Ex Parte Andreiko

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 19, 2016

11464909 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 19, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
111464,909 08/16/2006
83571 7590 09/21/2016
Wood, Herron & Evans, LLP (Sybron)
441 Vine Street
2700 Carew Tower
Cincinnati, OH 45202
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Craig A. Andreiko
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
ORM-211CP 9389
EXAMINER
PATEL, YOGESH P
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3732
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/21/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
usptodock@whe-law.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte CRAIG A. ANDREIKO
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
Technology Center 3700
Before LYNNE H. BROWNE, LEE L. STEPINA, and
ERIC C. JESCHKE, Administrative Patent Judges.
STEPINA, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR REHEARING
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Craig A. Andreiko ("Appellant") has filed a Request for Rehearing
("Request") of the Decision on Appeal entered May 31, 2016 ("Decision"),
in this Application. The Request seeks reconsideration of the Board's
affirmance of the rejection of claims 6-11, 13, 21, and 23-30.
We GRANT the request for reconsideration, and we now enter NEW
GROUNDS OF REJECTION of claims 6-11, 13, 21, and 23-30.
Rejection(!)
(A) Applicable Legal Standard
Appellant asserts, "[t]he Caveney case and the 'preponderance of the
evidence' standard it sets forth, does not relate to the evaluation of 'inherent'
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
disclosure of what is found in the four comers of a written reference, which
is at issue here." Req 2.
We disagree with Appellant's characterization of the issue as relating
to the inherent disclosure of the reference in question, Tatsu. 1 Rather, the
Decision relied on what is implicit in Tatsu. See, e.g., Dec. 8, stating:
Considering that Tatsu places core 11 on multiple teeth, and the
side view of core 11 in Figure 2 shows a contoured tooth
contacting surface, a person of ordinary skill in the art would
understand that core 11 in Tatsu provides this kind of contoured
surface for the numerous teeth touched by core 11, but not
depicted in the side view shown in Figure 2.
Thus, the quotation in the Decision that "[a]n anticipatory reference ... need
not duplicate word for word what is in the claims. Anticipation can occur
when a claimed limitation is 'inherent' or otherwise implicit in the relevant
reference" (see Dec. 5, quoting Standard Havens Prods., Inc. v. Gencor
Indus., Inc., 953 F.2d 1360, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 1991)), is pertinent as to its
discussion of implicit disclosure; not inherent disclosure.
To the extent Appellant asserts that the implicit disclosure of a
reference is not relevant, we also disagree. See In re Baxter Travenol Labs
952 F.2d 388, 390 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (the dispositive question is "whether one
skilled in the art would reasonably understand or infer" that a reference
teaches or discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention); In re
Preda, 401F.2d825, 826 (CCPA 1968) (stating, "in considering the
disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific
1 We have obtained an improved English translation of Tatsu (JP 10-
258070A) (hereinafter "Tatsu Translation II"), which is included with this
Decision for entry into the record. See PTO 10-4936 (attached).
2
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art
would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom").
(B) Evidence Supporting the Examiner's Findings
Appellant contends, "if the Board had used extrinsic evidence, it
would have concluded that a person of skill seeing the frequent reference to
'~tooth' conforming surface in Tatsu, and having familiarity with Doyle,
would clearly be led to the conclusion that Tatsu has only one tooth
conforming surface." Req. 3. Appellant further contends "there is evidence
in the record of a jig-like structure having a single tooth-conforming surface
and other surfaces that extend towards and contact but do not conform to
other teeth," and Appellant refers to Figure 15 of Doyle in support of this
contention. Id. Appellant made similar arguments regarding Figure 15 of
Doyle on pages 9-10 of the Appeal Brief.
As the Decision does not specifically address Appellant's comments
on Figure 15 of Doyle, we grant the Request. For the reasons discussed
below, we modify our Decision and enter a NEW GROUND OF
REJECTION of claims 6 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Tatsu.
Appellant contends Tatsu does not disclose "a jig body having at least
two jig-locating, tooth contact areas that are shaped to respectively conform
to a corresponding jig-contact area on respective surfaces of different teeth
of a group" (Appeal Br. 8), and Doyle and Andreiko "teach away from
attempting to conform ajig to two adjacent teeth" (Appeal Br. 9-10).
As discussed in the Decision, Tatsu describes conventional bonding of
orthodontics in relation to prior art Figures 10 and 11. Tatsu i-f 2; Tatsu
Translation II i-f 2. We produce below Figures 10 and 11 of Tatsu.
3
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
Figure 10 of Tatsu is a perspective view of a conventional transfer
apparatus with multiple brackets 1 disposed in core 3, one for each tooth
touched by core 3, and Figure 11 depicts the apparatus shown in Figure 10 in
use. See Tatsu 6 (Brief Description of the Drawings), i-f 2; Tatsu Translation
II, 17-18 (Brief Description of the Drawings), i-f 2.
As further discussed in the Decision, Tatsu indicates that, in a
conventional apparatus, a flexible section of core 3 is "forced in the direction
of a tooth axis" in order to attach bracket 1 to tooth 5. Tatsu i-f 3; see also
Tatsu Translation II i-f 3. When this occurs in a conventional apparatus,
according to Tatsu, "the bottom la of the bracket 1 will be worn to a tooth
flank at the time of attachment of the core 3. Therefore, there is a possibility
that the adhesives with which the bottom 1 a of the bracket 1 was plastered
may separate." Tatsu i-f 3; see also Tatsu Translation II (describing the same
problem, in which "the bottom 1 a of the bracket 1 rubs against the tooth
surface. Accordingly, there is a possibility that the adhesive with which the
bottom 1 a of the bracket 1 was spread with may separate").
In a paragraph under the label "Means for solving problem," Tatsu
characterizes its remedy for the rubbing problem in the conventional
4
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
apparatus as a transfer apparatus that moves the bracket toward and away
from the tooth surface. Tatsu i-f 5, Tatsu Translation II i-f 5.
We reproduce Figures 2 and 7 of Tatsu below.
[D'~ ,!. . ·71 L ia\l\i~nq · 1
-······-···················-~---······"-'
Figure 2 of Tatsu is a side view of core 11 closely fit onto tooth 5 with
bracket 17 in a position ready for attachment via movable arm 21, and
Figure 7 of Tatsu is a top view with multiple brackets 17 on corresponding
movable arms 21 disposed on core 11, vvherein core 11 is depicted as an
elongated body. See Tatsu 6; Tatsu Translation II 17.
Tatsu discloses or suggests placing one bracket on each of multiple
teeth. See, e.g., Tatsu, Fig. 1. In a discussion of the conventional device,
Tatsu states, "[a]s especially shown in drawing 10, when many brackets 1
are attached to the core 3, it is very difficult to stick each bracket 1 to the
predetermined position in each tooth flank correctly, respectively. This
invention tends to solve the problem like the above and is made." Tatsu i-f 3;
see also Tatsu Translation II (stating, "as shown in drawing 10, when a
plurality of brackets 1 are attached to the core 3, it is very difficult to make
each bracket 1 adhere correctly to a position on each tooth surface,
respectively. The present invention has as an object to solve problems like
5
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
the above"). Thus, Tatsu intends to address the difficulties associated with
attaching brackets to a predetermined position on each of multiple teeth.
Tatsu attaches multiple brackets to the core (Tatsu i-f 1 O; Tatsu
Translation II i-f 10), Figure 7 of Tatsu depicts core 11 as an elongated
member, and none of Tatsu's Figures depicts more than one bracket 17 on a
single tooth.
Considering the problem solved by Tatsu and reviewing the side view
of core 11 depicted in Tatsu's Figure 2 and top view of core 11 depicted in
Figure 7, a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that Tatsu
implies, or at least suggests, providing conforming surfaces on core 11 that
fit on each of multiple teeth as recited in claim 6. As Figure 2 of Tatsu is a
side view, core 11 is shown on the only tooth depicted in this figure. Thus,
Figure 2 does not explicitly disclose the relationship of core 11 to the teeth
behind the single tooth depicted in Figure 2. However, given the elongated
shape of core 11 and the depiction of multiple brackets 1 7 on arms 21 in
Figure 7, it is evident that Tatsu places core 11 on multiple teeth and places
one bracket 17 on each tooth. To the extent Tatsu depicts core 11 in a way
that indicates its relationship with any of the teeth overlapped by core 11,
Tatsu does so only with core 11 having a conforming surface as recited in
claim 6. See Tatsu, Fig. 2. Thus, Tatsu suggests, to one skilled in the art
considering the combined teachings of Figures 2 and 7, providing the same
kind of contoured surface depicted in Figure 2 for each of the numerous
teeth overlapped by core 11, depicted in Figure 7.
Furthermore, to duplicate the process of providing a conforming
tooth-contact as shown in Figure 2 of Tatsu so as to provide a conforming
surface for each of the multiple teeth touched by core 11 in Tatsu would
6
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill because it would have
provided the predictable result of contributing to the proper positioning of
core 11 on a plurality of teeth, the same way Tatsu already does with the
tooth-contact area of core 11 that conforms to tooth 5 shown in Figure 2.
