DETAILED 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/11/2025 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/25/25 follow the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because of new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, 20, 23-26, 28, 32, 33, 35, 36, 38, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2019/0020787) in view of Willamowski et la. (US 2011/0141497), Komine et al. (US 2012/0218594), and Kasahara (US 2017/0080732).
Regarding claim 1, Xu teaches a system for networked printing of images onto textiles (mass customization system comprising cloud based server “CCD” connected with multiple clients and remote fulfillment process centers “RCD” to print images onto textiles; ¶¶ 0035-0037, Fig. 6, ¶ 0081, and ¶ 0102), comprising:
an electronic network (network; ¶ 0036, Fig. 6);
a plurality of textile printing machines attached to said network (different remote fulfillment centers; ¶¶ 0064-0065, Fig. 9a, ¶ 0081 and ¶ 0075), each one of said printing machines associated with at least one respective printing quality profile, the printing quality profile comprising parameters indicative of abilities of said printer in reproducing an image on a textile (printer profile; ¶¶ 0060-0061 and ¶ 0071);
a computerized interface for user input for a user to place an order for textile printing of an image (client device; ¶¶ 0036-0037, Fig. 6 and ¶ 0046, Fig. 8a), the computerized interface enabling the user to select or prioritize printing parameters for said order (receive selections from user; ¶ 0044, Fig. 7B, ¶¶ 0048-0049), said parameters including at least one member of the group consisting of post- printing treatment parameters (other relevant information including date and/or time of delivery and a preferred location for pickup or shipment; ¶¶ 0044-0045, ¶ 0094, ¶ 0096, and ¶ 0126), such that the textile printing order is sent for printing to one of said plurality of textile printing machines on said network selected inter alia for having printing parameters most closely matching parameters specified in the order (CCD seeks appropriate RCD to fulfill customer’s order; ¶ 0039, ¶ 0044, Fig. 7b, ¶¶ 0060-0061),
wherein said plurality of textile printing machines (printers; ¶¶ 0060-0061 and ¶ 0071),
but does not explicitly teach and wherein ones of said printing machines are associated with a plurality of respective printing quality profiles, each one of said printing quality profiles being separately selectable at a respective printing machine;
wherein said plurality of textile printing machines are configured to update their respective printing quality profiles at settable intervals;
wherein said updating comprises printing a test image and measuring a set of parameters of said printed test image.
However, Willamowski teaches and wherein ones of said printing machines are associated with a plurality of respective printing quality profiles (print profiles 28, 30, 34; ¶ 0029, Fig. 1), each one of said printing quality profiles being separately selectable at a respective printing machine (print profile selection; ¶ 0034, Fig. 3);
wherein said plurality of printing machines are configured to update their respective printing quality profiles at intervals (print profiles may be provided to the system 10 by the respective printers and may be periodically updated; ¶ 0029).
Xu and Willamowski are in the same field of endeavor of a system for networked printing. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of Xu to include a plurality of respective printing quality profiles and to update said profiles as taught by Willamowski. The combination improves the system by providing a user simple means for selecting an appropriate print profile and keeping it up to date.
Furthermore, Komine teaches wherein said plurality of printing machines are configured to update their respective printing quality profiles at settable intervals (manually update print profiles; ¶ 0036 and Fig. 5).
Xu and Komine are in the same field of endeavor of a system for networked printing. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of Xu to update print profiles as taught by Komine. The combination improves the system by providing a user simple means for keeping print profiles accurate and up to date.
Finally, Kasahara teaches wherein said updating comprises printing a test image and measuring a set of parameters of said printed test image (updates printing profile data in accordance with a color measurement result; ¶ 0133).
Xu and Kasahara are in the same field of endeavor of a system for networked printing. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of Xu to update print profiles as taught by Kasahara. The combination improves the system by providing a user simple means for keeping print profiles accurate and up to date.
Regarding claim 4, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 1, wherein one of said set of image parameters is color, the system configured to use a color measuring device to measure colors on said test print and compare said measured colors with source colors to determine at least one member of the group consisting of a color range and a color accuracy (densitometer used for calibration; ¶¶ 0085-0086 and ¶ 0104, Xu).
Regarding claim 5, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 1, wherein one of said set of image parameters is one member of the group consisting of registration accuracy, printing cost and resolution (resolution information; ¶ 0084 and ¶ 0104, Xu).
Regarding claim 7, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 1, wherein said textile printing order is printed at said selected textile printing machine (direct textile printing; ¶ 0102, Xu).
Regarding claim 8, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 4, wherein said input is configured to enable said user to prioritize at least one of said parameters, or wherein said input is configured to enable a user to prioritize based on at least one parameter related to a physical location of a respective textile printing machine (preferred location; ¶ 0044 and ¶ 0049, Xu).
