2026DETAILED 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/15/2026 has been entered.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al (US 2004/0126738) in view of Hur (US 6,204,592), KR200447137 Y1 and Beck et al (US 2002/0119422)
In regard to claim 1, Atkin discloses an ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device (figure 1), comprising:
an acoustic assembly (see figures 2, 3 and 6) including an acoustic transformer (connecting body 103, which is disclosed as transmitting ultrasonic vibrations to the tip in par 24) configured to detachably receive a tip (102, par 22 discloses the tip is removably attached to the connecting body) and a transducer coupled to the acoustic transformer and configured to produce ultrasonic vibrational energy (ultrasonic transducer 108, see figure 6 which is disclosed as generating ultrasonic vibrations in par 7; par 31 discloses the dental insert may use a piezoelectric transducer)
a resilient grip (hand grip 104) having a substantially uniform cross-sectional configuration (see figure 6, where uniform is interpreted as symmetrical), wherein the resilient grip (104) positioned coaxially about the transducer (103, see figure 6 and par 26);
a fluid connection (interconnect 206, which is disclosed as coupling the cable that provides fluid in par 52) rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly (par 51 discloses the insert 100 rotating together with the rotator head 204 and the rotator head 204 being rotatably coupled to the rest of the handpiece 200, par 53 discloses the interconnect 206 is fixedly attached to the body 202 of the handpiece 200, as such when the insert 100 is rotated with the rotator head 204 it is rotatably coupled to the rest of the handpiece 200 including the interconnect 206)
wherein the resilient grip (104) is configured to rotate the acoustic assembly relative to the fluid connection, and a handpiece housing (par 44 discloses the hand grip is not rotatable with respect to the connecting body 103, par 51 discloses the insert 100 rotating together with the rotator head 204 and the rotator head 204 being rotatably coupled to the rest of the handpiece 200 including the body 203 and the interconnect 206, therefore when the grip and connecting body are rotated it is relative to the interconnect and the body 203/the rest of the handpiece 200)
wherein a rotational interface between the acoustic assembly ( 100) and the handpiece housing (200) is located forward and of a longitudinal center of the ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device (see figures 1 and 6, where the rotational interface is interpreted as the connection between the insert 100 and the rotator head 204; which is located more towards the end with the tip than the opposite end with the interconnect and therefore is forward to the longitudinal center).
Atkin fails to disclose the transducer including at least two first contacts coupled thereto, at least two rotational conductors configured to electrically couple the at least two first contacts with at least two second contacts configured to connect to an ultrasonic drive system, the at least two second contacts being fixed or attached to the handpiece housing enabling the resilient grip to be configured to rotate the acoustic assembly relative to the at least two second contacts, the resilient grip includes an elastomeric sleeve having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60 and configured to reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry as the resilient grip when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology, the fluid connection directly rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly, and wherein tortional resistance applied to a user’s hand is reduced during operation of the ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device .
Hur discloses an ultrasonic drill with a rotating transducer (figure 1 and abstract) that teaches the transducer (piezoelectric transducer means 12) that includes at least two first contacts coupled thereto (see annotated figure 1) at least two rotational conductors (slip rings 54/56) configured to electrically couple the at least two first contacts (pointed out in figure 1) with at least two second contact (cantilever electrodes 58/60, see figure 1) configured to connect to an ultrasonic drive system (col 8, lines 17-21 discloses the power for the piezoelectric transducer means 12 is supplied through the brush 58 or cantilevered electrode 60, as such it is capable of connecting to an ultrasonic drive system or power supply) for the purpose of enabling the transducer to rotate freely within the handpiece (see col 6, lines 40-43).
PNG
media_image1.png
307
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 1
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin to have the transducer including at least two first contacts coupled thereto, at least two rotational conductors configured to electrically couple the at least two first contacts with at least two second contacts configured to connect to an ultrasonic drive system, the at least two second contacts being fixed or attached to the handpiece housing enabling the resilient grip to be configured to rotate the acoustic assembly relative to the at least two second contacts as taught by the piezoelectric transducer of Hur for the purpose of enabling the transducer to rotate freely within the handpiece while supplying power to the transducer. The modification of Hur to include two second contacts being fixed or attached to the handpiece housing of Atkin enables the resilient grip to be configured to rotate the acoustic assembly relative to the at least two second contacts, as recited in the claim.
KR200447137Y1 teaches a fluid connection (connecting tube body 3, figure 2; wherein for supplying air or cleaning water to the connecting body 3) directly rotatably coupled to an acoustic assembly (the acoustic assembly being interpreted as the tubular body 4 and element 8, which is a vibration element which is translated to the tip 7,see page 6; see figures 1-2 which shows a screw connection between the connecting tube body 3 and the connecting tube body 3) in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly (see figures 1-2) for the purpose of easily assembling and disassembling the fluid connection to the acoustic assembly (par 1, page 6).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin/Hur to have the fluid connection directly rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly as taught by KR200447137Y1 for the purpose of easily assembling and disassembling the fluid connection to the acoustic assembly.
