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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 46-47 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/03/2026. Claims 28-45 are examined and claims 46-47 are withdrawn.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: “potential values” in claims 36 and 45.
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 36 and 45 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 36 recites the limitation "the determined value" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 45 recites the limitation "the determined value" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 28-29, 31-34, 36-38, 40-43, and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kopelman (US 20160199215 A1).
Regarding claim 28, Kopelman discloses an intraoral device system comprising: an intraoral device (10 – figure 2A, an intraoral appliance: paragraph 0053) including: an upper splint (12 – figure 2A, an upper shell: paragraph 0053) structured to engage with at least a portion of one or more teeth on a maxilla of a patient (figure 2A, the upper splint [12] are retainer-shaped to fit on the upper jaw of the patient: paragraph 0053); a lower splint (14 – figure 2A, a lower shell: paragraph 0053) structured to engage with at least a portion of one or more teeth on a mandible of the patient (figure 2A, the lower splint [14] are retainer-shaped to fit on the lower jaw of the patient: paragraph 0053); and a drive system (there is an actuator that is coupled to a pivot [19 – figure 2A] that rotates the rotor element [16 – figure 2A] about the pivot axis; it is also coupled to a single processor or a plurality of processors: paragraph 0050/0053/0066/0068) configured to move the lower splint (14) with respect to the upper splint (12) (figure 2A/figure 2B/figure 2C, the drive system displaces the lower splint [14] relative to the upper splint [12]: paragraph 0053); and a feedback system (500 – figure 5, an exemplary system that allows the collection of data to build patient-specific profile that can be used for diagnostics, preparation of patient prescriptions, as well as to control and improve performance of the intraoral appliance: paragraph 0065-0070) for generating instructions for adjusting the intraoral device (10) (when the intraoral device [10] is worn, there are sensors and processors that collect data and can be used to allow feedback control of the intraoral device [10]; the control algorithms can be applied via the processors: paragraph 0060-0061), the feedback system (500) including: a memory storing machine-readable instructions (there is a memory device with executable instructions stored thereon: paragraph 0066); and a control system (504 – figure 5, a processor: paragraph 0066) including one or more processors (the control system [504] can comprise a single processor or a plurality of processors: paragraph 0066) configured to execute the machine-readable instructions (the control system [504] is configured to execute the instructions stored in the memory: paragraph 0066) to cause the control system (504) to: receive sensor data from one or more sensors (502 – figure 5, a set of one or more sensors: paragraph 0066) associated with the patient (the control system [504] execute instructions to receive sensor data from the one or more sensors [502]: paragraph 0066); process the sensor data to determine a respiratory event likelihood parameter of the patient (the control system [504] can detect, identify, and/or assess physiological events based on or in response to sensor data: paragraph 0066); and output control instructions to operate the drive system (there is an actuator that is coupled to a pivot [19 – figure 2A] that rotates the rotor element [16 – figure 2A] about the pivot axis: paragraph 0053) to move the lower splint (14) with respect to the upper splint (12) responsive to the determined respiratory event likelihood parameter (the control system [504] can execute instructions to detect, predict or assess a pre-apnea or apnea event based on or in response to sensor data received from the one or more sensors [502], and can execute instructions to transmit a control signal to intraoral device [10] and cause the intraoral device [10], when in use, to displace the lower jaw of the patient [moving the lower splint {14} with respect to the upper splint {12} via drive system {actuator}], e.g., to an advanced or protruded position, in order to treat the sleep apnea event and/or suppress snoring: paragraph 0053/0068-0069).
Regarding claim 29, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 28. Kopelman further discloses wherein the drive system (actuator) includes a controller (the drive system [actuator] is coupled to the control system [504] and receives instructions from the control system [504], which is made up of multiple processors: paragraph 0066/0068-0069) and the feedback system (500) is further configured to transmit the control instructions to the controller to operate the drive system (actuator) (the feedback system [500] comprises the control system [504] that send control signals to the drive system [actuator] which causes the intraoral device [10] to advance from a first position to a second position or vice versa: paragraph 0068-0069).
