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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the:
“the connection ring body passes through and is connected into the connection through hole in a threaded manner, to implement rotation of the imaging head” of claim 7;
“wherein the connection slot is of a dovetail joint structure; the connector is also configured as a dovetail joint structure” of claim 11;
“wherein the first limiting convex ring and the second limiting convex ring are located on a coaxial arc, and the second limiting convex ring is located inside a gap formed by two ends of the first limiting convex ring” of claim 14;
“wherein an elastic abutment portion is further arranged at a bottom of the support” of claim 19 (this element is not identified by a reference character);
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112b
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 1, 6, and dependent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “on the same horizontal plane projection, two adjacent cameras are disposed at an angle” is unclear. It is unclear if the adjacency is meant for the cameras on the horizontal plane or on the arm. It is also unclear to what the camera is “at an angle”, i.e. at an angle to or from what.
Claim 1 recites “so that capturing ranges of the two adjacent cameras partially overlap, and after overlapping, the capturing ranges of all the cameras cover the imaging region”. It is unclear what is meant “after overlapping”. The cameras are configured to partially overlap, but “after” signifies a timing of events related to the overlapping. The overlapping is not considered to be a transient condition or state (since the device is configured and made with the cameras overlapping), but is implied to be by the claim and as such, this is considered indefinite.
Claim 1 recites “a turning structure, wherein the main imaging base is connected to the handheld assembly through the turning structure to implement multi-angle rotation of the imaging head”. It is unclear if “through” is to be interpreted as “physically through” or “via”.
Claim 6 recites “a connection slot with an opening in one side is formed in the main imaging base”. It is unclear to what “an opening in one side” is referring. Firstly, in one side of what element the opening is configured is not defined. Also, is the opening separate from the slot itself or is there a different cavity/opening associated with the slot? The slot itself is considered to have an opening by definition and therefore the claim must make this distinction.
Indefiniteness will be interpreted as provided in the rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-5, 9, 12, 15, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin 20170215997 and further in view of Wu 20260083311 and Gonzales 20150119759.
Martin discloses for claim 1, “An oral endoscopic scanning device (dental imager 10; fig 3 with the embodiment of fig 8 for the rotatable imaging head), comprising:
a handheld assembly (handle 12; fig 3);
an imaging head (rotatable head 22; fig 8; 0076), wherein an imaging head comprises a main imaging base (central platform 24), at least two groups of cameras (scanners 40, 42, 40’, 42’; fig 8), and two clamping portions (end pads 102, 102’; fig 8) respectively arranged on two sides of the main imaging base;
connection arms (arms 32, 32’; fig 8) are disposed between the main imaging base and the elastic clamping portions; the cameras surround an imaging region and are disposed on the main imaging base and/or the connection arms (fig 8); on the same horizontal plane projection, two adjacent cameras are disposed at an angle, so that capturing ranges of the two adjacent cameras partially overlap, and after overlapping, the capturing ranges of all the cameras cover the imaging region (fig 1, 2, 8);
the cameras are connected to the control circuit board through data wires provided, to implement image transmission; and
a turning structure, wherein the main imaging base is connected to the handheld assembly through the turning structure to implement multi-angle rotation of the imaging head (rotating head 22 described at 0076 to include a rotating joint to allow the rotating head 22 to rotate; fig 8)”.
Martin does not disclose a handheld assembly (handle 12; fig 3), “wherein a control circuit board is disposed within the handheld assembly”. Wu teaches in the same field of endeavor, a portable handheld oral scanner containing electronic circuit 605 and a processor requiring a substrate of some sort, i.e. circuit board, contained in the body 610; fig 1, 23A. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the modification of Wu into the invention of Martin in order to configure the device e.g. as claimed because it allows portability that is not tied to an external processing device.
Martin does not disclose the clamping portions as “elastic”. Gonzales teaches in the same field of endeavor, providing a soft material such as a deformable plastic or rubber to accommodate contact with soft gum or gingiva 0048. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the modification of Gonzales into the invention of Martin in order to configure the device e.g. as claimed because it provides a softer gentler contact for the device with sensitive tissue 0048.