Beck discloses a resilient grip of an ultrasonic tool (ergonomic handle 68, see par 39) that teaches the resilient grip (laminate handle 68)includes an elastomeric sleeve (layer 84) having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60 (par 40) and configured to reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip (par 40 discloses the three layer system being used to suppress a wide range of vibration frequencies) for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity (par 38).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to modify Atkin/Hur to have a resilient grip that includes an elastomeric sleeve having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60 as taught by Beck for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity.
Beck teaches the resilient grip as set forth above and further discloses that the plurality of elastomeric sleeves/layers may be used to tailor the ergonomic handle 68 to a specific need (par 40) and as such the layers materials and dimensions are considered a result effective variable in providing a desired grip and suppression of vibration for the operator (par 38). Further it appears that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the elastomeric sleeve(s)/layer(s) of Beck to have reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry as the resilient grip when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art,, before the effective filing date to modify Atkin/Hur/Beck to have the resilient grip reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology as a matter of routine optimization, for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity, since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
The limitation “wherein tortional resistance applied to a user’s hand is reduced during operation of the ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device” is interpreted as the resulting operation of the claimed ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device and therefore does not further limit the claim. As the obviousness rejection covers all claim limitations, the prior art is considered capable of performing the resultant operation.
Regarding claim 3, Atkin/Hur/ KR200447137Y1/Beck disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1. Atkin further discloses the resilient grip (104) is configured to rotate the acoustic assembly (100) at least 360 degrees relative to the fluid connection and the handpiece housing (in view of par 53 which discloses the insert can be rotated to any desired angular position). Where Hur teaches the at least two second contacts being a part of the handpiece housing as set forth above.
Regarding claim 4, Atkin/Hur/ KR200447137Y1/Beck disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose the at least two rotational conductors include four rotational conductors.
However, there is no evidence of record that establishes the number of rotational conductors including four rotational conductors would result in a difference in function of the rotational conductors of Hur. Further a person having ordinary skill in the art, being faced with modifying the number of rotational conductors of Hur to four, would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and the device would function as intended being given the claimed number of rotational conductors. Lastly, applicant has not disclosed that the claimed range solves any stated problem and discloses more rotational conductors than four (par 76 of specification) and therefore no criticality is placed on the range as claimed such that is produces unexpected result.
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 number of rotational conductors to four as an obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art. Furthermore, increasing the number of rotational conductors to four is considered duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)
Regarding claim 6, Atkin further discloses the rotational interface (204) is located at an approximate midline of the handpiece housing (203, see figures 1 and 10, where the rotational interface intersects the midline of body 203).
Regarding claim 8, Atkin/Hur/ KR200447137Y1/Beck disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1. Hur further teaches the at least two rotational conductors (54/56) are configured to provide electrical coupling between the at least two first contacts (see annotated figure 1) and the at least two second contacts (60/58) while permitting continuous 360-degree rotation of the acoustic assembly (elongated horn 16/transducer 12/shroud 26) relative to the handpiece housing (housing 21, see col 3, lines 13-15 which disclose the ultrasonic motor rotating the arm connected to the transduce 12 counter clockwise and clockwise and therefore is unlimited and able to rotate 360 degrees), for the reasons set forth above.
Regarding claim 9, Atkin further discloses the fluid interface (206) is configured to couple a pressurized water supply to the tip for cooling during operation (see figure 1 and par 21 and 48).
Regarding claim 10, Atkin further discloses the resilient grip (hand grip of par 34) has an outer diameter of from about 10 mm to about 18 mm to facilitate ergonomic handling by a user (par 34 discloses 0.95 cm-1.11 cm).
Regarding claim 11, Atkin/Hur/ KR200447137Y1/Beck disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1. Beck further teaches the resilient grip (68) comprises layered elastomeric zones of varying durometer hardness to enhance vibration damping (par 38-40).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al in view of Hur et al, KR200447137Y1, and Beck as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Parisi (US 4,169,984).
Regarding claim 2, Atkin/Hur/ KR200447137Y1/Beck disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1, but fails to disclose the acoustic assembly further comprises a preload mechanism configured to maintain a stack of piezoelectric crystals of the transducer under compressive force between a loading mass and the acoustic transformer.
Parisi teaches the acoustic assembly (24) further comprises a preload mechanism configured to maintain a stack of piezoelectric crystals of the transducer under compressive force between a loading mass and the acoustic transformer (see col 5, lines 11-12 discloses the transducer assembly comprising a stack of first and second piezoelectric crystal 46/48 and col 5, lines 31-35 discloses the assembly being prestressed between two body members 42/44) for the purpose of generating a maximum ultrasonic vibration output (col 5, lines 35-37).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin/Hur/ KR200447137Y1/Beck to have the acoustic assembly further comprises a preload mechanism configured to maintain a stack of piezoelectric crystals of the transducer under compressive force between a loading mass and the acoustic transformer as taught by Parisi for the purpose of generating a maximum ultrasonic vibration output.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al in view of Hur et al, KR200447137Y1 and Beck as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al (US 2002/0127512).