Regarding claim 31, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 28. Kopelman further discloses wherein the sensor data includes intraoral sensor data generated by one or more intraoral sensors associated with the intraoral device (10) (the one or more sensors [502] can monitor can be mounted on the intraoral device [10] and can monitor breathing sounds, respiratory flow rate, sleep position, and/or variants thereof and/or combinations thereof: paragraph 0076), body position data, respiratory sound data and sleep cycle data indicating respective positions of the patient's body, respiratory sounds of the patient and sleep stages of the patient, or any combination thereof (the sensor data includes breathing sounds, respiratory flow rate, sleep position, and/or variants thereof and/or combinations thereof: paragraph 0076), and wherein the control system (504) is configured to determine the respiratory event likelihood parameter based at least in part on the sensor data (the control system [504] can execute instructions to receive sensor data from the one or more sensors [502] and can detect, identify, and/or assess physiological events based on or in response to sensor data: paragraph 0066), where the sensor data includes the intraoral sensor data, the body position data, the respiratory sound data and the sleep cycle data, or any combination thereof (the sensor data includes breathing sounds, respiratory flow rate, sleep position, and/or variants thereof and/or combinations thereof: paragraph 0076).
Regarding claim 32, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 28. Kopelman further discloses wherein the control instructions operate the drive system (actuator) to automatically move the lower splint (14) with respect to the upper splint (12) between an advanced position and a neutral position responsive to the determined respiratory event likelihood parameter (the control system [504] can execute instructions to detect, predict or assess a pre-apnea or apnea event based on or in response to sensor data received from the one or more sensors [502], and can execute instructions to transmit a control signal to intraoral device [10] and cause the intraoral device [10], when in use, to displace the lower jaw of the patient [moving the lower splint {14} with respect to the upper splint {12} via drive system {actuator}], e.g., to an advanced or protruded position, in order to treat the sleep apnea event and/or suppress snoring: paragraph 0053/0068-0069).
Regarding claim 33, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 28. Kopelman further discloses wherein the determined respiratory event likelihood parameter is correlated with a sleep apnea event (sensor data detects, predicts, or assess a patient’s symptoms such as sleep apnea events: paragraph 0067-0069), the correlation being used as an indication of the patient's compliance (the control system [504] can execute instructions to detect, predict, or assess pre-apnea or apnea events in response to sensor data received from the one or more sensors [502] and can also execute instructions to transmit a control signal to the actuator to treat sleep apnea or suppress snoring: paragraph 0068-0069).
Regarding claim 34, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 28. Kopelman further discloses comprising an external computing device (server computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, notebook computers, sub-notebook computers, netbook computers, netpad computers, set-top computers, handheld computers, Internet appliances, mobile smartphones, tablet computers, personal digital assistants, video game consoles, and vehicles: paragraph 0132) configured to communicate with the intraoral device (10) for outputting control instructions for operation of the drive system (actuator) to move the lower splint (14) with respect to the upper splint (12) responsive to the determined respiratory event likelihood parameter (the external computing devices with CPUs can be used to carry the intraoral device’s [10] functions; the function being: the control system [504] can execute instructions to detect, predict or assess a pre-apnea or apnea event based on or in response to sensor data received from the one or more sensors [502], and can execute instructions to transmit a control signal to intraoral device [10] and cause the intraoral device [10], when in use, to displace the lower jaw of the patient [moving the lower splint {14} with respect to the upper splint {12} via drive system {actuator}], e.g., to an advanced or protruded position, in order to treat the sleep apnea event and/or suppress snoring: paragraph 0053/0068-0069/0131).
Regarding claim 36, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 28. Kopelman further discloses wherein the respiratory event likelihood parameter has potential values of low, medium and high, and the control instructions are configured to operate the intraoral device (10) in a different way depending on the determined value of the respiratory event likelihood parameter being low, medium, or high (the control system [504] can send a first control signal to the actuator to cause the intraoral device [10] to advance from a first position to a second position when onset of a sleep apnea event is detected [high] and can also send a second control signal to the actuator to cause the intraoral device [10] to retract from the second position to the first position when termination of sleep apnea is detected [low]; the control system [504] can also send another signal from one or more sensors [502] while the lower jaw is in the second position to determine its effectiveness and can modify the second position to better treat the sleep apnea event [medium]: paragraph 0026/0069).
Regarding claim 37, Kopelman discloses a feedback system (500 – figure 5, an exemplary system that allows the collection of data to build patient-specific profile that can be used for diagnostics, preparation of patient prescriptions, as well as to control and improve performance of the intraoral appliance: paragraph 0065-0070) for generating instructions for adjusting an intraoral device (10 – figure 2A, an intraoral appliance: paragraph 0053) (when the intraoral device [10] is worn, there are sensors and processors that collect data and can be used to allow feedback control of the intraoral device [10]; the control algorithms can be applied via the processors: paragraph 0060-0061) having an upper splint (12 – figure 2A, an upper shell: paragraph 0053) and a lower splint (14 – figure 2A, a lower shell: paragraph 0053) structured to engage with at least a portion of one or more teeth of a patient (figure 2A, the upper splint [12] and lower splint [14] are retainer-shaped to fit on the upper and lower jaw of the patient: paragraph 0053) and having a drive system (there is an actuator that is coupled to a pivot [19 – figure 2A] that rotates the rotor element [16 – figure 2A] about the pivot axis; it is also coupled to a single processor or a plurality of processors: paragraph 0050/0053/0066/0068) for moving the lower (14) splint with respect to the upper splint (12) (figure 2A/figure 2B/figure 2C, the drive system displaces the lower splint [14] relative to the upper splint [12]: paragraph 0053), the feedback system (500) comprising: a memory storing machine-readable instructions (there is a memory device with executable instructions stored thereon: paragraph 0066); and a control system (504 – figure 5, a processor: paragraph 0066) including one or more processors (the control system [504] can comprise a single processor or a plurality of processors: paragraph 0066) configured to execute the machine- readable instructions (the control system [504] is configured to execute the instructions stored in the memory: paragraph 0066) to implement a feedback process to facilitate adjustment of the intraoral device under operation of the drive system by: receiving sensor data from one or more sensors (502 – figure 5, a set of one or more sensors: paragraph 0066) associated with the patient (the control system [504] execute instructions to receive sensor data from the one or more sensors [502]: paragraph 0066); processing the sensor data to determine a respiratory event likelihood parameter of the patient (the control system [504] can detect, identify, and/or assess physiological events based on or in response to sensor data: paragraph 0066); and outputting control instructions for operation of the drive system (there is an actuator that is coupled to a pivot [19 – figure 2A] that rotates the rotor element [16 – figure 2A] about the pivot axis: paragraph 0053) to move the lower splint (14) with respect to the upper splint (12) responsive to the determined respiratory event likelihood parameter (the control system [504] can execute instructions to detect, predict or assess a pre-apnea or apnea event based on or in response to sensor data received from the one or more sensors [502], and can execute instructions to transmit a control signal to intraoral device [10] and cause the intraoral device [10], when in use, to displace the lower jaw of the patient [moving the lower splint {14} with respect to the upper splint {12} via drive system {actuator}], e.g., to an advanced or protruded position, in order to treat the sleep apnea event and/or suppress snoring: paragraph 0053/0068-0069).
Regarding claim 38, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 37. Kopelman further discloses wherein the drive system (actuator) includes a controller (the drive system [actuator] is coupled to the control system [504] and receives instructions from the control system [504], which is made up of multiple processors: paragraph 0066/0068-0069) and the feedback system (500) is further configured to transmit the control instructions to the controller to operate the drive system (actuator) (the feedback system [500] comprises the control system [504] that send control signals to the drive system [actuator] which causes the intraoral device [10] to advance from a first position to a second position or vice versa: paragraph 0068-0069).
Regarding claim 40, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 37. Kopelman further discloses wherein the sensor data includes intraoral sensor data generated by one or more intraoral sensors associated with the intraoral device (10) (the one or more sensors [502] can monitor can be mounted on the intraoral device [10] and can monitor breathing sounds, respiratory flow rate, sleep position, and/or variants thereof and/or combinations thereof: paragraph 0076), body position data, respiratory sound data and sleep cycle data indicating respective positions of the patient's body, respiratory sounds of the patient and sleep stages of the patient, or any combination thereof (the sensor data includes breathing sounds, respiratory flow rate, sleep position, and/or variants thereof and/or combinations thereof: paragraph 0076), and wherein the control system (502) is configured to determine the respiratory event likelihood parameter based at least in part on the sensor data (the control system [504] can execute instructions to receive sensor data from the one or more sensors [502] and can detect, identify, and/or assess physiological events based on or in response to sensor data: paragraph 0066), where the sensor data includes the intraoral sensor data, the body position data, the respiratory sound data and the sleep cycle data, or any combination thereof (the sensor data includes breathing sounds, respiratory flow rate, sleep position, and/or variants thereof and/or combinations thereof: paragraph 0076).