Consequently, we enter a new ground of rejection of claim 6, and claim 7
depending therefrom, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Tatsu.
Re} ections (11)-(IV)
Aside from arguments against Tatsu, Appellant made arguments
against "other prior art." Appeal Br. 9-10. Specifically, Appellant states
Id.
The Examiner's secondary references, Doyle and
Andreiko, teach away from attempting to conform a jig to two
adjacent teeth; Doyle instead shows in his Fig. 15 a device that
conforms to only one tooth, with a nonspecific extension leading
to an adjacent tooth. Andreiko similarly shows single tooth jigs
in Figs. 9Q - 9W.
We are not persuaded that Doyle and Andreiko teach away from
providing two jig-locating, tooth-contact areas, each shaped to respectively
conform to a corresponding jig-contact area on respective occlusal surfaces
of different teeth. Although Doyle describes various jigs applied to a single
tooth (see, e.g., Figures 2, 4a and 4b, 5, 7a-7d), and Doyle expands upon
this concept with thejig depicted in Figure 15, in which ajig bridges a gap
between two adjacent teeth, we do not consider this disclosure to teach away
from the arrangement recited in claim 1. At most, the disclosure of the
various devices in Doyle amounts to the teaching of alternative
embodiments of jigs for orthodontic brackets. See DePuy Spine, Inc. v.
Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., 567 F.3d 1314, 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2009) ("A
7
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
reference does not teach away ... if it merely expresses a general preference
for an alternative invention.").
In any event, in describing the embodiment Doyle discloses in Figure
15, Doyle indicates a need for additional stabilization, which further
supports our finding above that a person of ordinary skill in the art would
have had a reason to duplicate the process of providing a conforming surface
on one tooth, as disclosed in Tatsu, so as to provide multiple conforming
surfaces matching multiple teeth. See Doyle, col. 8, 11. 44--49 (stating "Ajig
200 such as shown in FIG. 15 is particularly helpful for the reorientation of
highly rotated teeth separated by a space or in any situation where it is likely
that the jig will require additional stabilization to that available from
engaging the target tooth alone"). By engaging multiple teeth as shown in
Figure 15, Doyle enhances the stabilization provided in the embodiments
where the jig is attached to only one tooth. In this regard, Doyle also teaches
that both ends of jig 200 are "adapted for securely engaging teeth 196c and
196d." Doyle, col. 8, 11. 39--41. Accordingly, rather than teaching away
from the arrangement recited in claim 6, Doyle teaches securing a jig to
multiple teeth and the benefit this provides.
As for Figures 9Q--9W of Andreiko, Appellant does not explain
persuasively why the mere disclosure of jigs applied to single teeth
teaches away from the arrangement recited in claim 6. As discussed
above, the mere disclosure of alternatives does not amount to teaching
away. See DePuy Spine, 567 F.3d at 1327.
Our Decision here changes the finding that Tatsu implicitly
discloses "at least two jig-locating, tooth-contact areas each shaped to
respectively conform to a corresponding jig-contact area on respective
8
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
occlusal surfaces of different teeth" to a conclusion that it would have
been obvious to modify Tatsu to include this feature. Therefore, we
enter NEW GROUNDS OF REJECTION for Rejections II-IV. The
Decision remains unchanged in all other aspects.
DECISION
(I) The Examiner's rejection of claims 6 and 7 as anticipated by Tatsu
is reversed, and we enter a NEW GROUND OF REJECTION of claims 6
and 7 under 35 USC§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Tatsu.
(II) We change our affirmance of the Examiner's rejection of claims
8-10, 21, and 23 as unpatentable over Tatsu and Doyle to a reversal, and we
enter a NEW GROUND OF REJECTION of claims 8-10, 21, and 23 as
unpatentable over Tatsu and Doyle based on our modification of Rejection
(I). The Examiner's rejection of claims 19 and 22 remains reversed.
(III) We change our affirmance of the Examiner's rejection of claim
11 as unpatentable over Tatsu, Doyle, and Andreiko to a reversal, and we
enter a NEW GROUND OF REJECTION of claim 11 as unpatentable over
Tatsu, Doyle, and Andreiko based on our modification of Rejection (I).
(IV) We change our affirmance of the Examiner's rejection of claim
13 as unpatentable over Tatsu and Doyle to a reversal, and we enter a NEW
GROUND OF REJECTION of claim 13 as unpatentable over Tatsu and
Doyle based on our modification of Rejection (I).
(V) The Examiner's rejection of claim 20 as unpatentable over Tatsu
remains reversed.
(VI) We change our affirmance of the Examiner's rejection of claims
24--30 as unpatentable over Tatsu and Andreiko to a reversal, and we enter a
9
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
NEW GROUND OF REJECTION of claims 24--30 as unpatentable over
Tatsu and Andreiko based on our modification to Rejection (I).
This decision contains new grounds of rejection pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.50(b). Section 41.50(b) provides "[a] new ground of rejection pursuant
to this paragraph shall not be considered final for judicial review." Section
41.50(b) also provides:
When the Board enters such a non-final decision, the Appellant,
within two months from the date of the decision, must exercise one of the
following two options with respect to the new ground of rejection to avoid
termination of the appeal as to the rejected claims:
(1) Reopen prosecution. Submit an appropriate
amendment of the claims so rejected or new Evidence relating to
the claims so rejected, or both, and have the matter reconsidered
by the examiner, in which event the prosecution will be
remanded to the examiner. The new ground of rejection is
binding upon the examiner unless an amendment or new
Evidence not previously of Record is made which, in the opinion
of the examiner, overcomes the new ground of rejection
designated in the decision. Should the examiner reject the claims,
appellant may again appeal to the Board pursuant to this subpart.
(2) Request rehearing. Request that the proceeding be
reheard under § 41.52 by the Board upon the same Record. The
request for rehearing must address any new ground of rejection
and state with particularity the points believed to have been
misapprehended or overlooked in entering the new ground of
rejection and also state all other grounds upon which rehearing
is sought.
Further guidance on responding to a new ground of rejection can be
found in the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure§ 1214.01.
10
Appeal2013-010483
Application 11/464,909
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(l )(iv).
GRANTED; 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b)
11
Notice of References Cited
*
Document Number Date
Country Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY
A US-
B US-
c US-
D US-
E US-
F US-
G US-
H US-
I US-
J US-
K US-
L US-
M US-
*
Document Number Date
Country Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY
N 10258070 09-1998
0
p
Q
R
s
T
Application/Control No.
11/464,909
Examiner
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
Name
FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
Country
JP
NON-PATENT DOCUMENTS
Name
Omura
Applicant(s)/Patent Under Patent
Appeal No.
Art Unit
I Page 1 of 1 13732
Classification
Classification
A61C 7/02, 7/14, 7/28
* Include as applicable: Author, Title Date, Publisher, Edition or Volume, Pertinent Pages)
u
v
w
x
*A copy of this reference 1s not being furnished with this Office action. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).)
Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
PT0-892 (Rev. 01-2001) Notice of References Cited Part of Paper No.
PTO 10-4936 CC=JP
DATE=19980929
KIND=A
PN=10258070
BRACKET TRANSFER APPARATUS FOR ORTHODONTIC INDIRECT BONDING
[SHIKA KYOUSEI NO INDAIREKUTO BONDINGU NI OKERU BURAKETTO
NO TORANSUFAA SOUCHI]
TATSU OMURA
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. JULY 2010
TRANSLATED BY: SCHREIBER TRANSLATIONS, INC.
PUBLICATION COUNTRY (10): JP
DOCUMENT NUMBER (11): 10258070
DOCUMENT KIND (12): A
PUBLICATION DATE (43): 19980929
APPLICATION NUMBER (21): 09085983
APPLICATION DATE (22): 19970318
INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION (51): A61C 7/02, 7/14, 7/28
PRIORITY COUNTRY (33): N/A
PRIORITY NUMBER (31): N/A
PRIORITY DATE (32): N/A
INVENTOR(S) (72): TATSU OMURA
APPLICANT(S) (71): TATSU OMURA
DESIGNATED CONTRACTING STATES (81): N/A
TITLE (54): BRACKET TRANSFER
FOREIGN TITLE
1
APPARATUS FOR
ORTHODONTIC INDIRECT
BONDING
[54A]: SHIKA KYOUSEI NO
INDAIREKUTO BONDINGU
NI OKERU BURAKETTO NO
TORANSUFAA SOUCHI
I ( 2)
[Scope of Patent Claim(s)]
[Claim 1] A bracket transfer apparatus for orthodontic
indirect bonding, which is characterized in that a core
provided with a shape corresponding to a patient's tooth is
formed by a master cast which reproduces a patient's tooth
correctly; a bracket which is provided with an arch wire
holding mechanism is attached to said core movably in a
direction which contacts and separates from the tooth
surface, and said bracket contacts a prescribed position on
the tooth surface when said bracket is moved in the
direction of the tooth surface.