Regarding claim 5, Atkin/Hur/ KR200447137Y1/Beck disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1, but fails to disclose the at least two rotational conductors are configured as concentric rings of different diameter.
Chen further teaches the at least two rotational conductors (annular concentric conducting rings 90 a, b, c) are configured as concentric rings of different diameter (see figure 7A) for the purpose of implementing a rotary electrical connection (par 61).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin/Hur/ KR200447137Y1/Beck to have the at least two rotational conductors are configured as concentric rings of different diameter as taught by Chen for the purpose of implementing a rotary electrical connection.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al in view of Hur et al, KR200447137Y1 and Beck as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rahman et al (EP 1180350 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Atkin/Hur/ KR200447137Y1/Beck disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1, but fails to disclose the rotational interface includes a bearing assembly configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation.
Rahman teaches a rotational interface (section indicated at rotary in figure 2A) includes a bearing assembly (rotary bearing 24) configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation (par 50 discloses the reduction of friction and improvement of rotational smoothness) for the purpose of enabling rotation of the gripping member by the practitioner without excessive friction (par 47).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin/Hur/ KR200447137Y1/Beck the rotational interface includes a bearing assembly configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation as taught by Rahman for the purpose of enabling rotation of the gripping member by the practitioner without excessive friction.
Claims 12 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al in view of Beck et al, KR200447137Y1 and Chen et al.
Regarding claim 12, Atkin discloses an ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device (figure 1), comprising:
an acoustic assembly (see figures 2, 3 and 6) including an acoustic transformer (connecting body 103, which is disclosed as transmitting ultrasonic vibrations to the tip in par 24) configured to detachably receive a tip (102, par 22 discloses the tip is removably attached to the connecting body) and a transducer coupled to the acoustic transformer and configured to produce ultrasonic vibrational energy (ultrasonic transducer 108, see figure 6 which is disclosed as generating ultrasonic vibrations in par 7; par 31 discloses the dental insert may use a piezoelectric transducer);
a resilient grip (hand grip 104) having a substantially uniform cross-sectional configuration (see figure 6, where uniform is interpreted as symmetrical), wherein the resilient grip (104) includes an elastomeric sleeve (see figure 6), wherein the resilient grip (104) positioned coaxially about the transducer (103, see figure 6 and par 26);
conductors configured to electrically couple the transducer to an ultrasonic drive system (par 21 discloses a cable 12 which carries “wires” that deliver electrical signal and energy to the dental tool)
a fluid connection (interconnect 206, which is disclosed as coupling the cable that provides fluid in par 52) rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly (par 51 discloses the insert 100 rotating together with the rotator head 204 and the rotator head 204 being rotatably coupled to the rest of the handpiece 200, par 53 discloses the interconnect 206 is fixedly attached to the body 202 of the handpiece 200, as such when the insert 100 is rotated with the rotator head 204 it is rotatably coupled to the rest of the handpiece 200 including the interconnect 206),
wherein a combination of the tip (102), the resilient grip (104), and the acoustic assembly (100, specifically the connecting body 103 and transducer 108) are configured to rotate about an assembly axis relative to a handpiece housing and the fluid connection while maintaining the electrical coupling between the transducer and the ultrasonic drive system the coupling between the fluid interface and the acoustic assembly (in view of par 44 which discloses the hand grip is not rotatable with respect to the connecting body 103, par 51 discloses the insert 100 rotating together with the rotator head 204 and the rotator head 204 being rotatably coupled to the rest of the handpiece 200 including the body 203 and the interconnect 206, therefore the tip, resilient grip and acoustic assembly relative to the body 203 while maintaining the electrical coupling to the transducer and the fluid interface to the acoustic assembly via the interconnect 206)
Atkin fails to disclose the elastomeric sleeve having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60, the resilient grip configured to reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry as the resilient grip when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology; the fluid connection directly rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly, the conductor being at least two rotational conductors configured to electrically couple the transducer to an ultrasonic drive system; and wherein tortional resistance applied to a user’s hand is reduced during operation of the ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device.
Beck discloses a resilient grip of an ultrasonic tool (ergonomic handle 68, see par 39) that teaches the resilient grip (laminate handle 68)includes an elastomeric sleeve (layer 84) having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60 (par 40) and configured to reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip (par 40 discloses the three layer system being used to suppress a wide range of vibration frequencies) for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity (par 38).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to modify Atkin to have a resilient grip that includes an elastomeric sleeve having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60 as taught by Beck for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity.
