DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Specification
2. Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words. It is important that the abstract not exceed 150 words in length since the space provided for the abstract on the computer tape used by the printer is limited. The form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as "means" and "said," should be avoided. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, "The disclosure concerns," "The disclosure defined by this invention," "The disclosure describes," etc.
3. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains legal phraseology “comprises” (line 1). Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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.
5. Claim 5 is 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 5 recites “a power source positioned in the housing”. It is unclear whether this is the same as, different from, or part of “a power source carried by the housing” previously recited in claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-6 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tjioe et al. (US 2013/0244197) in view of Kerschbaumer (US 2002v).
Regarding claim 1, Tjioe et al. discloses a dental shade guide (Figs. 1-2), comprising: a housing 1/3 (front 1 and rear 3); an array of strips/holders 9 carried by the housing 1/3; an array of samples 6 carried by the array of strips/holders 9 and extending from the housing and oriented to face forwardly (i.e. facing the front 1) with respect to the housing, each shade sample 6 having a different shade corresponding to dental shades (Figs. 1-2; abstract; [0020] “one or more holders for holding one or more shade tabs”; [0068] “holder 9 is formed as a supporting space for holding a rod or strip of the shade tab”). Tjioe et al. further discloses a light source 2/8, carried by the housing 1/3 and oriented to face rearwardly with respect to the housing (i.e. Fig. 1 shows the light rays 2 are facing or “shining” rearwardly; light 8 is also facing/shining rearwardly with respect to the housing).
Although Tjioe does not explicitly disclose a power source, such power source is implicit because Tjioe indicates electronical power in order to provide power to the light source. Tjioe fails to disclose a power source carried by the housing. Kerschbaumer et al. discloses a dental color analyzing device 50 comprising a housing 52, a light source 71, and a power source 96 carried by the housing 52 and electrically coupled to the light source (Fig. 3; [0043]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tjioe et al. by including a power source within the housing in order to provide power to the light source while enabling the device portable for convenience.
As to claim 2, Tjioe et al. discloses the light source 8 is positioned behind the array of shade samples 6.
As to claim 3, Tjioe et al. discloses the light source but fails to specify such light source comprising an array of light emitting diodes (LEDs). Kerschbaumer et al. discloses the light source comprising LEDs (see Kerschbaumer [0037] “ light sources 71,73 comprise rows of LEDs… mounted on a supports 76”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tjioe et al. by utilize LEDs as a known suitable alternative light source as taught be Kerschbaumer. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to arrange the LEDs across the width of the array of sample shades in order to effectively provide adequate lighting across the shade samples.
As to claim 4, the housing 1/3 having a window opening (window within retracting wall frame 4) in a back wall 4 of the housing; and the light source 8 positioned in the housing and aligned with the window opening (Fig. 1).
As to claim 5, although Tjioe does not explicitly disclose a power source, such power source is implicit because Tjioe indicates electronical power in order to provide power to the light source. Tjioe fails to disclose a power source positioned in the housing. Kerschbaumer et al. discloses a dental color analyzing device 50 comprising a housing 52, a light source 71, and a power source 96 carried by the housing 52 and electrically coupled to the light source (Fig. 3; [0043]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tjioe et al. by including a power source within the housing in order to provide power to the light source while enabling the device portable for convenience. Kerschbaumer et al. further discloses an adjustment button (keypad 100) carried by the housing enabling adjustments (see Kerschbaumer [0043] “keypad 100 that provides an interface for user to operate”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include such adjustment button/keypad in Tjioe’s device in order to effectively operate and adjust the device as taught by Kerschbaumer.
As to claim 6, Tjioe et al. discloses the array of strips 6 is removably carried by the housing; and wherein a proximal end of each strip of the array of strips has an interference fit with the housing (Figs. 1-2; [0068] “shade tab 6 can be mounted in the holder 9 mechanically… by snap-fit or screwing”.
As to claim 9, Tjioe et al. discloses the shade sample 6 comprises a dental material comprising resin ([0068] “shade tab which is made of resin”).
As to claim 10, Tjioe et al. shows each shade sample 6 has a shape of an anterior tooth (see Figs. 2a-2b).
8. Claims 7-8 are are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tjioe et al. in view of Kerschbaumer, and further in view of Coste (US 6,315,554).
Tjioe/Kerschbaumer discloses the invention substantially as claimed according to claim 1 as detailed above. However, as per claims 7-8, Tjioe/Kerschbaumer is silent to the indicia on the housing for the slots of shade strips and indicia on the shade tabs. Coste et al. discloses a dental shade guide having indicia 21/22/23/24 labeling the shade slots on the housing (Fig. 1) and corresponding indicia on the shade tabs (see Coste Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tjioe/Kerschaumer by including indicia on the housing slots and also corresponding indicia on the shade tabs as taught by Coste et al. in order to establish a consistent nomenclature organization for the shades.
Allowable Subject Matter
9. Claims 11-20 are allowed.
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner HAO D. MAI whose telephone number is (571)270-3002. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 8:00-4:30. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eric Rosen can be reached on (571) 270-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HAO D MAI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights