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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1 – 2, 7 – 8 and 11 have been amended and are hereby entered.
Claims 3 - 6 and 9 were cancelled, while claims 13 – 15 were added.
Claims 1 - 2, 7 - 8, 10 - 11 and 13 - 15 are pending and have been examined.
This action is made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 16, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 26, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding to Applicant's arguments against the 101 rejection of pending claims on pages 8 -11: Applicant’s arguments directed to Step 2A prong 1 and Step 2A prong 2 analysis were considered. However, these arguments are not persuasive and the Examiner respectfully disagrees for the following reasons:
For Step 2A-Prong 1 starting in p. 7: The Applicant argues that the claims and its features are not directed to a method of organizing human activity as commercial interactions (pp. 8 – 9 from remarks) because the alleged “logic” implemented on the office action for asserting the claims 1, 11 and 14 being directed to “sales activities”, is “flawed.” However, the Examiner disagrees and find these arguments unpersuasive. Because the abstract idea was found to be recited in the claim limitations and the Applicant is missing the whole analysis made by the Examiner. Specifically, the steps related to “user information” being received for the execution of a “predetermined communication” as recited are related to a device (i.e. a printer) and a specific service (i.e. a printing service such as shipping a printer or an ink cartridge or toner; see ¶0002, ¶0019 and ¶0094 from Applicant disclosure) wherein this user information is further used to “generate/store authentication information” that is further compared with corresponding information that the user inputted to confirm authentication (by executing authentication processes) and generate access information to further establish connection and periodically receive “status” information from the printing provided services and connection. Thus, these steps in the claims are reciting commercial interactions via sales activities because the user’s information that is used for authentication (i.e. executing first and second authentication) involves “status” information related to printing services and payment (see ¶0004 and ¶0062 from Applicant’s disclosure) to then, based on the information, establish connections. Therefore, this analysis, is contrary to the Applicant’s assertion of considering (i.e. the alleged “logic” of) the actual step of “automatically establish a constant connection” or as the Applicant asserts for “connecting a device to the Internet” which is too simple to being reduced to the abstract idea identified alone.
As for the arguments with regard to “mental processes” in p.9 from Remarks, contrary to Applicant assertions of “how a human” implement the steps for “generate and sending” an “email message” with authentication information, “in the mind without a computer” is considered to be unpersuasive. Because redacting an “electronic mail” can still be done in its simplest form of redacting a mail (i.e. using pen and paper) that is traditionally delivered or a human can still utilize a general computer to redact the mail in an electronic format which can still fall under the abstract idea of mental process while using the computer as a tool (e.g. invoking “apply it”) in order to receive authentication information for access to the device. In other words, claim limitations still recite the abstract idea of a mental process even if they require at least one of: (B) physical aid (e.g. pen and paper) and/or (C) a computer (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(B & C)).Thus, this step does not negate and further still reads in the mental nature of the limitation(s), when generating/sending such information via email, as well as the concept is merely claimed to be performed on a generic computer and is merely using a computer as a tool to perform the concept of notifying authentication information to the user as claimed.
As for the step of “in a case where both of the first authentication and the second authentication are successful, generate access information and transmit the access information to the device…” argued by the Applicant in p.9 from Remarks, is found to be unpersuasive. Because the step that still falls under mental process is the steps directed to the user’s information used to “generate” or redact and “send” email messages containing authentication information, and the steps that are further comparing such information for authentication (i.e. “executing” first and second authentication) to establish connections, but not the actual step of “automatically establish a constant connection” or as the Applicant asserts for “connecting a device to the Internet”.