Regarding claim 10, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 8, wherein said parameter related to a physical location of a respective textile printing machine is a parameter related to a location of the respective textile printing machine relative to a desired delivery location for printed textiles (preferred location; ¶ 0044 and ¶ 0049, Xu), or wherein said parameter related to a physical location is one member of the group consisting of a delivery time and a delivery cost (delivery time and cost; ¶¶ 0044-0045, ¶ 0094, ¶ 0096, and ¶ 0126, Xu).
Regarding claim 12, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 1, wherein said input is configured to enable a user to adjust printing parameters at a selected textile printing machine (receive selections from user; ¶ 0044, Fig. 7B, ¶¶ 0048-0049, Xu).
Regarding claim 15, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 1, wherein at least one of said printing parameters is a parameter relating to an additional process applicable to the textile, said applicable process being one member of the group consisting of a decoration process, embroidery, attaching of accessories, and sewing, (fabrics or woven textile materials; ¶ 0048 and ¶ 0070, Xu) or wherein ones of said printing machines are associated with a plurality of respective printing quality profiles, each one of said printing quality profiles being separately selectable (color profiles; ¶ 0095, Xu).
Regarding claim 38, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein each one of said printing machines is associated with a plurality of respective printing quality profiles (three profiles for three printers where a given printer may have more than one print profile; ¶ 0029), each printing quality profile of said plurality of respective printing quality profiles being different in one or more parameters (print profiles 28, 30, 34, ¶ 0029, Fig. 1).
The motivation applied in claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 39, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 38, but does not explicitly teach wherein said parameters are one or more of fast speed printing and low cost, low speed printing and high cost, printed image quality.
However, Komine teaches wherein said parameters are one or more of fast speed printing and low cost, low speed printing and high cost (speed priority vs price priority; ¶ 0038), printed image quality (better quality; ¶ 0038).
The motivation applied in claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Furthermore, Willamowski teaches wherein said parameters are one or more of printed image quality (achieved color quality; ¶¶ 0051-0054).
The motivation applied in claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Claims 17, 20, 23-26, 28, 32, 33, 35, and 36 are method claims that correspond to the apparatus of claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15, 38, and 39 thus, arguments similar to that presented above for claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15, 38, and 39 are equally applicable to claims 17, 20, 23-26, 28, 32, 33, 35, and 36.
Claim(s) 13, 29-31, 34, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2019/0020787) in view of Willamowski et la. (US 2011/0141497), Komine et al. (US 2012/0218594), Kasahara (US 2017/0080732), and Escudero Gonzalez et al. (US 2020/0361225).
Regarding claim 13, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 12 wherein said parameters are one member of the group consisting of printing speed (date/time-to-deliver; ¶¶ 0044-0045 and ¶ 0049, Xu), or wherein the system is configured to analyze parameters of a provided image for printing combined with parameters provided by said user and to provide said user with a price offer for printing said provided image using a respective textile printing machine (cost; ¶ 0094, Xu), but Xu does not explicitly teach and pre-printing and post printing treatment parameters.
However, Escudero Gonzalez teaches and pre-printing and post printing treatment parameters (printing options including primer and undercoating; ¶ 0058).
Xu and Escudero Gonzalez are in the same field of endeavor of a system for networked printing. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of Xu to include pre-printing and post printing treatment parameters as taught by Escudero Gonzalez. The combination improves the system by providing a user greater control over a print job.
Regarding claim 37, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, and Kasahara teach the system of claim 1, but Xu does not explicitly teach wherein said parameters are one member of the group consisting of printing speed and printing an undercoat.
However, Willamowski teaches wherein said parameters are one member of the group consisting of printing speed (printer speed; ¶ 0029).
The motivation applied in claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Furthermore, Escudero Gonzalez teaches wherein said parameters are one member of the group consisting of printing an undercoat (printing options including undercoating; ¶ 0058).
The motivation applied in claim 13 is incorporated herein.
Claims 29, 30, and 34 are method claims that correspond to the system of claims 13 and 37, thus arguments similar to that presented above for claims 13 and 37 are equally applicable to claims 29, 30, and 34.
Regarding claim 31, Xu in view of Willamowski, Komine, Kasahara, and Escudero Gonzalez teach the method of claim 30 comprising obtaining bids from a plurality of printing machines and selecting between said bids (cost, date/time-to-deliver, shipping and handling, etc. may be sent to the client device; ¶ 0045, Xu).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hayami et al. (US 2012/0173332) teaches system and method for fulfilling a customer's print job needs through a process carried out by an online platform including retrieving from database profiles of a multiplicity of participating print shops.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENT YIP whose telephone number is (571)270-5244. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 PM PST.
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, Akwasi M. Sarpong can be reached at (571) 270-3438. 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.
/KENT YIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681