Beck teaches the resilient grip as set forth above and further discloses that the plurality of elastomeric sleeves/layers may be used to tailor the ergonomic handle 68 to a specific need (par 40) and as such the layers materials and dimensions are considered a result effective variable in providing a desired grip and suppression of vibration for the operator (par 38). Further it appears that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the elastomeric sleeve(s)/layer(s) of Beck to have reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art,, before the effective filing date to modify Atkin/Beck to have the resilient grip reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology as a matter of routine optimization, for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity, since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
KR200447137Y1 teaches a fluid connection (connecting tube body 3, figure 2; wherein for supplying air or cleaning water to the connecting body 3) directly rotatably coupled to an acoustic assembly (the acoustic assembly being interpreted as the tubular body 4 and element 8, which is a vibration element which is translated to the tip 7,see page 6; see figures 1-2 which shows a screw connection between the connecting tube body 3 and the connecting tube body 3) in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly (see figures 1-2) for the purpose of easily assembling and disassembling the fluid connection to the acoustic assembly (par 1, page 6).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin/Beck to have the fluid connection directly rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly as taught by KR200447137Y1 for the purpose of easily assembling and disassembling the fluid connection to the acoustic assembly.
Chen teaches a connection (80) that teaches at least two rotational conductors (conducting rings 80 b,c,d) configured to electrically couple the transducer to an ultrasonic drive system (see figure 1A, where the connection to the cable section 20 enables the electrical coupling to an ultrasonic drive of remote source S) for the purpose of enabling easy coupling and preparation of the instrument (par 41).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin to have the conductor be at least two rotational conductors configured to electrically couple the transducer to an ultrasonic drive system as taught by Chen for the purpose of enabling easy coupling and preparation of the instrument.
The limitation “wherein tortional resistance applied to a user’s hand is reduced during operation of the ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device” is interpreted as the resulting operation of the claimed ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device and therefore does not further limit the claim. As the obviousness rejection covers all claim limitations, the prior art is considered capable of performing the resultant operation.
Regarding claim 14, Atkin/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 12. Chen further teaches the at least two rotational conductors (conducting rings 80 b, c, d) are configured to provide the electrical coupling while permitting continuous 360-degree rotation (par 62 discloses the connection enabling the two components to rotate relative to one another), for the reasons set forth above.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrical coupling of Atkin/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen to have the combination rotate relative to the handpiece to of the combination relative to the handpiece housing.
Regarding claim 15, Atkin further discloses the fluid interface (206) is configured to couple a pressurized water supply to the tip for cooling during operation (see figure 1 and par 21 and 48).
Regarding claim 16, Atkin further discloses the resilient grip (hand grip of par 34) has an outer diameter of from about 10 mm to about 18 mm to facilitate ergonomic handling by a user (par 34 discloses 0.95 cm-1.11 cm).
Regarding claim 17, Atkin/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 12. Beck further teaches the resilient grip (68) comprises layered elastomeric zones of varying durometer hardness to enhance vibration damping (par 38-40).
Regarding claim 18, Atkin/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 12, but fails to explicitly disclose the at least two rotational conductors include four rotational conductors.
However, there is no evidence of record that establishes the number of rotational conductors including four rotational conductors would result in a difference in function of the rotational conductors of Chen. Further a person having ordinary skill in the art, being faced with modifying the number of rotational conductors of Chen to four, would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and the device would function as intended being given the claimed number of rotational conductors. Lastly, applicant has not disclosed that the claimed range solves any stated problem and discloses more rotational conductors than four (par 76 of specification) and therefore no criticality is placed on the range as claimed such that is produces unexpected result.
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 number of rotational conductors to four as an obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art. Furthermore, increasing the number of rotational conductors to four is considered duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)
Regarding claim 19, Atkin/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 12, but fails to disclose the at least two rotational conductors are configured as concentric rings of different diameter.
Chen further teaches an additional embodiment the at least two rotational conductors (annular concentric conducting rings 90 a, b, c) are configured as concentric rings of different diameter (see figure 7A) for the purpose of implementing a rotary electrical connection (par 61).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen to have the at least two rotational conductors are configured as concentric rings of different diameter as taught by Chen for the purpose of implementing a rotary electrical connection.
Regarding claim 20, Atkin further discloses the rotational interface (204) between the combination (100) and the handpiece housing (200) is located at an approximate midline of the handpiece housing (203, see figures 1 and 10, where the rotational interface intersects the midline of body 203).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al in view of Beck et al, KR200447137Y1,and Chen et al as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Parisi.
Regarding claim 13, Atkin/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 12, but fails to disclose the acoustic assembly further comprises a preload mechanism configured to maintain a stack of piezoelectric crystals of the transducer under compressive force between a loading mass and the acoustic transformer.