For Step 2A-Prong 2 starting in pp. 10 – 11: The Applicant argues that the claimed invention, specifically for reciting the “automatic establishment of the constant connection as claimed solves a problem of establishing a network connection for a service without overly burdening a user” and provides a “secure way to establish a constant connection”, thus, integrating the abstract idea identified into a practical application. However, the Examiner find this argument unpersuasive and respectfully disagrees. Because even if the features are for providing services that do not “overly burden” the user, while providing a “secure way” to “efficiently” establish the automatic constant connection, the reciting limitations in the claims did not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application since the steps are merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f) and 2106.04(d)(I)). Specifically, the claims’ limitations are reciting the use of a generic computer that is generally/broadly recited, that further utilizes the “authentication and access information” generated and transmitted to achieve the intended result of causing the establishment and ensure a secure constant and automatic connection with the device that was supplied/transported and the user terminal device as well as to process related printing requests. Thus, “claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept” (see MPEP 2106.05(f)(2); TLC communications). Lastly, these limitations and their additional elements, individually and in combination, are not “significantly more” as these are recited in a high level of generality that cannot provide an inventive concept at Step 2B, and are not integrating the abstract idea into a practical application. (see MPEP 2106.05). Thus, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, and maintains 35 USC § 101 rejection for these pending claims.
Regarding to Applicant's arguments for 35 USC § 103 rejection of the pending claims on pages 11 – 13: Applicant’s arguments regarding the amended limitation steps in the pending claims are not persuasive. Firstly, the Applicant argues that the step of “in a case where the authentication information is stored in the memory in association with the user information and the identification information, generate an email message with a body of the email message having the authentication information and sending the email message…” have not being established with a prima facie case as to why the stated feature of the email message’s body is considered “descriptive matter” and non-functional. However, the Examiner still believes that the “generation” of an email message with a “body containing “authentication information” is further describing the data (i.e. descriptive matter) being generated and send and is non-functional because such recitation is not functionally tied to the system’s structure for the functions of generating or sending the message. Rather, is simply describing or “defining the structure of the email”, as Applicant asserts, which is merely describing data.
Secondly, the Applicant argument in p. 12 from Remarks against Schultz not teaching the “authentication information” claimed this was interpreted as receiving “authenticating information” (in addition to “location messages”) when sending the message “at various times” (see C13; L7 – 20; Schultz).
Thirdly, the Applicant also argues in p. 12 from Remarks that the two types of authentications “(first and second authentications)” claimed are not taught by neither Hanaoka or Schultz. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant general allegations since the Applicant failed to recognize the breadth/broadness of their claim language for this claim limitation under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) wherein Hanaoka still reasonably teaches the execution of the first authentication of the authentication information received from the device “by the user ID and the password in this embodiment” with “other pieces of information” used, such as “Use Permit ID” (see ¶0062 and Fig. 2 from Hanaoka) which is directed to an activation key as the example given in ¶0070 from Applicant disclosure (see ¶0054; Hanaoka) and for the execution of the second authentication of the identification information received from the device is taught as receiving “MAC address, the user ID, and the password (step S220), refers to the user information for authentication (step S230), and authenticates the user as a registered legal user (step S240)” (see ¶0072 – 73; Hanaoka). Finally the step for automatically establish a constant connection according to a particular protocol by using the transmitted access information is reasonably taught by Hanaoka as the “printer rental service system, the user's general-purpose personal computer 10 and the printer 100 are linked to a server 200 in the service center via the Internet INT to establish communication” (see ¶0051; Hanaoka) and the ability that the system has in different embodiments to have the “communication between the printing device and the server may be made at ever time of activation of the printing device, at every time of replacement of a cartridge of a printing material attached to the printing device, or at any preset time intervals, for example, once a month or once a week” which is directed to be set as a constant communication (see ¶0011; Hanaoka). Therefore, for all the reasons stated above, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, and maintains 35 USC § 103 rejection for these pending claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 - 2, 7 - 8, 10 - 11 and 13 - 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The analysis of this claimed invention recited in the claims begins in view of independent claim 1, the most representative claim of the independent claims set 1 and 11, as follows:
At Step 1: Claims 1 -2, 7 – 8 and 12 – 15 falls under statutory category of a machine, while claim 11 is directed to a process.
At Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 1 (representative of claims 11 and 14) recites an abstract idea in the following limitations:
receive user information indicating a user …in a case where predetermined communication is executed…,
wherein the predetermined communication is related to…to the user, and the user information is used for a specific service related to the device and includes an email address;
in a case where the user information is received…generate and store authentication information…in association with the user information received…;
in a case where the authentication information is stored in the memory in association with the user information and the identification information, generate an email message with a body of the email message having the authentication information and sending the email message to a specified email address to notify the authentication information to the user;
in a case where the authentication information emailed to the user is inputted …, receive the authentication information which is entered …; and
in a case where the authentication information and the identification information are received… execute first authentication of the authentication information received…against the authentication information stored…;
in a case where the authentication information and the identification information are received…, execute second authentication of the identification information received…against the identification information stored…;
in a case where both of the first authentication and the second authentication are successful, generate access information and transmit the access information…, and automatically establish a constant connection according to a particular protocol by using the transmitted access information via the Internet…as a second state;
in a case where the constant connection is established, transmit a request…
in a case where the request is transmitted, periodically receive information related to a status… using the constant connection; and
execute a process in a case where the information is periodically received, and wherein prior to the establishment of the connection…is in a first state and in a case where any one of the first authentication and the second authentication is not successful, …remains in the first state.
Generally, these limitations describe a system and a method for receiving and evaluating user authentication information to determine whether to supply a device (e.g. cartridges or a printer product) to the user and/or provide a specific service related to the device such as "shipping ink cartridges for printers" (see ¶0002 from Applicant specifications). As disclosed in the specification in ¶0019, this invention allows “provides various services related to multifunctional device, including an online shopping service of purchasing a multifunctional device online, a shipping service of shipping a consumable article for a multifunctional device to a user, etc.”. However, the abstract idea(s) of a certain method of organizing human activity (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II) is recited in claim 1 in the form of “commercial or legal interactions”. Specifically, the abstract idea is recited at least in the steps of “receiving user information” for the execution of a “predetermined communication” related to a device (i.e. a printer) and a specific service (i.e. a printing service such as shipping a printer or an ink cartridge or toner; see ¶0002, ¶0019 and ¶0094 from Applicant disclosure), to “generate and store” the user’s “authentication information” associated to the corresponding “identification information” of the device to “receive authentication information” for access via email message that is further used to “execute” a first and a second authentication that when both are successful “generate” and “transmit” access information to automatically establish a constant connection (i.e. during a “second state”) while receiving information to the “status” of the device, if not the system is not connected remaining in a first state. Because “generating” and “storing” authentication information based on user’s information that is associated to a printer device that provides specific services and receiving status information from the printer device encompasses at least sales activities (i.e. such as providing printing services with print jobs). Further, to “generate/send” via email, authentication information and “periodically receive information” upon transmitting/receiving requests of status device based on constant connection established, as claimed, such authentication information is dependent from sales information in the “user information” received.
The steps for “in a case where the user information is received from the terminal device, generate and store authentication information…and identification information”, “in a case where the authentication information is stored…in association with the user information and the identification information, generate an email message with a body of the email message having the authentication information and sending the email message…”, “in a case where the authentication information emailed to the user is inputted to the device , receive the authentication information which is entered into the device…” and “in a case where the authentication information and the identification information are received from the device, execute first authentication of the authentication information…” and a “second authentication of the identification information…” fall under the abstract idea of mental processes that can be practically be performed in the human mind or in pen and paper (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III). Because the limitations of the generated/stored authentication information associated to a device’s identification information can be executed by a user inputting such information in an email to send it with the assistance of a computer and also input (i.e. enter) the authentication information received into the printer device to further execute different types of authentication that relates to comparing authentication and identification information provided against the corresponding prestored information (see ¶0057 – 59 and ¶0069 – 71 from Applicant disclosure), requires at least evaluation and judgement. For this reason, such user inputs for the generated/stored “authentication information” and “identification information” can still fall under the abstract idea of mental process while using the computer as a tool (e.g. invoking “apply it”) to gain device access for the user. Further, these steps can either be done with the help of physical aid such as pen and paper or can be performed by humans without a computer by using traditional mail, instead of electronic mail, for example. Thus, the steps does not negate and further still reads in the mental nature of the limitation(s), when obtaining such information, as well as the concept is merely claimed to be performed on a generic computer and is merely using a computer as a tool to perform the concept of “causing” the establishment of a device “constant connection” after determining the user authentication and access information inputted (e.g. via a “particular protocol”), as later claimed (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(B & C)).