Martin discloses for claim 2, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 1, wherein an angle θ between the two adjacent cameras on the same horizontal plane projection is less than or equal to 90° (fig 1)”.
Martin discloses for claim 3, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 2, wherein the connection arms downwards slantways extend respectively from the two sides of the main imaging base (fig 1, 2)”.
Martin discloses for claim 4, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 3, wherein first bent portions are arranged between the elastic clamping portions and the connection arms, to cause the two elastic clamping portions to be horizontally opposite to each other and form, between the two elastic clamping portions, a clamping opening for passing through an alveolar cavity (fig 1, 8)”.
Martin discloses for claim 5, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 1, wherein light-emitting diode (LED) light groups are arranged at a periphery of the main imaging base and/or peripheries of the cameras (fig 1; 0061)”.
Martin discloses for claim 9, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 1, further comprising a support (pads 96; 0076), wherein the support is perpendicularly arranged on the main imaging base (fig 8)”.
Martin in an alternative embodiment discloses for claim 12, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 3, wherein the main imaging base is fixedly connected to the connection arms (fig 11; 0078 that is available as an alternative to the instant embodiment of fig 8). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the modification of the alternative embodiment into the instant embodiment in order to configure the device e.g. as claimed because it may function to detach the tongue and cheeks from the teeth, potentially providing the ability to capture a better clean image 0078.
Martin discloses for claim 15, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 5, wherein the cameras are fixedly connected to a camera housing; and the LED light groups are arranged around the peripheries of the cameras (fig 1)”.
Martin discloses for claim 17, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 1, wherein the control circuit board is integrated with a Type-C interface and a wireless module (0024)”.
Claim(s) 6, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin, Wu, and Gonzales as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Levy 20130172670.
Martin does not disclose for claim 6, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 1, wherein the imaging head further comprises a connector; a connection slot with an opening in one side is formed in the main imaging base; the connector is plugged into the connection slot for locking; and the turning structure is arranged on the connector”, simply lacking the details of the specific joint. Levy teaches in the same field of endeavor, a joint appropriate for an endoscopic device with a detachable head (fig 5, 6). Since Martin fails to disclose the nature of the joint, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used any suitable configuration known in the art, including the one taught by Levy to achieve the predictable result of a detachable tip.
Modified Martin discloses for claim 11, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 6, wherein the connection slot is of a dovetail joint structure; the connector is also configured as a dovetail joint structure; and the connector is plugged into the connection slot to implement stable connection (Levy: fig 5, 6)”.
Claim(s) 10, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin, Wu, and Gonzales as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Robichaud 20210353304.
Martin does not disclose for claim 10, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 9, wherein a physical mark and a standard reference substance are arranged on the support and/or the elastic clamping portion”. Robichaud teaches in the same field of endeavor, providing markings and color coding on surgical devices as a guide and reference 0065. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the modification of Robichaud into the invention of Martin in order to configure the device e.g. as claimed because it provides a distance and depth guide for the instrument 0065.
Martin does not disclose for claim 19, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 10, wherein an elastic abutment portion is further arranged at a bottom of the support”. Gonzales teaches in the same field of endeavor, providing a soft material such as a deformable plastic or rubber to accommodate contact with soft gum or gingiva 0048. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the modification of Gonzales into the invention of Martin in order to configure the device e.g. as claimed because it provides a softer gentler contact for the device with sensitive tissue 0048.
Modified Martin discloses for claim 20, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 19, wherein the elastic abutment portion is made of an elastic material (Gonzales: 0048).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin, Wu, and Gonzales as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Pesach 20180028292.
Martin does not disclose for claim 18, “The oral endoscopic scanning device according to claim 4, wherein the first bent portions and the elastic clamping portions are made of an elastic material”. Pesach teaches in the same field of endeavor, providing arms for an intraoral scanning device to be elastic 0192. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the modification of Pesach into the invention of Martin in order to configure the device e.g. as claimed because it provides a measure of flexibility for the instrument around delicate tissues helping to minimize traumatic events.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 8, 14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAE K WOO whose telephone number is (571)272-0837. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-2:30p, 6p-9p.
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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at (571) 272-4963. 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.
/Jae Woo/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/ANHTUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
7/26/26
Prosecution Insights