Parisi teaches the acoustic assembly (24) further comprises a preload mechanism configured to maintain a stack of piezoelectric crystals of the transducer under compressive force between a loading mass and the acoustic transformer (see col 5, lines 11-12 discloses the transducer assembly comprising a stack of first and second piezoelectric crystal 46/48 and col 5, lines 31-35 discloses the assembly being prestressed between two body members 42/44) for the purpose of generating a maximum ultrasonic vibration output (col 5, lines 35-37).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen to have the acoustic assembly further comprises a preload mechanism configured to maintain a stack of piezoelectric crystals of the transducer under compressive force between a loading mass and the acoustic transformer as taught by Parisi for the purpose of generating a maximum ultrasonic vibration output.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al in view of Beck et al, KR200447137Y1 and Chen et al as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Rahman et al.
Regarding claim 21, Atkin/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 1, but fails to disclose the rotational interface between the combination and the handpiece housing includes a bearing assembly configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation.
Rahman teaches a rotational interface (section indicated at rotary in figure 2A) includes a bearing assembly (rotary bearing 24) configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation (par 50 discloses the reduction of friction and improvement of rotational smoothness) for the purpose of enabling rotation of the gripping member by the practitioner without excessive friction (par 47).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin /Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen the rotational interface includes a bearing assembly configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation as taught by Rahman for the purpose of enabling rotation of the gripping member by the practitioner without excessive friction.
Claims 22, 24, and 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paschke et al (US 2023/0248496), Paschke ‘496 in view of Beck et al , KR200447137Y1 and Chen et al
Regarding claim 22, Paschke ‘496 discloses an ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device (figure 6), comprising:
an acoustic assembly (ultrasonic driver 14 which is disclosed as equivalent to the ultrasonic driver of figures 1-5 in par 61) including an acoustic transformer (9) configured to detachably receive a tip (par 61) and a transducer (13) coupled to the acoustic transformer (see figures 5/6 and par 60-61) and configured to produce ultrasonic vibrational energy in response to receipt of a drive signal from a signal source (par 39),
a handpiece housing (enclosure 5);
a fluid reservoir (fluid chamber 21) disposed within the handpiece housing (see figure 6);
a spring-loaded reservoir cap (cap 23 and pressuring component 22) configured to maintain a relatively uniform pressure on the fluid contained in the fluid reservoir (see par 30 which discloses a spring that applies pressure to the fluid);
a solenoid (fluid flow control 19 e.g. solenoid) operably coupled to the fluid reservoir (par 62) and configured to provide on-off control of fluid delivery, wherein the solenoid is electronically coupled to the signal source such that fluid delivery from the fluid reservoir is synchronized with a vibrational amplitude of the transducer (par 65 discloses a control circuit 31 which controls the coolant delivery on-off function and par 66 discloses the flow being proportional to the output amplitude of the work tool);
a grip (16) having a substantially uniform cross-sectional configuration and positioned coaxially about the transducer (see figure 6);
conductors configured to electrically couple the transducer to an ultrasonic drive system (par 21 discloses a cable 12 which carries “wires” that deliver electrical signal and energy to the dental tool)
a fluid connection (“fluid conduit” which is disclosed as part of the enclosure in par 62) rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly (par 18 discloses the acoustic transformer is rotatable relative to the enclosure of the components of the enclosure),
wherein a combination of the tip (15), the resilient grip (16), and the acoustic assembly (14) is configured to rotate about a common axis relative to a handpiece housing, conductors and the fluid connection (par 18 discloses the grip being attached to the acoustic assembly and figure 6 shows the tip attached, par 18 further discloses the rotation of the grip and acoustic assembly relative to the enclosure),
wherein a rotational interface of the rotation (near seal 25, which contacts the grip 16) is located forward of a longitudinal center of the ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device (see figure 6), and
Paschke ‘496 fails to disclose the grip being resilient, includes an elastomeric sleeve having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60, and configured to reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry as the resilient grip when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology; the fluid connection directly rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly, the conductor being at least two rotational conductors configured to electrically couple the transducer to an ultrasonic drive system; and wherein tortional resistance applied to a user’s hand is reduced during operation of the ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device.
Beck discloses a resilient grip of an ultrasonic tool (ergonomic handle 68, see par 39) that teaches the resilient grip (laminate handle 68) includes an elastomeric sleeve (layer 84) having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60 (par 40) and configured to reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip (par 40 discloses the three layer system being used to suppress a wide range of vibration frequencies) for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity (par 38).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to modify Paschke ‘496 to have a resilient grip that includes an elastomeric sleeve having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60 as taught by Beck for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity.