Step 2A Prong 2: For independent claims 1, 11 and 14, The judicial exception(s) or abstract idea previously identified is not integrated into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.04 (d)). The claims recite the additional element(s) of a memory; a communication interface, an external device, (from claims 1 and 11); a controller (from claim 1); a server-memory, a server-communication interface, a server-controller, device-memory, a device-communication interface, a device-controller and a screen (from claim 14); a server, a device, a terminal device and a display (from claims 1, 11 and 14). These additional elements, individually and in combination, and while considering the claims as a whole, are merely used as a tool to perform the abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). These element features including the computer used performing their respective limitations steps, are recited at a high level of generality that is being used as a tool to perform the generic computer functions for receiving and transmitting information related to user authentication, printer device identification and access in order to establish a constant connection with the device and process service “requests” for the use of the printer device. Thus, these steps mentioned above are further describing and applying the abstract idea without placing any limits on how the technological components claimed are being improved, while distinguishing in the claim language, the performing limitations from functions that generic computer components can perform.
Claim 1 (representative of claims 11 and 14) recites the steps of “…receive user information indicating a user from a terminal device…”, “in a case where the user information is received from the terminal device, generate and store authentication information…and identification information…” “in a case where the authentication information emailed to the user is inputted to the device , receive the authentication information…”, “in a case where both of the first authentication and the second authentication are successful, generate access information and transmit the access information to the device and automatically establish a constant connection…”, “in a case in a case where the constant connection is established, transmit a request…”, and “in a case where the request is transmitted, periodically receive information related to a status…”. These steps are really nothing more than links to computer for implementing the use of ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components (refer to MPEP 2106.05 f (2)). Thus, in these limitation steps, the computer is used to perform an abstract idea, as discussed above in Step 2A, Prong One, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer.
Step 2B: For independent claims 1, 11 and 14, these claims do not provide an inventive concept. The recited additional elements of the claim(s) are the following: a memory; a communication interface, an external device, (from claims 1 and 11); a controller (from claim 1); a server-memory, a server-communication interface, a server-controller, device-memory, a device-communication interface, a device-controller and a screen (from claim 14); a server, a device, a terminal device and a display (from claims 1, 11 and 14). These additional elements are not sufficient to amount significantly more than the judicial exception or abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05). Because, as indicated in Step 2A Prong 2, these additional element(s) claimed are merely, instructions to “apply” the abstract ideas, which cannot provide an inventive concept. Also, the recitation of a computer to perform the claim limitations amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Thus, even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer, which do not provide an inventive concept at Step 2B.
For dependent claims 2 ,7 - 8, 10, 13 and 15, these claims cover or fall under the same abstract idea of a method of organizing human activity and mental processes. They describe additional limitations steps of:
Claims 2 ,7 - 8, 10, 13 and 15: further describes the abstract idea of a method for managing printing services and whether the authentication and identification information is used when the specific service is being provided at a first state, the different timings for the device when is transported to the place or destination that was ordered from and when the email message was generated and sent as well as the acceptance of an instruction to supply the device to the user via a button in a screen and other shipping information. Thus, being directed to the abstract idea groups of “engaging in commercial or legal interactions” and mental processes as it involves activities sales such as ordering and shipping of printer devices as well as the evaluation, judgment, and opinion for providing the establishment of the connection to provide access to the user for the utilization of such services, based on user authentication information and additional data.
Step 2A Prong 2 and Step 2B: For dependent claim 8, this claim recites the additional elements of: an input screen which are invoking computers merely used as a tool to perform or “apply” the abstract idea(s) to the existing process of display the acceptance of an instruction for the “supply of the device to the user”. Thus, amounting to no more than mere instructions to “apply” the exception using a generic computer component (MPEP 2106.05(f) and (f)(2)). Accordingly, for the same reasons stated above, these additional element(s) claimed cannot provide an inventive concept at Step 2B.
Finally, the additional elements previously mentioned above, are nothing more than descriptive language about the elements that define the abstract idea, and these claims remain rejected under 101 as well.
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.
Claims 1- 2, 8 and 10 - 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanaoka (U.S. Pub No. 20060045595 A1) in view of Schultz (U.S. Pub No. 9110608 B2).
