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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed, 18 May 2026, of application filed, with the above serial number, on 07 July 2022 in which claims 1-2, 6, 8, 10, 15-16 have been amended, claims 3-5, 7, 9, 12-14, 17-18 have been cancelled, and claims 19-20 have been added. Claims 1-2, 6, 8, 10-11, 15-16, 19-20 are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 1, 15, 16 recites the limitation "the plurality of cloud servers" in line 10 and also amended line 3 and line 7 of exemplary claim 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as it is not clear if there is more than one plurality of cloud servers.
Claims 1-2, 6, 8, 15-16, 19-20 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. The claim is amended to add “transmit a plurality of data blocks of data to be processed to each of a plurality of cloud servers, wherein each of the plurality of cloud servers receives a different portion of the plurality of data blocks of data” (emphasis added). It is not clear what is being transmitted as the first half of the limitation describes transmitting a plurality of the blocks, eg. pages, to be processed to each, in other words, transmitting all blocks or pages to all servers. The second half of the limitation then describes each receiving a different portion. These limitations appear to conflict with each other and it is not clear what is being transmitted to where.
Claims 1-2, 6, 8, 15-16, 19-20 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. The claim is amended to add “return an acquisition notification to a respective cloud server among the plurality of cloud servers for each data block”. However, it is not clear what the notification is for. The claim recites data blocks, a processing result from processing the data block, and a data block unit. The data block is transmitted to the cloud server(s) for processing, however, the acquisition is for the processing result acquired. Thus, as argued in the amendment, the notification appears to be for each processing result or perhaps the data block unit, as the apparatus does not re-acquire the data block.
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) 1-2, 6, 8, 10-11, 15-16, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohna (hereinafter “Ohno”, 2014/0240748) in view of Tecu (hereinafter “Tecu”, 2016/0162221) and Takahashi (hereinafter “Takahashi”, 2014/0325517).
As per Claim 1, Ohno discloses an information processing apparatus comprising:
a processor configured to:
provide an execution instruction of processing and apparatus identification information of the information processing apparatus to each of a plurality of cloud servers that executes distributed processing (at least paragraph 81-85; Fig. 3; job information transmitting unit 362 transmits, to the job information receiving unit 372 of the cloud print managing server 170, the cloud user ID, the job ID, and the printer name by associating them with each other for processing of print job; plurality of cloud printers- cloud printer server 160, cloud print managing server 170);
acquire identification information of the processing and the apparatus identification information from each of the plurality of cloud servers (at least paragraph 85-90; print job receiving unit 323 confirms with the printer information storing unit 335 of the intranet print managing server 130 whether the printer 120 is permitted to perform cloud printing (S504)…. When cloud printing is permitted, the print job receiving unit 323 extracts the job ID from the cloud print job, and temporarily stores it (S505). Then, the print job receiving unit 323 passes the received print job to the print processing unit 322, and the print processing unit 322 executes the print processing and the print-related processing (S506)), and, when communication for acquiring a processing result is started, transmit a confirmation notification indicating that the apparatus identification information is correct (at least paragraph 79, 81; the print job transmitting unit 363 confirms whether a setting flag is set, to the printer information storing unit 361, for managing the number of printed sheets of the printer 120 (S707); When the setting flag is set, the job information transmitting unit 362 transmits, to the job information receiving unit 372 of the cloud print managing server 170, the cloud user ID, the job ID, and the printer name by associating them with each other. The job information receiving unit 372 of the cloud print managing server 170 stores the received cloud user ID, the job ID and the printer name in the job information storing unit 371 (S709); par. 85: print job receiving unit 323 confirms with the printer information storing unit 335 of the intranet print managing server 130 whether the printer 120 is permitted to perform cloud printing (S504). …When cloud printing is permitted, the print job receiving unit 323 extracts the job ID from the cloud print job, and temporarily stores it (S505)); and
in a case where the acquired apparatus identification information is the apparatus identification information of the information processing apparatus, acquire a processing result of the processing identified by the identification information of the processing acquired together with the apparatus identification information from each of the plurality of cloud servers that is a transmission source of the apparatus identification information (at least paragraph 85-90; print job receiving unit 323 confirms with the printer information storing unit 335 of the intranet print managing server 130 whether the printer 120 is permitted to perform cloud printing (S504)…. When cloud printing is permitted, the print job receiving unit 323 extracts the job ID from the cloud print job, and temporarily stores it (S505). Then, the print job receiving unit 323 passes the received print job to the print processing unit 322, and the print processing unit 322 executes the print processing and the print-related processing (S506)).