Beck teaches the resilient grip as set forth above and further discloses that the plurality of elastomeric sleeves/layers may be used to tailor the ergonomic handle 68 to a specific need (par 40) and as such the layers materials and dimensions are considered a result effective variable in providing a desired grip and suppression of vibration for the operator (par 38). Further it appears that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the elastomeric sleeve(s)/layer(s) of Beck to have reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to modify Paschke ‘496/Beck to have the resilient grip reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology as a matter of routine optimization, for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity, since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
KR200447137Y1 teaches a fluid connection (connecting tube body 3, figure 2; wherein for supplying air or cleaning water to the connecting body 3) directly rotatably coupled to an acoustic assembly (the acoustic assembly being interpreted as the tubular body 4 and element 8, which is a vibration element which is translated to the tip 7,see page 6; see figures 1-2 which shows a screw connection between the connecting tube body 3 and the connecting tube body 3) in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly (see figures 1-2) for the purpose of easily assembling and disassembling the fluid connection to the acoustic assembly (par 1, page 6).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Paschke ‘496/Beck to have the fluid connection directly rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly as taught by KR200447137Y1 for the purpose of easily assembling and disassembling the fluid connection to the acoustic assembly.
Chen teaches a connection (80) that teaches at least two rotational conductors (conducting rings 80 b,c,d) configured to electrically couple the transducer to an ultrasonic drive system (see figure 1A, where the connection to the cable section 20 enables the electrical coupling to an ultrasonic drive of remote source S) for the purpose of enabling easy coupling and preparation of the instrument (par 41).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Paschke ‘496 to have at least two rotational conductors configured to electrically couple the transducer to an ultrasonic drive system as taught by Chen for the purpose of enabling easy coupling and preparation of the instrument.
The limitation “wherein tortional resistance applied to a user’s hand is reduced during operation of the ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device” is interpreted as the resulting operation of the claimed ergonomic ultrasonic dental scaling device and therefore does not further limit the claim. As the obviousness rejection covers all claim limitations, the prior art is considered capable of performing the resultant operation.
Regarding claim 24, Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 22. Chen further teaches the at least two rotational conductors (conducting rings 80 b, c, d) are configured to provide the electrical coupling while permitting continuous 360-degree rotation (par 62 discloses the connection enabling the two components to rotate relative to one another), for the reasons set forth above.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrical coupling of Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen to have the combination rotate relative to the handpiece to of the combination relative to the handpiece housing.
Regarding claim 27, Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 22. Beck further teaches the resilient grip includes an elastomeric material, wherein the elastomeric material is silicone, thermoplastic elastomer (TPE), or polyurethane (par 37), for the reasons set forth above.
Regarding claim 28, Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 22. Beck further teaches the resilient grip (68) comprises layered elastomeric zones of varying durometer hardness to enhance vibration damping (par 38-40).
Regarding claim 29, Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 22. As set forth above, Beck teaches the resilient grip as set forth above and further discloses that the plurality of elastomeric sleeves/layers may be used to tailor the ergonomic handle 68 to a specific need (par 40) and as such dimensions, such as the resilient grip area is considered a result effective variable in providing a desired grip and suppression of vibration for the operator (par 38). Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the resilient grip area to be configured to reduce hand–arm vibration exposure such that transmitted vibration acceleration from the acoustic assembly to a user is diminished by a factor of from about 2:1 to about 4:1.As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to modify Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen to have the resilient grip area to be configured to reduce hand–arm vibration exposure such that transmitted vibration acceleration from the acoustic assembly to a user is diminished by a factor of from about 2:1 to about 4:1.as a matter of routine optimization, for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity, since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 30, Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 22. Beck further teaches the resilient grip has an outer diameter of from between 0.5 inch to 1.5 inches, which is approximately 12.7 mm to 38.1 mm (par 33), for the reasons set forth above, but fails to explicitly disclose between 10-18 mm.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the outer diameter of the grip to be between 10-18 mm as claimed, since it has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art’ a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paschke ‘496 in view of Beck et al, KR200447137Y1, and Chen et al as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Parisi.
Regarding claim 23, Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 22, but fails to disclose the acoustic assembly further comprises a preload mechanism configured to maintain a stack of piezoelectric crystals of the transducer under compressive force between a loading mass and the acoustic transformer.
Parisi teaches the acoustic assembly (24) further comprises a preload mechanism configured to maintain a stack of piezoelectric crystals of the transducer under compressive force between a loading mass and the acoustic transformer (see col 5, lines 11-12 discloses the transducer assembly comprising a stack of first and second piezoelectric crystal 46/48 and col 5, lines 31-35 discloses the assembly being prestressed between two body members 42/44) for the purpose of generating a maximum ultrasonic vibration output (col 5, lines 35-37).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen to have the acoustic assembly further comprises a preload mechanism configured to maintain a stack of piezoelectric crystals of the transducer under compressive force between a loading mass and the acoustic transformer as taught by Parisi for the purpose of generating a maximum ultrasonic vibration output.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paschke ‘496 in view of Beck et al, KR200447137Y1 and Chen et al as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Li et al (US 2019/0201175).
Regarding claim 25, Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 22. Paschke ‘496 further discloses the inclusion of seals on the reservoir in combination with the spring-loaded reservoir cap to prevent leaks during pressurization (par 62), but fails to disclose the seal being included with the spring-loaded reservoir cap and the seal being elastomeric material.
Li teaches a reservoir cap (lid 13) that includes an elastomeric seal (see par 24 that discloses the lid 13 is fitted with an o ring) for the purpose of sealing the reservoir (par 25).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen to have the seal being included with the spring-loaded reservoir cap and the seal being elastomeric material as taught by Li for the purpose of sealing the reservoir.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paschke ‘496 in view of Beck et al, KR200447137Y1 and Chen et al as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Helenius (US 2011/0174348).
Regarding claim 26, Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 22, but fails to disclose the solenoid is configured to operate at a DC voltage of from about 12 volts to about 24 volts.
However, Helenius discloses a pressure accumulating and dispersal system with a fluid pump (see par 28) that teaches a solenoid is configured to operate at a DC voltage of from about 12 volts to about 24 volts (par 28 discloses the operating voltage being 12V DC) for the purpose of providing current to the device and the operating electronics (par 37).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen to have the solenoid is configured to operate at a DC voltage of from about 12 volts to about 24 volts as taught by Helenius for the purpose of providing current to the electronics of the ultrasonic device.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paschke ‘496 in view of Beck et al, KR200447137Y1 and Chen et al as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Rahman et al.
Regarding claim 31, Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen disclose the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 22, but fails to disclose the rotational interface includes a bearing assembly configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation.
Rahman teaches a rotational interface (section indicated at rotary in figure 2A) includes a bearing assembly (rotary bearing 24) configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation (par 50 discloses the reduction of friction and improvement of rotational smoothness) for the purpose of enabling rotation of the gripping member by the practitioner without excessive friction (par 47).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Paschke ‘496/Beck/ KR200447137Y1/Chen the rotational interface includes a bearing assembly configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation as taught by Rahman for the purpose of enabling rotation of the gripping member by the practitioner without excessive friction.
Claims 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al in view of Chen and KR200447137 Y1.
Regarding claim 32, Atkin discloses an ultrasonic dental scaling device (figures 1), comprising:
an acoustic assembly (see figures 2, 3 and 6) including an acoustic transformer (connecting body 103, which is disclosed as transmitting ultrasonic vibrations to the tip in par 24) configured to detachably receive a tip (102, par 22 discloses the tip is removably attached to the connecting body) and a transducer coupled to the acoustic transformer and configured to produce ultrasonic vibrational energy (ultrasonic transducer 108, see figure 6 which is disclosed as generating ultrasonic vibrations in par 7; par 31 discloses the dental insert may use a piezoelectric transducer);
a handpiece housing (200) configured to receive the acoustic assembly (see figure 1);
a rotational interface (disposed between the acoustic assembly (100) and the handpiece housing (200), the rotational interface configured to permit rotation of the acoustic assembly relative to the handpiece housing about a longitudinal axis during operation (see figures 1 and 6, where the rotational interface is interpreted as the connection between the insert 100 and the rotator head 204; which is located more towards the end with the tip than the opposite end with the interconnect and therefore is forward to the longitudinal center);
a conductor configured for continuous electrical coupling between the transducer and an ultrasonic drive system during rotation of the acoustic assembly relative to the handpiece housing (par 21 discloses a cable 12 which carries “wires” that deliver electrical signal and energy to the dental tool, and the insert is still rotatable relative to the handpiece during operation par 53),
a fluid connection (interconnect 206, which is disclosed as coupling the cable that provides fluid in par 52) rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly (par 51 discloses the insert 100 rotating together with the rotator head 204 and the rotator head 204 being rotatably coupled to the rest of the handpiece 200, par 53 discloses the interconnect 206 is fixedly attached to the body 202 of the handpiece 200, as such when the insert 100 is rotated with the rotator head 204 it is rotatably coupled to the rest of the handpiece 200 including the interconnect 206), and configured to deliver coolant to the tip while permitting rotation of the acoustic assembly relative to the handpiece housing and the fluid connection (par 24-25 disclose that the hand grip /insert 100 includes a passageway for delivering fluid to the tip 102 after passing through the handpiece 200, this is performed while the handpiece and insert are attached in the rotatable configuration disclosed par 53).
Atkin fails to disclose the conductors are at least two rotational electrical conductors configured for continuous electrical coupling and the fluid connection directly rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly.
Chen teaches a connection (80) that teaches at least two rotational conductors (conducting rings 80 b,c,d) configured for continuous electrical coupling between the transducer and an ultrasonic drive system (see figure 1A, where the connection to the cable section 20 enables the electrical coupling to an ultrasonic drive of remote source S and par 62 discloses the connection enabling the two components to rotate relative to one another) for the purpose of enabling easy coupling and preparation of the instrument (par 41).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin to have the conductors be at least two rotational electrical conductors configured for continuous electrical coupling.
