Ex Parte Honkura et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

May 18, 2012

10546059 (B.P.A.I. May. 18, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________

Ex parte YOSHINOBU HONKURA and KAZUO ARAI
__________

Appeal 2010-011573
Application 10/546,059
Technology Center 3700
__________

Before TONI R. SCHEINER, JEFFREY N. FREDMAN, and
ERICA A. FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judges.

FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) involving claims to a
dental attachments configured to be embedded in a denture base. The Patent
Examiner rejected the claims as obvious. We have jurisdiction under
35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Claims 9, 12, 13, and 19-25 are on appeal. Independent claims 9 and
21 are representative and read as follows:
Appeal 2010-011573
Application 10/546,059

2
9. A dental attachment configured to be embedded in a denture
base so as to attach to a keeper by a magnetic attractive force, the
keeper including a soft magnetic material and embedded in a tooth
root, comprising:
an attachment main body including a magnetic body delivering
magnetic attractive force; and
a cap covering a head portion of the attachment main body and
located on a side of the magnetic body opposite to an attractive
surface that attaches to the keeper,
wherein the cap includes a non-magnetic material and is
coupled to the attachment main body so as to be configured to move,
while remaining coupled to the attachment main body, between a
contacting position (A) at which the cap is in contact with the head
portion and an extended position (B) spaced from the contacting
position (A) by a distance, a space being provided between the head
portion and the cap, in the extended position,
wherein the attachment main body further includes
a yoke, a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the yoke
being straight and without a taper, the yoke including soft magnetic
material with a concave part which accommodates the magnetic body,
a disk including soft magnetic material which is installed so as
to close an opening part of the concave part while the magnetic body
is housed in the concave part, and
a ring shaped contacting part including the non-magnetic
material which connects the disk and the yoke,
wherein the cap covers the head portion, which is located on an
opposite side of the yoke to the opening part of the concave part of the
yoke,
wherein the yoke has a collar and a cylindrical outer peripheral
surface, said collar protrudes radially outward from the cylindrical
outer peripheral surface of the yoke at the edge of the head portion of
the yoke, and the cap includes a bottom portion, which faces the head
portion of the yoke, and a lateral portion, which faces the cylindrical
outer peripheral surface of the yoke and covers the collar, and the
lateral portion includes a protruding part protruding inward to the
cylindrical outer peripheral surface of the yoke, and the protruding
part and the collar are engaged when the cap is located at the extended
position (B) and said protruding part and said collar are not engaged
when said cap is located at said contacting position (A), and
Appeal 2010-011573
Application 10/546,059

3
wherein the cap is configured to move, without bias generated
by the dental attachment, from the extended position (B) to the
contacting position (A) and vice versa.

21. A dental attachment configured to be embedded in a denture
base so as to attach to a keeper by a magnetic attractive force, the
keeper including a soft magnetic material and embedded in a tooth
root, comprising:
an attachment main body including a magnetic body delivering
magnetic attractive force; and
a cap covering a head portion of the attachment main body and
located on a side of the magnetic body opposite to an attractive
surface that attaches to the keeper,
wherein the cap includes a non-magnetic material and is
coupled to the attachment main body so as to be configured to move,
while remaining coupled to the attachment main body, between a
contacting position (A) at which the cap is in contact with the head
portion and an extended position (B) spaced from the contacting
position (A) by a distance, a space being provided between the head
portion and the cap, in the extended position,
wherein the attachment main body further includes
a yoke, a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the yoke
being straight and without a taper, the yoke including soft magnetic
material with a concave part which accommodates the magnetic body,
a disk including soft magnetic material which is installed so as
to close an opening part of the concave part while the magnetic body
is housed in the concave part, and
a ring shaped contacting part including the non-magnetic
material which connects the disk and the yoke,
wherein the cap covers the head portion, which is located on an
opposite side of the yoke to the opening part of the concave part of the
yoke,
wherein the yoke has a collar and a cylindrical outer peripheral
surface, said collar protrudes radially outward from the cylindrical
outer peripheral surface of the yoke at the edge of the head portion of
the yoke, and the cap includes a bottom portion, which faces the head
portion of the yoke, and a lateral portion, which faces the cylindrical
outer peripheral surface of the yoke and covers the collar, and the
lateral portion includes a protruding part protruding inward to the
Appeal 2010-011573
Application 10/546,059

4
cylindrical outer peripheral surface of the yoke, and the protruding
part and the collar are engaged when the cap is located at the extended
position (B) and said protruding part and said collar are not engaged
when said cap is located at said contacting position (A), and
wherein the cap is configured to move to adjust to a gum line
from the extended position (B) to the contacting position (A) and vice
versa.

The Examiner rejected claims 9, 12, 13, and 19-251 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Honkura2 and Hideo.3 The Examiner’s
position is that Honkura disclosed a dental attachment, configured to be
embedded in a denture base, comprising an attachment main body including
a yoke 25 having a recess underneath for receiving the magnetic body 24.
(Ans. 3-4.) According to the Examiner, “said recess is equivalent to the
claimed portion of the outer peripheral of the yoke being straight and
without a taper.” (Id. at 4.)
Regarding independent claim 9, the Examiner also found that
Honkura disclosed an embodiment of its dental attachment wherein “the cap
is made of a hard resin and does not include the cushion/biasing soft resin
button 227… so that the cap 22A is capable of moving between the
extended/non-loading position (Fig. 17) and the contacting/loading position
(Fig. 18) without bias generated by the dental attachment as claimed.” (Id.)

1 While the Examiner only included claims 9, 12, 13, 19, and 20 in the
statement of rejection (Ans. 3) claims 21-25 were clearly intended to have
been included because the Examiner specifically addressed claims 21-25 in
the rejection (see Ans. 5). Appellants have also acknowledged the inclusion
of claims 21-25 in the rejection. (App. Br. 7.)
2 Patent No. US 6,203,325 B1 issued to Yoshinobu Honkura et al., Mar. 20,
2001.
3 Patent No. JP 09154856 issued to Hasegawa Hideo, Jan. 12, 1995.

Appeal 2010-011573
Application 10/546,059

5
Regarding independent claim 21, the Examiner also found that the
claim language “the cap configured to move to adjust to a gum line” is a
functional or intended use and does not convey any positive structural
limitation. (Id.) According to the Examiner, Honkura’s cap is capable of
adjusting to a gum line as the cap is moving between an extended and a
contacting position. (Id.)
Regarding both independent claims 9 and 21, Appellants contend that
the interior surface of Honkura’s cap yoke 25 is not an “outer peripheral
surface of the yoke” as recited in the claims. (App. Br. 8.) According to
Appellants, “Honkura requires its cap (22) and side (21b) to be arched and
tapered in order to prevent the cap from detaching from the attachment main
body.” (Id.)
Regarding independent claim 9, Appellants further contend that
Honkura teaches away from its cap being configured to move, without bias
generated by the dental attachment, from an extended position to a
contacting position and vice versa. (Id. at 10.) According to Appellants,
Honkura requires its cap to be curved around a curved portion of the cap
yoke to “prevent the cap 22 from taking off.” (Id.)(quoting Honkura col. 11,
ll. 16-22). Appellants assert, “to move cap (22’) upward, the cap (22’) must
flex so that the lower portions of the sleeve (222) spread outward. This
flexing motion as the cap (22’) moves upward creates a bias for the cap (22’)
to remain in a downward position.” (Id.)
After considering all the evidence and arguments, we conclude that
the record does not support a conclusion of prima facie obviousness. See In
re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074 (Fed. Cir. 1988). In particular, we agree with
Appellants (App. Br. 8-9) that the Examiner has not shown Honkura taught a
Appeal 2010-011573
Application 10/546,059

6
portion of the outer peripheral surface of the yoke being straight and
without a taper, by disclosing a yoke “having a recess underneath for
receiving the magnetic body 24” (see Ans. 4)(emphasis added). Moreover,
regarding claim 9, we also agree with Appellants that the Examiner has not
established that it would have been obvious for Honkura’s cap to be
configured to move “between the extended/non-loading position (Fig. 17)
and the contacting/loading position (Fig. 18) without bias generated by the
dental attachment” (see Ans. 4) for the reasons discussed in the Appeal Brief
(App. Br. 9-10).

SUMMARY
We reverse the rejection of claims 9, 12, 13, and 19-25 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Honkura and Hideo.

REVERSED

lp