[Claim 2] A bracket transfer apparatus for orthodontic
indirect bonding which is characterized in that a core
provided with a shape corresponding to a patient's tooth is
formed by a master cast which reproduces a patient's tooth
correctly; a hinge is provided in said core, and one end of
a rotating arm is provided in said hinge in a direction
which contacts and separates from the tooth surface; a
bracket which is provided with an arch wire holding
mechanism is attached to the other end of said rotating arm,
and said bracket contacts a prescribed position on the
tooth surface when said arm is moved in the direction of
the tooth surface.
2
[Claim 3] The transfer apparatus according to Claim 2 which
is characterized in that it is provided with a locking
means which locks said rotating arm when said bracket
touches a prescribed position on a tooth surface.
[Claim 4] A bracket transfer apparatus for orthodontic
indirect bonding which is characterized in that a core
provided with a shape corresponding to a patient's tooth is
formed by a master cast which reproduces a patient's tooth
correctly, a support tube is provided in said core, a
sliding arm is inserted in said support tube, a bracket
which is provided with an arch wire holding mechanism is
attached to said sliding arm, and said bracket contacts a
prescribed position on the tooth surface when said sliding
arm is slid in the direction of the tooth surface.
[Claim 5] A bracket transfer apparatus for orthodontic
indirect bonding which is characterized in that a core
provided with a shape corresponding to a patient's tooth is
formed by a master cast which reproduces a patient's tooth
correctly; and one end of a spring body which sandwiches
the tooth is attached to said core, a bracket which is
provided with an arch wire holding mechanism is attached to
the other end of said spring mechanism, then said other end
of said spring body is movable in a direction in which said
bracket contacts and separates from the tooth surface and
3
simultaneously has a slant which moves it in a direction in
which said bracket is against the tooth surface, and said
bracket contacts a prescribed position on the tooth surface
when said other end of said spring body is moved in the
direction of the tooth surface.
[Claim 6] The transfer apparatus of any of Claims 1 to 5
which is characterized in that a plurality of brackets is
attached to said core.
[Detailed Description of the Invention]
[0001]
[Field of the Invention] The present invention relates to a
bracket transfer apparatus for orthodontic indirect bonding,
more particularly, it relates to a transfer apparatus for
moving a bracket whose position on the tooth surface is
defined by a master cast to the corresponding tooth surface
of a patient in orthodontic indirect bonding. The bracket
is provided with an arch wire holding mechanism.
Incidentally, the technique of directly adhering a bracket
to a patient's tooth surface is called direct bonding.
[0002]
[Description of the Prior Art] Conventionally, what are
shown in drawing 10 and drawing 11 are used as a bracket
transfer apparatus in orthodontic indirect bonding. This
transfer apparatus is formed from a master cast which
4
reproduces a patient's tooth correctly using gypsum, etc.,
and the bottom la of a bracket 1 is temporarily fixed to a
position on the tooth surface of this master cast, then an
impression material, such as silicone, is spread on the
tooth of this master cast, and thereby, a flexible core 3
provided with a shape corresponding to the patient's tooth
and having essentially a U-shape in which the bottom la of
the bracket 1 is exposed on its inner surface is formed.
When the bracket 1 is moved to a patient's corresponding
tooth surface, the bottom la of the bracket 1 is spread
with an adhesive, and after the bracket 1 is adhered on the
surface of the tooth 5 by attaching the essentially U-
shaped core 3 in a patient's tooth 5, the core 3 is removed.
[0003]
[Problem(s) to be Solved by the Invention] However, there
is the following sort of problems in the aforementioned
conventional transfer apparatus. That is, as shown in
drawing 11, since the essentially U-shaped flexible core 3
in which the bottom la of the bracket 1 inside is exposed
and forced in the direction of the tooth axis to a
patient's tooth 5 in order to fit it to the tooth surface,
when the core 3 is attached, the bottom la of the bracket 1
rubs against the tooth surface. Accordingly, there is a
possibility that the adhesive with which the bottom la of
5
the bracket 1 was spread with may separate. As a result,
there is a problem in that the bottom la of the bracket 1
does not fully adhere to the tooth surface. Further, since
the bracket 1 is what is exposed to the inner surface of
the essentially U-shaped core 3, when the core 3 is fitted
to a patient's tooth 5 as described above, it is very
difficult to check the position of the bracket 1 with
respect to the tooth surface visually. Therefore, it is not
easy to adhere correctly the bracket 1 to a position on a
tooth surface. Especially, as shown in drawing 10, when a
plurality of brackets 1 are attached to the core 3, it is
very difficult to make each bracket 1 adhere correctly to a
position on each tooth surface, respectively. The present
invention has as an object to solve problems like the above.