Ohno fails to explicitly disclose transmit a plurality of data blocks of data to be processed to each of a plurality of cloud servers, wherein each of the plurality of cloud servers receives a different portion of the plurality of data blocks of data;
the processing result being received in a data block unit together with the apparatus identification information and a data block identifier including a page ID;
integrate the processing result from each of the plurality of cloud servers to generate an integrated processing result.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Tecu. Tecu discloses, in an analogous art, an electronic document ED being portioned into pages and sending different pages to different resources including cloud print servers in order to distribute ED processing to multiple servers, wherein apparatus identification information (print processing resource, eg. cloud print service) along with page number and processing result are returned to print manager and aggregated/assembled/combined to then be output (at least Tecu paragraph 15, 49-51, 57, 26, 28-29).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Tecu’s distributed processing with a plurality of cloud servers as Tecu acknowledges (par. 2, 36) different printing resources can process various types of content in a print job differently and some may be faster than other for some pages, and thus distributing such a portioned large print job to more cloud servers to process would lower such processing time to allow the user to print faster.
Ohno and Tecu fail to explicitly disclose return an acquisition notification to a respective cloud server among the plurality of cloud servers for each data block. However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Takahashi. Takahashi discloses, in an analogous image processing art, a server communicating that a processing result has been successfully received and the job ID associated with the processing (at least paragraph 94-97, Fig. 23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Takahashi’s notification with Ohno and Tecu as it is very common in networking art and distributed processing to return a notification or acknowledgement to a server that sends data to another server and this would easily be combinable with Ohno and Tecu as the references describe communicating status information and other messages to processing servers such as Tecu’s interrupt messages to ‘losing’ servers, sending a thank you or confirmation type message to the ‘winning’ server would be an obvious, well-known, and easy addition.
As per Claim 2. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to: in a case where communication for acquiring the processing result is started between the information processing apparatus and each of the plurality of cloud servers, acquire the apparatus identification information from each of the plurality of cloud servers and determine whether the apparatus identification information is the apparatus identification information of the information processing apparatus; and in a case where the processing result is acquired from each of the plurality of cloud servers, acquire the apparatus identification information again from the each of the plurality of cloud servers and determine whether the acquired apparatus identification information is the apparatus identification information of the information processing apparatus (at least paragraph 85-90; print job receiving unit 323 confirms with the printer information storing unit 335 of the intranet print managing server 130 whether the printer 120 is permitted to perform cloud printing (S504)…. When cloud printing is permitted, the print job receiving unit 323 extracts the job ID from the cloud print job, and temporarily stores it (S505). Then, the print job receiving unit 323 passes the received print job to the print processing unit 322, and the print processing unit 322 executes the print processing and the print-related processing (S506)).
As per Claim 3. The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the processor is configured to: in a case where the processing result is acquired from each of the plurality of cloud servers, acquire the apparatus identification information together with the processing result (at least paragraph 85-90).
As per Claim 4. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processing result is data generated in the data block unit, and the processor is configured to: acquire the apparatus identification information for each data block; and in a case where the acquired apparatus identification information is the apparatus identification information of the information processing apparatus, acquire data of the data block (at least paragraph 75, 79, 81-88; data block as printed sheets for the corresponding user ID and print job ID).
As per Claim 5. The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the processor is configured to: acquire the apparatus identification information together with the data of the data block for each data block (at least paragraph 75, 79, 81-88; data block as printed sheets).
As per Claim 6. The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the processing result is image data generated in a page unit as the data block (at least paragraph 8, 41; image processing apparatus for print image of sheet).
As per Claim 7. The information processing apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the processing result is image data generated in a page unit as the data block (at least paragraph 8, 41; image processing apparatus for print image of sheet).
As per Claim 8. The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the processing result is motion picture data generated in a frame unit as the data block (at least paragraph 8, 41; image processing apparatus for print image of sheet).
As per Claim 9. The information processing apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the processing result is motion picture data generated in a frame unit as the data block (at least paragraph 8, 41; image processing apparatus for print image of sheet).
Claims 10-16 do not, in substance, add or define any additional limitations over claims 1-9 and therefore are rejected for similar reasons, supra.
As per Claim 17. Ohno discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of cloud servers comprise a first cloud server and a second cloud server that both execute the distributed processing (at least paragraph 81-85; Fig. 3; plurality of cloud printers- cloud printer server 160, cloud print managing server 170). Ohno fails to explicitly disclose wherein the processor acquires a first processing result and a second processing result respectively from the first cloud server and the second cloud server.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Tecu. Tecu discloses, in an analogous art, an electronic document ED being portioned into pages and sending different pages to different resources including cloud print servers in order to distribute ED processing to multiple servers (at least Tecu paragraph 15, 49-51, 57).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Tecu’s distributed processing with a plurality of cloud servers as Tecu acknowledges (par. 2, 36) different printing resources can process various types of content in a print job differently and some may be faster than other for some pages, and thus distributing such a portioned large print job to more cloud servers to process would lower such processing time to allow the user to print faster.
As per Claim 18. The information processing apparatus according to claim 17, wherein the processor is further configured to: integrate the first processing result and the second processing result to generate an integrated processing result (at least Tecu paragraph 15, 49-51, 57; aggregating/assembling/combining multiple pages/portions for output to printer).
As per Claim 19. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1 wherein the plurality of cloud servers comprise a first cloud server and a second cloud server (at least paragraph 81-85; Fig. 3; plurality of cloud printers- cloud printer server 160, cloud print managing server 170), and wherein the processor is configured to:
transmit a first portion of the plurality of data blocks of data to the first cloud server and receive a first processing result of the first portion from the first cloud server (at least Tecu paragraph 15, 49-51, 57, 26, 28-29; portion of the ED to print processing resource and receive raster image file from winning resource);
transmit a second portion, different from the first portion, of the plurality of data blocks of data to the second cloud server and receive a second processing result of the second portion from the second cloud server; and integrate the first processing result and the second processing result to generate the integrated processing result (at least Tecu paragraph 15, 49-51, 57, 26, 28-29; transmit next unit or portion of the ED to another print processing resource and receive raster image file from that winning resource; aggregate (e.g., assemble, combine, etc.) the raster image file(s) for each portion).
As per Claim 20. The information processing apparatus according to claim 19, wherein the first portion and the second portion respectively comprise a plurality of first data blocks and a plurality of second data blocks (at least Tecu paragraph 15, 49-51, 39, 57, 26, 28-29; pages, chapters, etc), wherein each of the plurality of first data blocks in the first processing result received from the first cloud server comprises apparatus identification information of the first cloud server and a respective data block identifier including a page ID, and wherein each of the plurality of second data blocks in the second processing result received from the second cloud server comprises apparatus identification information of the second cloud server and a respective data block identifier including a page ID (at least Tecu paragraph 15, 49-51, 57, 26, 28-29; eg. designated winning print processing resource for page N).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 18 May 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues 1. that Ohna does not transmit acquisition notification of processing results. While Tecu discloses the receiving the processed portion of an ED from the winning resource and sending interrupt messages to the resources to process other portions of the ED, Tecu and Ohna do not explicitly send such an acquisition notification, see above revised rejection in view of Takahashi.
Applicant also argues 2. Tecu sends the entire ED to each of the processing resources rather than claim 1’s distribution of a different portion of the data blocks to respective cloud servers and subsequent integration from the servers.
However, claim 1 is amended to add “transmit a plurality of data blocks of data to be processed to each of a plurality of cloud servers, wherein each of the plurality of cloud servers receives a different portion of the plurality of data blocks of data”
For ease of understanding and comparison, the data block is interpreted as a page unit (see cl. 6 and specification) or page to be printed. The claim is actually amended to comprise that the plurality of pages are transmitted to be processed to each of the servers, see 112. Tecu teaches in par. 15, 26, 49-51, 57, 28-29, that portions, eg. pages, of a document are sent to each of the resources or servers, with each receiving a different portion that processes the page(s). (Regarding Applicant’s par. 47 emphasis of the entire ED being sent, the preceeding part of the sentence clarifies that a portion may be sent and is the preferable embodiment and shown in Fig. 3). In par. 26 Tecu notes that different units have different processing resources/servers. The print manager sends an interrupt to other resources so the other resources do not process the pages and even that other servers then start processing a next page.
Applicant also argues 3. The combination would not return an acquisition notification to the cloud server. See response to 1. above.
Applicant also argues 4. that based on 1-3. claim 1 is thus allowable. See responses to 1-3. above.
Further, see par. 50 of Kato on 892.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is indicated in PTO form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY TODD whose telephone number is (303)297-4763. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5 MST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Nicholas Taylor can be reached on 571-272-3889. 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.
/GREGORY TODD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights