracted from an alveolar socket of a patient (Figure 14; ¶ [0060]), the alveolar socket having a bone crest curve that corresponds to where an interface between the patient's tooth root and the alveolar socket terminates around the circumference of the tooth root prior to extraction (¶ [0003]; Figure 14 - the solid line of the area in which the implant is installed is the bone crest, as labeled in other figures as bone 12 with lingual side 14 and buccal side 16), the root-analog dental implant (implant 72) comprising:
an emergence portion (machined collar 76) configured to abut a root boundary (top of textured surface 62) of a root portion (textured surface 62 with lower portion containing larger screw threads as shown in Figure 14) of the root-analog dental implant (implant 72); and
the root portion (textured surface 62 with lower portion containing larger screw threads), the root portion being configured to occupy space within the alveolar socket at or below the bone crest curve following extraction of the tooth (Figure 14; ¶ [0060]), a shape of the root boundary corresponding to a shape of the bone crest curve (Figure 14 shows that the shape of the top of textured surface 62 follows the bone and therefore corresponds to the shape of the bone crest and the hole for the implant that defines the bone crest curve).
Regarding Claim 2, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 1 (as presented above), a coronal portion (textured surface 62) of the root portion (textured surface 62 with lower portion containing larger screw threads as shown in Figure 14) further comprising:
a coronal groove (micro threads/grooves 46b) circumferentially surrounding the coronal portion of the root portion of the root-analog dental implant (Figure 14; ¶ [0057]), a shape of the coronal groove corresponding to the shape of the root boundary (Figure 14; ¶ [0057] describes micro threads/grooves 46b parallel to the coronal contour as potentially aiding in bone preservation).
Regarding Claim 3, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 2 (as presented above), further comprising: a plurality of coronal grooves (Figure 14; micro threads/grooves 46b), each coronal groove of the plurality of coronal grooves having a shape corresponding to the shape of the root boundary (Figure 14).
Regarding Claim 12, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 1 (as presented above), further comprising: a support structure (the large threads at the lower or apical portion of the root portion as designated by larger threads 46a in some Figures act as a spiral-shaped support structure as the threads support and secure the implant in the bone).
Regarding Claim 14, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 1 (as presented above), wherein the root-analog dental implant (implant 72) includes an abutment (top of implant 72 as shown in Figure 14; ¶ [0059]) positioned proximate (Figure 14) to the emergence portion (collar 76).
Regarding Claim 15, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 1 (as presented above), wherein a shape of the emergence portion (collar 76) is responsive to at least one of a clinician preference and a patient characteristic (Figure 14 shows machined collar 76 spanning the soft tissue 78 thickness, therefore the thickness which is part of the shape of the emergence portion is responsive to the patient characteristic of the thickness of the soft tissue; ¶ [0060] supports that the implant used is chosen based on the size and shape of the implant site, which is a patient characteristic).
Regarding Claim 16, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 1 (as presented above), the root portion (textured surface 62 with lower portion containing larger screw threads as shown in Figure 14) further comprising one or more of an extension (lower portion containing larger screw threads as shown in Figure 14), a tapered horizontally oriented coronal feature, a horizontally oriented coronal feature, a vertically oriented coronal feature, an array of tapered horizontally oriented coronal features, an array of horizontally oriented coronal features, and an array of vertically oriented coronal features.
Regarding Claim 19, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 1 (as presented above), wherein a shape of at least one of the emergence portion and the root portion is responsive to at least one of a clinician preference and a patient characteristic (¶ [0060]).
Regarding Claim 20, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 1 (as presented above), wherein the root boundary closely matches to a shape of the bone crest curve (Figure 14).
Regarding Claim 27, Cottrell discloses a root-analog dental implant (implant 72) configured to replace a tooth extracted from an alveolar socket of a patient (Figure 14; ¶ [0060]), the alveolar socket having a bone crest curve that corresponds to where an interface between the patient's tooth root and the alveolar socket terminates around the circumference of the tooth root prior to extraction (¶ [0003]; Figure 14 - the solid line of the area in which the implant is installed is the bone crest, as labeled in other figures as bone 12 with lingual side 14 and buccal side 16), the root-analog dental implant (implant 72) comprising:
a coronal groove (micro threads/grooves 46b) circumferentially surrounding (Figure 14; ¶ [0057]) a coronal portion (textured surface 62) of the root portion (textured surface 62 with lower portion containing larger screw threads as shown in Figure 14) of the root-analog dental implant (implant 72), a shape of the coronal groove corresponding to the shape of the root boundary (Figure 14; ¶ [0057] describes micro threads/grooves 46b parallel to the coronal contour as potentially aiding in bone preservation).