[0004]
[Means for Solving the Problem(s)] In order to solve the
aforementioned problems, the present invention provides the
following transfer apparatus.
I ( 3)
[0005] (1) A bracket transfer apparatus for orthodontic
indirect bonding which is characterized in that a core
provided with a shape corresponding to a patient's tooth is
formed by a master cast which reproduces a patient's tooth
correctly; a bracket which is provided with an arch wire
6
holding mechanism is attached to the aforementioned core
movably in a direction which contacts and separates from
the tooth surface; and the aforementioned bracket contacts
a prescribed position on the tooth surface when the
aforementioned bracket is moved in the direction of the
tooth surface (the direction toward the tooth
surface) (Claim 1).
[0006] (2) A bracket transfer apparatus for orthodontic
indirect bonding which is characterized in that a core
provided with a shape corresponding to a patient's tooth is
formed by a master cast which reproduces a patient's tooth
correctly, a hinge is provided in the aforementioned core,
and one end of a rotating arm is provided in the
aforementioned hinge in a direction which contacts and
separates from the tooth surface; a bracket which is
provided with an arch wire holding mechanism is attached to
the other end of the aforementioned rotating arm, and the
aforementioned bracket contacts a prescribed position on
the tooth surface when the aforementioned arm is moved in
the direction of the tooth surface (Claim 2).
[0007] (3) Preferably, the transfer apparatus is provided
with a locking means which locks the aforementioned
rotating arm when the aforementioned bracket touches a
prescribed position on a tooth surface (Claim 3).
7
[0008] (4) A bracket transfer apparatus for orthodontic
indirect bonding which is characterized in that a core
provided with a shape corresponding to a patient's tooth is
formed by a master cast which reproduces a patient's tooth
correctly, a support tube is provided in the aforementioned
core, a sliding arm is inserted in the aforementioned
support tube, a bracket which is provided with an arch wire
holding mechanism is attached to the aforementioned sliding
arm, and the aforementioned bracket contacts a prescribed
position on the tooth surface when the aforementioned
sliding arm is slid in the direction of the tooth
surface(Claim 4).
[0009] (5) A bracket transfer apparatus for orthodontic
indirect bonding which is characterized in that a core
provided with a shape corresponding to a patient's tooth is
formed by a master cast which reproduces a patient's tooth
correctly, and one end of a spring body which sandwiches
the tooth is attached to the aforementioned core, a bracket
which is provided with an arch wire holding mechanism is
attached to the other end of the aforementioned spring
mechanism, thus the aforementioned other end of the
aforementioned spring body is movable in a direction in
which the aforementioned bracket contacts and separates
from the tooth surface and simultaneously has a slant which
8
moves it in a direction which the aforementioned bracket is
against the tooth surface, and the aforementioned bracket
contacts a prescribed position on the tooth surface when
the aforementioned other end of the aforementioned spring
body is moved in the direction of the tooth surface (Claim
5) •
[0010] (6) A plurality of brackets may be attached to the
aforementioned core (Claim 6) .
[0011]
[Operation] [Transfer apparatus according to Claim 1] When
a bracket is attached to a position on a patient's tooth
with the transfer apparatus according to Claim 1, the
bottom of a bracket attached to a core is spread with an
adhesive, then the core is fitted to the patient's tooth,
and the bottom of this bracket is pressed against and
adhered to the position on the tooth surface by moving the
bracket in the direction of a tooth surface. When the
bracket is moved in the direction of the tooth surface, the
shape of the core from the master cast and the bracket, the
physical relationship, etc., are determined to be such that
the bottom of this bracket touches the position on the
tooth surface. The bracket may be adhered to a lingual side
of the tooth, but it may also be adhered to the labial side
or cheek side. Thus, after adhering brackets to the
9
predetermined teeth, respectively, a plurality of brackets
are connected by an arch wire by removing the core from the
mouth and making the arch wire held in place by a holding
mechanism on a bracket. Dental correction is performed by
maintaining this state for a prescribed period.
[0012] [Transfer apparatus according to Claim 2] In the
transfer apparatus according to Claim 2, in order to make
the apparatus become movable in the direction which
attaches and detaches a bracket with a tooth surface, the
bracket is attached via a rotating arm to the hinge with
which the core is provided, thus enabling free rotation.
After a bracket is adhered to a tooth surface, the rotating
arm is removed from the bracket and the rotating arm and
hinge are removed from the mouth with the core. In other
ways, this apparatus is the same as the transfer apparatus
according to Claim 1.