Regarding claims 1 and 11:
Hanaoka teaches:
a memory; (In Fig. 1 (200): refer to ¶0055 for further details of data storage.)
a communication interface configured to communicate with an external device; and a controller is configured to: (In ¶0054; Fig. 1 (220, 100 and 10): teaches a system comprising of a server that includes “control module 220 controls the operations of the respective functional blocks in the server 200 and takes charge of external communication via the Internet INT” directed to the controller. Also, the system is linked to “user's general-purpose personal computer 10” wherein the user can make order requests at least by telephone or by other “input device” (see ¶0051 and ¶0008) which is directed to the communication interface claimed.)
receive user information indicating a user from a terminal device via the communication interface in a case where predetermined communication is executed with the terminal device via the communication interface, (In ¶0050; Fig. 1 (260); Fig. 7 (S220): teaches that the “user is asked to register the required pieces of information including the user's name, a user ID, a password, and a credit card number in the service center to receive the printer rental service” while the user’s device and the system are in communication (see ¶0051). Refer to ¶0072 for more details of S220 for receiving user information.)
wherein the predetermined communication is related to a device to the user…(In ¶0051: teaches “user may make a request for the printer rental service and make an order of any relevant expendables via the Internet, as well as by post, by telephone, or by facsimile” in order for a “service center” to provide “each user who has been registered in a predetermined form with a rental printer 100 in response to the user's request” to give “maintenance support of the printer 100” (see ¶0050). Refer to ¶0052 for more details.)
in a case where the user information is received from the terminal device, generate and store authentication information in the memory in association with the user information received from the terminal device and identification information identifying the device; (In ¶0050; Fig. 2 (S220): this conditional limitation is taught as the “user is asked to register the required pieces of information including the user's name, a user ID, a password, and a credit card number” is registered in the service center system. Refer to ¶0055 for more details of the user’s information stored in the system’s database which includes “the user information management module 260 manages a user number assigned to each user, the user's name, a user ID and a password required for authentication, a model and a MAC address of the printer rented by the user” and “a use permit ID allocated to the MAC address” directed to the identification information identifying the device.)
in a case where the authentication information emailed to the user is inputted to the device, receive the authentication information which is entered into the device via a display and the identification information which is prestored in the device from the device via the communication interface; and (In ¶0072; Fig. 4 (100 and 110); Fig. 7 (S220 – S230): this conditional limitation is taught as the process of after the server receives “the MAC address, the user ID, and the password” from the printer (step S220), the server “refers to the user information for authentication (step S230), and authenticates the user as a registered legal user (step S240)”. Refer to ¶0062 wherein the “use permit ID may otherwise be input by the user's keyboard entry of the personal computer 10 or by the user's operation panel entry of the printer 100”.)
in a case where the authentication information and the identification information are received from the device, execute first authentication of the authentication information received from the device against the authentication information stored in the memory; (In ¶0054; Fig. 2; Fig. 7 (S210 – S240 and/or S250 – S262): teaches that the “authentication module 240 authenticates each user as a legal user registered in the service center” wherein “the user is authenticated by the user ID and the password in this embodiment” (directed to identification information received), “although other pieces of information may be used for the authentication” that relate to “the users who use the printer rental service and the printers rented by the users (see FIG. 2)” such as “Use Permit ID” (see ¶0062 also) which is directed to an activation key as the example given in ¶0070 from Applicant disclosure. Also, refer to ¶0072 – 74 for further details. Finally, in ¶0080 a modified example is given wherein “printer 100 establishes communication with the server 200 and executes the use permit screening with the use permit ID” wherein “receives the user's manual entry of the use permit ID from the keyboard or the operation panel and compares the entered use permit ID with the use permit ID stored in advance in the printer 100 for the use permit screening”.)
in a case where the authentication information and the identification information are received from the device, execute second authentication of the identification information received from the device against the identification information stored in the memory; (In ¶0072 – 73; Fig. 2; Fig. 7 (S210 – S242): teaches that the “server 200 receives the MAC address, the user ID, and the password (step S220), refers to the user information for authentication (step S230), and authenticates the user as a registered legal user (step S240)”.)
in a case where both of the first authentication and the second authentication are successful, generate access information and transmit the access information to the device and automatically establish a constant connection according to a particular protocol by using the transmitted access information via the Internet and the communication interface between the server and the device as a second state; (In ¶0072 – 73; Fig. 1; Fig. 5; Fig. 7 (S240 – S242 and S210 – S262): this conditional limitation is taught as the ”use permit screening process” occurring between the printer and the server over the internet (see Figs. 1 and 5) wherein the computer receives a “MAC address, the user ID, and the password” from the printer as well as the “user permit ID” directed to the first and second authentications, recognizes and authenticates the user credentials at step S240 – 242 and the computer server then provides the “use permit ID allocated to the MAC address to the printer 100 (step S242)” to further approve the use or service of the printer (see ¶0073). See a modified examples in ¶0080 – 81. As for automatically establishing constant communication, this was interpreted as the “printer rental service system, the user's general-purpose personal computer 10 and the printer 100 are linked to a server 200 in the service center via the Internet INT to establish communication” (see ¶0051) and the ability that the system has in different embodiments to have the “communication between the printing device and the server may be made at ever time of activation of the printing device, at every time of replacement of a cartridge of a printing material attached to the printing device, or at any preset time intervals, for example, once a month or once a week” which is directed to be set as a constant communication (see ¶0011).)
in a case where the constant connection is established, transmit a request to the device; (In ¶0072 – 73; Fig. 1; Fig. 5; Fig. 7 (S230, S242 and S262): this conditional limitation is taught as the “use permit screening process” occurring between the printer and the server over the internet (see Figs. 1 and 5) wherein the computer receives a “MAC address, the user ID, and the password” from the printer and upon receiving this authentication data the server requests or “refers to the user information for authentication (step S230)” that when the authentication succeeds and after “the received use permit ID is identical with the storage, that is, when the received use permit ID is legal, the printer 100 sets a value ‘1’ to the flag F2 (F2=1) to approve the use of the printer 100 (step S262)”.)
Hanaoka does not explicitly teach the abilities of having user information that specifically includes an email address, notifying authentication information to the user, specifically by email message, periodically receive status information upon transmitted requests, execute a process for the server to be in a first state (i.e. interpreted as not providing the user the specific service) when information is periodically received prior to any connection established and if none of the authentication processes succeed, the system’s server remains in this first state. However, Schultz teaches:
and the user information is used for a specific service related to the device and includes an email address; (In C13; L7 – 13; Fig. 6 (607): teaches that the “mobile device 300 also includes messaging module 331 that is configured to receive, transmit, and/or process messages” such as the user’s “electronic mail messages” (see C11 - 12; L65 – 67 and L1 – 9) that are “received from (or transmitted to) printing platform 105 or any other suitable component or facility of system 100”. Further, “messaging module 331 may be configured to receive, transmit, and/or process print requests, pricing information, mobile device 300 and print station location information, terms of printing file, authenticating information and status updates” (see C13; L13 – 17). Refer to C11; L60 – 64 wherein the system can store user’s profile information including “contact lists, personal information, sensitive information, work related information, etc.” (see Fig. 6, element 607 for “user profile” tab that enable users to modify/update their personal info which may further include contact info such as email address).)
in a case where the authentication information is stored in the memory in association with the user information and the identification information, generate an email message with a body of the email message having the authentication information and sending the email message to the email address to notify the authentication information to the user; (In C10; L45 – 55; Fig. 1 (101 and 105); Fig. 2 (105); Fig. 3 (300 and 331): this conditional limitation is taught as “the workflow manager module 227 may send a location message associated with a print station 103 location to a mobile device 101 to enable a user to initiate directions to a print station 103” wherein the “message may be sent at various times” such as “when receiving authenticating information”. Moreover, the system (i.e. mobile device 300 and the printing platform 105) supports email type of messages (i.e. “electronic mail messages”) that can be received or transmitted between the device and platform (see C13; L7 – 20).)
in a case where the request is transmitted, periodically receive information related to a status of the device, from the device, using the constant connection; and (In C4; L14 – 29: this conditional limitation is taught as “the printing platform 105 may generate, and send to the mobile device 101 status updates regarding a print request”. Generally, the “printing platform 105 may “poll” or receive such spatial positioning information from mobile devices 101 in real-time, so as to provide presence service features related to mobile devices 101” (see C3; L38 – 41).)
execute a process in a case where the information is periodically received, and wherein prior to the establishment of the connection, the server is in a first state (In C19; L38 – 52; Fig. 5b (521 – 523); Fig. 4 (409): this conditional limitation is taught as “the printing platform 105 may take no further action unless the user agrees to the terms by inputting an agreement to the printing terms on the mobile device 101” wherein the “printing terms” were initially sent to the “mobile device 101” to receive an acceptance response from the user. Also, refer to C4; L5 – 10 wherein the “authenticating information may be used before printing the confidential file for the purpose of protecting sensitive information” or “the printed material may be generated and access restricted until the print station 103 receives authenticating information from a mobile device 101”.)
and in a case where any one of the first authentication and the second authentication is not successful, the server remains in the first state. (In C18; L39 – 57; Fig. 5a (517): teaches this limitation as “the printing platform 105 receives invalid authenticating information it may continue to restrict access of the printed material to the user presenting the invalid authenticating information, and generate a notification of access attempt”.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanaoka to provide the abilities of having user information that specifically includes an email address, notifying authentication information to the user, specifically by email message, periodically receive status information upon transmitted requests, execute a process for the server to be in a first state (i.e. interpreted as not providing the user the specific service) when information is periodically received prior to any connection established and if none of the authentication processes succeed, the system’s server remains in this first state, as taught by Schultz in order to provide a “remotely secure mobile printing, such as for the purpose of printing confidential material outside of a secured office” and “reduce unauthorized access to printed materials.” (C2; L50 – 53 and L64 – 67; Schultz).
Regarding claim 14:
Hanaoka further teaches:
a server; and a device, wherein the server comprising: a server-memory configured to store authentication information in association with user information, (In ¶0053 – 55; Fig. 1 (200): teaches a “server 200 includes a control module 220, an authentication module 240, a user information management module 260, and an accounting module 280” wherein each module stores user’s authentication information such as “user ID and the password” as well as “other pieces of information” (see ¶0054) such as “a use permit ID allocated to the MAC address, the postal address and the telephone number of the user, and accounting-related information in the form of a database” (see ¶0055).)
the authentication information being generated by the server in response to receiving the user information from a terminal device, the user information including an email address, and identification information identifying the device; (In ¶0050; Fig. 1 (260); Fig. 7 (S220): teaches that the “user is asked to register the required pieces of information including the user's name, a user ID, a password, and a credit card number in the service center to receive the printer rental service” while the user’s device and the system are in communication (see ¶0051). Refer to ¶0072 for more details of S220 for receiving user information.)
a server-communication interface configured to communicate with the device and the terminal device; and a server-controller, (In ¶0054; Fig. 1 (220, 100 and 10): teaches a system comprising of a server that includes “control module 220 controls the operations of the respective functional blocks in the server 200 and takes charge of external communication via the Internet INT” directed to the controller. Also, the system is linked to “user's general-purpose personal computer 10” wherein the user can make order requests at least by telephone or by other “input device” (see ¶0051 and ¶0008) which is directed to the communication interface claimed.)
wherein the device comprises: device-memory configured to store the identification information; (In ¶0061; Fig. 1 (100); Fig. 4 (100 and 120): teaches “An identification information storage module 120 stores a MAC address intrinsically allocated to the printer 100 as identification information for identifying the printer 100”. See ¶0012 for general details of storage information in the “printing device”.)
a display configured to display a screen for receiving the authentication information; (In ¶0062; Fig. 4 (100 and 110): teaches “the use permit ID sent from the server 200 to the communication module 110 is automatically entered into the use permit ID input module 130. The use permit ID may otherwise be input by the user's keyboard entry of the personal computer 10 or by the user's operation panel entry of the printer 100” which is directed to displaying a screen to receive authentication information.)
a device-communication interface configured to communicate with the server; and (In ¶0060; Fig. 4 (100 and 110): teaches “communication module 110 takes charge of data transmission to and from the server 200 in the service center”.)
a device-controller configured to, in a case where the screen receives the authentication information… (In ¶0072; Fig. 7 (220 – 230): this conditional limitation is taught as the process of after the server receives “the MAC address, the user ID, and the password” from the printer (step S220), the server “refers to the user information for authentication (step S230), and authenticates the user as a registered legal user (step S240)”.)