KR200447137Y1 teaches a fluid connection (connecting tube body 3, figure 2; wherein for supplying air or cleaning water to the connecting body 3) directly rotatably coupled to an acoustic assembly (the acoustic assembly being interpreted as the tubular body 4 and element 8, which is a vibration element which is translated to the tip 7,see page 6; see figures 1-2 which shows a screw connection between the connecting tube body 3 and the connecting tube body 3) in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly (see figures 1-2) for the purpose of easily assembling and disassembling the fluid connection to the acoustic assembly (par 1, page 6).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin/Hur to have the fluid connection directly rotatably coupled to the acoustic assembly in coaxial arrangement relative to the acoustic assembly as taught by KR200447137Y1 for the purpose of easily assembling and disassembling the fluid connection to the acoustic assembly.
Regarding claim 33, Atkin further discloses a resilient grip (hand grip 104), wherein the resilient grip is configured to rotate the acoustic assembly relative to the handpiece housing (par 44 discloses the hand grip is not rotatable with respect to the connecting body 103, par 51 discloses the insert 100 rotating together with the rotator head 204 and the rotator head 204 being rotatably coupled to the rest of the handpiece 200 including the body 203 and the interconnect 206, therefore when the grip and connecting body are rotated it is relative to the interconnect and the body 203/the rest of the handpiece 200).
Claims 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al in view of Chen et al and KR200447137Y1 as applied to claim 33 above, and further in view of Beck et al.
Regarding claim 34, Atkin/Chen/ KR200447137Y1 fails to disclose the resilient grip includes an elastomeric sleeve having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60.
Beck teaches a hand grip with an elastomeric sleeve (laminate handle 68) having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60 (par 40) for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity (par 38).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin/Chen/ KR200447137Y1 to have the resilient grip includes an elastomeric sleeve having a Shore A durometer hardness of from about 40 to about 60 as taught by Beck for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity.
Regarding claim 35, Atkin discloses the resilient grip (104) is positioned coaxially about the transducer (insert 100, see figure 6), but fails to disclose Atkin/Chen/ KR200447137Y1 is configured to reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry as the resilient grip when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology.
Beck teaches the resilient grip as set forth above and further discloses that the plurality of elastomeric sleeves/layers may be used to tailor the ergonomic handle 68 to a specific need (par 40) and as such the layers materials and dimensions are considered a result effective variable in providing a desired grip and suppression of vibration for the operator (par 38). Further it appears that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the elastomeric sleeve(s)/layer(s) of Beck to have reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry as the resilient grip when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art,, before the effective filing date to modify Atkin/Chen/ KR200447137Y1 to have the resilient grip reduce measured vibration acceleration at a grip surface of the resilient grip by a factor of at least about 2:1 relative to a rigid grip of similar geometry when tested according to ISO 5349-1 methodology as a matter of routine optimization, for the purpose of providing a comfortable grip that reduces vibration and provides some tactile sensitivity, since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 36, Beck further teaches the resilient grip (68) comprises layered elastomeric zones of varying durometer hardness to enhance vibration damping (par 38-40), for the reasons set forth above.
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al in view of Chen et al in view of KR200447137Y1 as applied to claim 32 above, and further in view of Rahman et al.
Atkin/Chen/ KR200447137Y1 fail to disclose a bearing assembly at a rotational interface between the acoustic assembly and the handpiece housing, the bearing assembly configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation of the acoustic assembly relative to the handpiece housing.
However, Rahman teaches a rotational interface (section indicated at rotary in figure 2A) includes a bearing assembly (rotary bearing 24) configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation (par 50 discloses the reduction of friction and improvement of rotational smoothness) for the purpose of enabling rotation of the gripping member by the practitioner without excessive friction (par 47).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotational interface between the acoustic assembly and the handpiece housing of Atkin/Chen/ KR200447137Y1 to have a bearing assembly configured to permit substantially frictionless rotation of the acoustic assembly relative to the handpiece housing as taught by Rahman for the purpose of enabling rotation of the gripping member by the practitioner without excessive friction.
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkin et al in view of Chen et al and KR200447137Y1 as applied to claim 32 above, and further in view of Paschke (US 2013/0071812), herein known as Paschke ‘812.
Atkin/Chen/ KR200447137Y1 fail to disclose the acoustic assembly configured for continuous 360-degree rotation relative to the handpiece housing at a torque less than 5 in/oz.
However, Paschke ‘812 teaches a rotational interface configured for continuous 360-degree rotation at a torque less than 5 in/oz (par 65 discloses a rotational torque of an insert being between 0.5-1.5 in-oz and par 20 discloses the insert is rotatable 360 degrees) for the purpose of providing a good seal and easy rotation to the tip (par 9).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkin/Chen/ KR200447137Y1 to have the acoustic assembly configured for continuous 360-degree rotation relative to the handpiece housing at a torque less than 5 in/oz as taught by Paschke ‘812 for the purpose of providing a good seal and easy rotation to the tip.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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
7/8/2026
Prosecution Insights