[0013] [Transfer apparatus according to Claim 3] Since the
transfer apparatus according to Claim 3 is provided with a
locking means which locks a rotating arm when a bracket
touches the position on a tooth surface, the bracket is
maintained in the state in which the position on a tooth
surface is touched. Therefore, even if a bracket is not
pressed against a tooth surface by hand or other pressing
means, the bottom of a bracket definitely adheres to a
10
tooth surface. The hinge, the rotating arm, and the locking
means are removed from the mouth with the core after the
bracket adheres to a tooth surface.
[0014] [Transfer apparatus according to Claim 4] In the
transfer apparatus according to Claim 4, in order to make
the apparatus become movable in the direction which
attaches and detaches a bracket with a tooth surface, the
bracket is slid and fitted via a sliding arm in a support
cylinder with which the core is provided. After a bracket
adheres to a tooth surface, the sliding arm is removed from
the bracket and the sliding arm and the support cylinder
are removed from the mouth with the core. In other ways,
this apparatus is the same as the transfer apparatus
according to Claim 1.
[0015] [Transfer apparatus according to Claim 5] In the
transfer apparatus according to Claim 5, in order to make
the apparatus become movable in the direction which
attaches and detaches a bracket with a tooth surface, the
bracket is attached to the core via a spring body which
sandwiches a tooth. The bracket is pressed and adhered by
the power of a spring body to the position on a tooth
I ( 4)
surface. After the bracket adheres to a tooth surface, the
spring body is removed from the bracket and the spring body
11
is removed from the mouth with the core. In other ways,
this apparatus is the same as the transfer apparatus
according to Claim 1.
[0016] [Transfer apparatus according to Claim 6] In the
transfer apparatus according to Claim 6, a plurality of
brackets are attached to the same core.
[0017]
[Embodiment of the Invention] Next, an embodiment of the
invention is described according to the accompanying
drawings. It is a core which is shown by the notation 11. A
core 11 is formed such that it has a shape corresponding to
a patient's tooth S using a master cast, such as gypsum,
etc., which reproduces the patient's tooth S correctly. The
core 11 is formed with a hard material, such as a synthetic
resin or a photo-polymerization resin. The core 11 is
provided with a bracket 17 which is then provided with a
holding mechanism lS for an arch wire 13 such that it is
movable in the direction which contacts and separates from
a tooth surface Sa, and when the bracket 17 is moved in the
direction of a tooth surface, the bracket 17 contacts the
position on the tooth surface Sa.
[0018] In the example shown in drawing 2, the core 11 is
provided with a hinge 19 and an end 21a of a rotating arm
21 is attached to the hinge 19 such that the rotating arm
12
21 can be rotated in the direction which contacts and
separates from the tooth surface Sa; the bracket 17 which
is provided with the holding mechanism lS for the arch wire
13 is attached to the other end 21b of the rotating arm 21,
and when the rotating arm 21 is rotated in the direction of
a tooth surface (arrow direction in drawing 2), the bottom
17a of the bracket 17 contacts the position on the tooth
surface Sa. The notation 23 is an adhesive layer spread on
the bottom 17a of the bracket 17.
[0019] Drawing 4 and drawing S show an example of a bracket
17 and a rotating arm 21. That is, a slot 2S with
approximately a cross shape is formed in a surface 17b of
the bracket 17, the other end 21b of the rotating arm 21 is
provided with the shape corresponding to the slot 2S, then
the other end 21b of the rotating arm 21 is fixed into the
slot 2S of the bracket 17 surface 17b, and the other end
21b of the rotating arm 21 and the surface 17b of the
bracket 17 are temporarily fixed with a synthetic resin 27,
such as a thermoplastic. In this example, after the bottom
17a of the bracket 17 is adhered to the position on the
tooth surface Sa, the synthetic resin 27 and the rotating
arm 21 are removed from the bracket 17, and the linear part
of the approximately cross-shaped slot 2S of the surface
13
17b of the bracket 17 becomes the holding mechanism 15 of
the arch wire 13.
[0020] Drawing 6 shows a locking means which locks the
rotating arm when the bracket 17 touches a position on the
tooth surface Sa. This locking means is included in the
hinge 19 with which the core 11 is provided. That is, in
the hinge 19, the aforementioned end 21a of the rotating
arm 21 meshes with a pivot 29 attached to the core 11; the
pivot 29 has notch sections 31 and 31 formed by cutting and
removing the surface of a cylindrical body, and the
aforementioned end 21a of the rotating arm 21 is provided
with a central hole 35 which meshes with the pivot 29 and
opens to the outside via a discontinuous part 33 formed at
the tip of the end 21a. In other words, the aforementioned
end 21a of the rotating arm 21 is formed in the shape,
essentially, of the letter C. The rotating arm 21 in this
example is preferably formed with a synthetic resin.