Regarding claim 41, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 37. Kopelman further discloses wherein the control instructions operate the drive system (actuator) to automatically move the lower splint (14) with respect to the upper splint (12) between an advanced position and a neutral position responsive to the determined respiratory event likelihood parameter (the control system [504] can execute instructions to detect, predict or assess a pre-apnea or apnea event based on or in response to sensor data received from the one or more sensors [502], and can execute instructions to transmit a control signal to intraoral device [10] and cause the intraoral device [10], when in use, to displace the lower jaw of the patient [moving the lower splint {14} with respect to the upper splint {12} via drive system {actuator}], e.g., to an advanced or protruded position, in order to treat the sleep apnea event and/or suppress snoring: paragraph 0053/0068-0069).
Regarding claim 42, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 37. Kopelman further discloses wherein the determined respiratory event likelihood parameter (sensor data detects, predicts, or assess a patient’s symptoms such as sleep apnea events: paragraph 0067-0069) is correlated with a sleep apnea event, the correlation being used as an indication of the patient's compliance (the control system [504] can execute instructions to detect, predict, or assess pre-apnea or apnea events in response to sensor data received from the one or more sensors [502] and can also execute instructions to transmit a control signal to the actuator to treat sleep apnea or suppress snoring: paragraph 0068-0069).
Regarding claim 43, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 37. Kopelman further discloses wherein an external computing device (server computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, notebook computers, sub-notebook computers, netbook computers, netpad computers, set-top computers, handheld computers, Internet appliances, mobile smartphones, tablet computers, personal digital assistants, video game consoles, and vehicles: paragraph 0132) is configured to communicate with the intraoral device (10) for outputting control instructions for operation of the drive system (actuator) to move the lower splint (14) with respect to the upper splint (12) responsive to the determined respiratory event likelihood parameter (the external computing devices with CPUs can be used to carry the intraoral device’s [10] functions; the function being: the control system [504] can execute instructions to detect, predict or assess a pre-apnea or apnea event based on or in response to sensor data received from the one or more sensors [502], and can execute instructions to transmit a control signal to intraoral device [10] and cause the intraoral device [10], when in use, to displace the lower jaw of the patient [moving the lower splint {14} with respect to the upper splint {12} via drive system {actuator}], e.g., to an advanced or protruded position, in order to treat the sleep apnea event and/or suppress snoring: paragraph 0053/0068-0069/0131).
Regarding claim 45, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 37. Kopelman further discloses wherein the respiratory event likelihood parameter has potential values of low, medium and high, and the control instructions are configured to operate the intraoral device (10) in a different way depending on the determined value of the respiratory event likelihood parameter being low, medium, or high (the control system [504] can send a first control signal to the actuator to cause the intraoral device [10] to advance from a first position to a second position when onset of a sleep apnea event is detected [high] and can also send a second control signal to the actuator to cause the intraoral device [10] to retract from the second position to the first position when termination of sleep apnea is detected [low]; the control system [504] can also send another signal from one or more sensors [502] while the lower jaw is in the second position to determine its effectiveness and can modify the second position to better treat the sleep apnea event [medium]: paragraph 0026/0069)..
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 30 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kopelman (US 20160199215 A1) in view of Flanagan (US 20160324681 A1).
Regarding claim 30, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 28.
However, Kopelman fails to disclose wherein the drive system is manually adjustable and the control system instructions are outputted as an alert to the patient for manual operation of the drive system
Flanagan teaches wherein an analogous drive system (6/8 – figure 1, an actuation band [6] and two push rods [8]: paragraph 0040/0046) is manually adjustable (figure 16, the physician is able to perform remote adjustments of the invention including locking in the maximum lower jaw extension dimension and setting the snoring threshold as well as allowing remote adjustments of the invention as the information exchange between the invention and the physician will be two-way: paragraph 0034/0078) and an analogous control system instructions are outputted as an alert to the patient for manual operation of the analogous drive system (figure 16, there is a microcontroller that tracks data regarding patient compliance and that data can be used by the physician to quantify the reduction in snoring following deployment of the lower mandibular tray to allow adjustment in the amount of lower tray extension; patients may manually adjust as well after receipt of physicians’ command through digital connection. Furthermore, an optional component such as an audible tone generate may be used as an alert during times of dangerous snoring or apneic events: paragraph 0034/0074/0078).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drive system of Kopelman to be manually adjustable and to have control system instructions outputted as an alert to the patient for manual operation of the drive system as taught by Flanagan in order to provide an intraoral device system that has an improved drive system that allows physicians to quickly and conveniently perform necessary remote adjustments based on patient data collected by the microcontroller; furthermore, patients can also conveniently perform adjustments after receipt of physician’s command (paragraph 0034/0078, Flanagan).
Regarding claim 39, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 37.
However, Kopelman fails to disclose wherein the drive system is manually adjustable and the control system instructions are outputted as an alert to the patient for manual operation of the drive system.
Flanagan teaches wherein an analogous drive system (6/8 – figure 1, an actuation band [6] and two push rods [8]: paragraph 0040/0046) is manually adjustable (figure 16, the physician is able to perform remote adjustments of the invention including locking in the maximum lower jaw extension dimension and setting the snoring threshold as well as allowing remote adjustments of the invention as the information exchange between the invention and the physician will be two-way: paragraph 0034/0078) and an analogous control system instructions are outputted as an alert to the patient for manual operation of the analogous drive system (figure 16, there is a microcontroller that tracks data regarding patient compliance and that data can be used by the physician to quantify the reduction in snoring following deployment of the lower mandibular tray to allow adjustment in the amount of lower tray extension; patients may manually adjust as well after receipt of physicians’ command through digital connection. Furthermore, an optional component such as an audible tone generate may be used as an alert during times of dangerous snoring or apneic events: paragraph 0034/0074/0078).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drive system of Kopelman to be manually adjustable and to have control system instructions outputted as an alert to the patient for manual operation of the drive system as taught by Flanagan in order to provide an intraoral device system that has an improved drive system that allows physicians to quickly and conveniently perform necessary remote adjustments based on patient data collected by the microcontroller; furthermore, patients can also conveniently perform adjustments after receipt of physician’s command (paragraph 0034/0078, Flanagan).
Claims 35 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kopelman (US 20160199215 A1) in view of Hanewinkel et al. (US 20140114146 A1).
Regarding claim 35, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 34. Kopelman further discloses wherein the external computing device (server computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, notebook computers, sub-notebook computers, netbook computers, netpad computers, set-top computers, handheld computers, Internet appliances, mobile smartphones, tablet computers, personal digital assistants, video game consoles, and vehicles: paragraph 0132) includes a user interface configured to display an outputted alert (the external computing device can include a display to send visual information to the patient: paragraph 0135).
However, Kopelman fails to disclose the user interface configured to allow the patient to interact with the manual operation of the drive system.
Hanewinkel teaches an analogous user interface (an interface of a digital computer: paragraph 0009) configured to allow the patient to interact with the manual operation of an analogous drive system (22/32 – figure 1/figure 5, a servomotor: paragraph 0046) (the user interface allows for manipulation of the mandible manually through the interface of the digital computer: paragraph 0009).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the user interface of Kopelman to allow patients to interact with the manual operation of the drive system as taught by Hanewinkel in order to provide an intraoral device system that has an improved user interface to conveniently enable manipulation of the mandible based on patient’s recorded physiological data and servo motor position for the mandible movement (paragraph 0009, Hanewinkel).
Regarding claim 44, Kopelman discloses the invention as discussed in claim 43. Kopelman further discloses wherein the feedback system (500) instructions are outputted as an alert to the patient for operation of the drive system (actuator) (the feedback system [500] can collect data and generate patient alarms and reports on patient treatment and status that can be assessed by a healthcare professional; the alert can occur based on received sensor data and can be transmitted to the patient or healthcare professional: paragraph 0062-0065/0102) and wherein the external computing device (server computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, notebook computers, sub-notebook computers, netbook computers, netpad computers, set-top computers, handheld computers, Internet appliances, mobile smartphones, tablet computers, personal digital assistants, video game consoles, and vehicles: paragraph 0132) comprises a user interface configured to display an outputted alert (the external computing device can include a display to send visual information to the patient: paragraph 0135).
However, Kopelman fails to disclose the user interface configured to allow the patient to interact with the operation of the drive system.
Hanewinkel teaches an analogous user interface (an interface of a digital computer: paragraph 0009) configured to allow the patient to interact with the operation of an analogous drive system (22/32 – figure 1/figure 5, a servomotor: paragraph 0046) (the user interface allows for manipulation of the mandible manually through the interface of the digital computer: paragraph 0009).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the user interface of Kopelman to allow patients to interact with the operation of the drive system as taught by Hanewinkel in order to provide an intraoral device system that has an improved user interface to conveniently enable manipulation of the mandible based on patient’s recorded physiological data and servo motor position for the mandible movement (paragraph 0009, Hanewinkel).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW JUN-WAI MOK whose telephone number is (703)756-4605. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4pm.
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, Alireza Nia can be reached at (571) 270-3076. 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.
/ANDREW JUN-WAI MOK/Examiner, Art Unit 3786
/ALIREZA NIA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3786
Prosecution Insights