Regarding Claim 28, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 27 (as presented above), further comprising: a plurality of coronal grooves (Figure 14 shows multiple micro threads/grooves 46b).
Regarding Claim 36, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 27 (as presented above), wherein an exterior shape of the root-analog dental implant (implant 72) is responsive to a shape of the alveolar socket (¶ [0060] discloses that the implant is chosen to meet the shape and size needed for the application therefore the shape of the implant is responsive to the shape of the socket into which it will be installed).
Regarding Claim 37, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 27 (as presented above), further comprising: a support structure (the large threads at the lower or apical portion of the root portion as designated by larger threads 46a in some Figures act as a spiral-shaped support structure as the threads support and secure the implant in the bone).
Regarding Claim 40, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 27 (as presented above),
an emergence portion (machined collar 76) configured to abut a root boundary (top of textured surface 62) of a root portion (textured surface 62 with lower portion containing larger screw threads as shown in Figure 14) of the root-analog dental implant (implant 72); and
the root portion (textured surface 62 with lower portion containing larger screw threads), the root portion being configured to occupy space within the alveolar socket at or below the bone crest curve following extraction of the tooth (Figure 14; ¶ [0060]), a shape of the root boundary corresponding to a shape of the bone crest curve (Figure 14 shows that the shape of the top of textured surface 62 follows the bone and therefore corresponds to the shape of the bone crest and the hole for the implant that defines the bone crest curve).
Regarding Claim 41, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 40 (as presented above), wherein a shape of the emergence portion (collar 76) is responsive to at least one of a clinician preference and a patient characteristic (Figure 14 shows machined collar 76 spanning the soft tissue 78 thickness, therefore the thickness which is part of the shape of the emergence portion is responsive to the patient characteristic of the thickness of the soft tissue; ¶ [0060] supports that the implant used is chosen based on the size and shape of the implant site, which is a patient characteristic).
Regarding Claim 42, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 40 (as presented above), wherein a shape of the coronal groove further corresponds to a shape of the root boundary (Figure 14; ¶ [0057] describes micro threads/grooves 46b parallel to the coronal contour as potentially aiding in bone preservation).
Regarding Claim 43, Cottrell discloses the root-analog dental implant of claim 27 (as presented above), further comprising one or more of an extension (lower portion of implant 72 containing larger screw threads as shown in Figure 14), a tapered horizontally oriented coronal feature, a horizontally oriented coronal feature, a vertically oriented coronal feature, an array of tapered horizontally oriented coronal features, an array of horizontally oriented coronal features, and an array of vertically oriented coronal features.
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.
Claims 7 and 32 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cottrell (US 2004/0142304) as applied to claims 3 and 27 above, and in further view of Chung (US 2008/0081316).
Regarding Claims 7 and 32, Cottrell teaches the root-analog dental implant of claims 3 and 27, as presented above. Cottrell further teaches the physical design of the implant being affected by the size and shape of the bone into which it will be implanted, but does not explicitly teach the number of coronal grooves being part of the physical design that is changed.
However, Chung, in the same field of endeavor of root-analog dental implants (¶ [0001]), teaches a dental implant (fixtures 10, 100) with an emergence portion (non-tooth part 20, 120) and a root portion (all the parts below parts 20 and 120 in Figures 2 and 6) where the root portion includes a coronal portion (first inclination part 10 or first straight part 110) with a plurality of coronal grooves (axial direction straight groove 12, 112). Chung teaches that the coronal grooves (small thread parts) are present to provide tight and stable engagement with the compact bone (510) while the larger thread portion contacts the cancellous bone (520; ¶ [0010]). Chung also teaches that the depth of the compact bone can vary (Figures 4 and Figure 8), and therefore the number of grooves can vary depending on the depth of the compact bone and the length of the small thread section of the implant corresponding to this depth (Figures 4 and 8). The number of coronal grooves therefore is responsive to the patient characteristic as observed in the compact bone depth characteristic of the alveolar socket.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the dental implant as taught by Cottrell to further include the number of coronal grooves being responsive to the a characteristic of the alveolar socket (depth of compact bone) as taught by Chung in order to have the coronal grooves engage with the compact bone and the larger threads engage with the cancellous bone to improve the overall engagement of the dental implant (Chung ¶ [0010).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer P. Connell whose telephone number is (703)756-1169. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 3 pm ET.
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.
/JENNIFER P CONNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/HEIDI M EIDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772 7/23/2026
Prosecution Insights