[0021] In the example shown in drawing 7, a plurality of
rotating arms 21, 21 are attached to the hinge 19 provided
in the core 11 and the bracket 17 is attached to each
rotating arm 21.
[0022] In the example shown in drawing 8, the core 11 is
provided with the support cylinder 41 and a sliding arm 43
is slid and fitted into the support cylinder 41, the
14
bracket 17 which is provided with the holding mechanism lS
of the arch wire 13 is attached to the sliding arm 43 via a
base material 4S of a synthetic resin such that the bracket
17 moves in the direction which contacts and separates from
the tooth surface Sa by sliding the sliding arm 43 to the
support cylinder 41. When sliding the sliding arm 43 in the
direction of a tooth surface (the direction in which the
bracket 17 slants toward the tooth surface Sa, that is, the
arrow direction in drawing 8), the bracket 17 contacts the
position on the tooth surface Sa.
[0023] In the example shown in drawing 9, a end Sla of a
spring body Sl which sandwiches the tooth S is attached to
the core 11, the bracket 17 which is provided with the
holding mechanism lS of the arch wire 13 is attached to the
other end Slb of the spring body Sl via a base material S3
of a synthetic resin, the aforementioned other end Slb of
the spring body Sl has the movable bracket 17 which moves
in the direction which contacts and separates from the
tooth surface Sa, and when the aforementioned other end Slb
of the spring body Sl moves in the direction of a tooth
surface (arrow direction in drawing 9), it presses the
bracket 17 against the tooth surface Sa, and the bracket 17
contacts the position on the tooth surface Sa. The spring
body Sl in this example is provided with a pair of handles
15
Slc, Sld and the operation of the spring body 51 can be
controlled by grasping the handles Slc, Sld with the
fingers.
[0024]
[Effect of the Invention] As explained above, according to
the present invention, a bracket which is movable in the
direction which contacts and separates from a tooth surface
is attached to the core, so when attaching a bracket to a
patient's tooth, the core is attached on the patient's
tooth and this bracket is moved in the direction of the
tooth surface, and the bottom of the bracket can be pressed
and adhered to a position on a tooth surface. In other
words, since the bracket does not rub on a patient's tooth
surface, there is no possibility that the adhesive with
which the bottom of the bracket is spread will separate.
Therefore, a bracket definitely adheres to a patient's
tooth surface. Since this bracket can be viewed when
attaching the bracket to a patient's tooth, a bracket can
be made to correctly adhere to a position on a tooth
surface.
[Brief Description of the Drawings]
[Drawing 1] This is a front view showing the state in which
I ( s)
16
a bracket is adhered to a tooth and an arch wire is held by
the bracket.
[Drawing 2] This is a side view showing an example of the
transfer apparatus according to the present invention.
[Drawing 3] This is a side view showing the state in which
the bracket is adhered to a tooth using the same transfer
apparatus same as above.
[Drawing 4] This is a perspective view showing a bracket
and a rotating arm.
[Drawing 5] This is a side view showing the state in which
the rotating arm is attached to the bracket.
Drawing 6] This is an explanatory view showing a locking
means which locks a rotating arm when a bracket contacts a
position on a tooth surface,.
[Drawing 7] This is a top view showing the state in which a
plurality of rotating arms are attached to a hinge with
which the core is provided and a bracket is attached to
each rotating arm.
[Drawing 8] This is a side view showing another example of
the transfer apparatus according to the present invention.
Drawing 9] This is a side view showing another example of
the transfer apparatus according to the present invention.
[Drawing 10] This is a perspective view showing a
conventional transfer apparatus.
17
[Drawing 11] This is a side view showing the conditions of
use of a conventional transfer apparatus.
[Description of Notations]
1 Bracket
la Bottom
3 Core
5 Tooth
Sa Tooth Surface
11 Core
13 Arch Wire
15 Holding Mechanism
17 Bracket
19 Hinge
21 Rotating Arm
21a End
21b Other End
23 Adhesive Layer
25 Slot
27 Synthetic Resin
29 Pivot
31 Notch Section
33 Discontinuous Part
35 Central Hole
41 Support Cylinder
18
43 Sliding Arm
45 Base Material
51 Spring Body
51a End
51b Other End
51c Bundle Part
51d Bundle Part
53 Base Material
[Drawing 1]
[Drawing 2]
19
[Drawing 3]
[Drawing 5]
[Drawing 6]
20
I ( 6)
[Drawing 4]
[Drawing 7]
( []7 J
21
[Drawing 8]
[Drawing 9]
[Drawing 10]
22
[Drawing 11]
23