transmit, via the device- communication interface, the authentication information which is input into the screen and the identification information stored in the device-memory to the server, (In ¶0071; Fig. 4; Fig. 7 (S220 – S230 and S250): teaches that “the printer 100 first sends the MAC address, the user ID, and the password to the server 200 (step S210)”. Refer to ¶0080 wherein the “printer 100 may not include the communication module 110, and the processing of steps S210 to S250 may be omitted from the processing flow of FIG. 7” and instead “the user's manual entry of the use permit ID from the keyboard or the operation panel and compares the entered use permit ID with the use permit ID stored in advance in the printer 100 for the use permit screening”. See ¶0062 also wherein “use permit ID may otherwise be input by the user's keyboard entry of the personal computer 10 or by the user's operation panel entry of the printer 100 or may be read from a recording medium, such as a magnetic card, with the use permit ID recorded therein” which is directed to another example of the device- communication interface.)
wherein the server-controller is configured to in a case where the authentication information and the identification information are received from the device, execute first authentication of the authentication information received from the device against the authentication information stored in the server-memory; (In ¶0054; Fig. 2; Fig. 7 (S210 – S240 and/or S250 – S262): teaches that the “authentication module 240 authenticates each user as a legal user registered in the service center” wherein “the user is authenticated by the user ID and the password in this embodiment” (directed to identification information received), “although other pieces of information may be used for the authentication” that relate to “the users who use the printer rental service and the printers rented by the users (see FIG. 2)” such as “Use Permit ID” (see ¶0062 also) which is directed to an activation key as the example given in ¶0070 from Applicant disclosure. Also, refer to ¶0072 – 74 for further details. Finally, in ¶0080 a modified example is given wherein “printer 100 establishes communication with the server 200 and executes the use permit screening with the use permit ID” wherein “receives the user's manual entry of the use permit ID from the keyboard or the operation panel and compares the entered use permit ID with the use permit ID stored in advance in the printer 100 for the use permit screening”.)
in a case where the authentication information and the identification information are received from the device, execute second authentication of the identification information received from the device against the identification information stored in the memory; (In ¶0072 – 73; Fig. 2; Fig. 7 (S210 – S242): teaches that the “server 200 receives the MAC address, the user ID, and the password (step S220), refers to the user information for authentication (step S230), and authenticates the user as a registered legal user (step S240)”.)
in a case where both of the first authentication and the second authentication are successful, generate access information and transmit the access information to the device and automatically establish a constant connection according to a particular protocol by using the transmitted access information via the Internet between the server and the device using the server-communication interface, as a second state, (In ¶0072 – 73; Fig. 1; Fig. 5; Fig. 7 (S240 – S242 and S210 – S262): this conditional limitation is taught as the ”use permit screening process” occurring between the printer and the server over the internet (see Figs. 1 and 5) wherein the computer receives a “MAC address, the user ID, and the password” from the printer as well as the “user permit ID” directed to the first and second authentications, recognizes and authenticates the user credentials at step S240 – 242 and the computer server then provides the “use permit ID allocated to the MAC address to the printer 100 (step S242)” to further approve the use or service of the printer (see ¶0073). See a modified examples in ¶0080 – 81. As for automatically establishing constant communication, this was interpreted as the “printer rental service system, the user's general-purpose personal computer 10 and the printer 100 are linked to a server 200 in the service center via the Internet INT to establish communication” (see ¶0051) and the ability that the system has in different embodiments to have the “communication between the printing device and the server may be made at ever time of activation of the printing device, at every time of replacement of a cartridge of a printing material attached to the printing device, or at any preset time intervals, for example, once a month or once a week” which is directed to be set as a constant communication (see ¶0011).)
in a case where the constant connection is established, transmit a request to the device; (In ¶0072 – 73; Fig. 1; Fig. 5; Fig. 7 (S230, S242 and S262): this conditional limitation is taught as the “use permit screening process” occurring between the printer and the server over the internet (see Figs. 1 and 5) wherein the computer receives a “MAC address, the user ID, and the password” from the printer and upon receiving this authentication data the server requests or “refers to the user information for authentication (step S230)” that when the authentication succeeds and after “the received use permit ID is identical with the storage, that is, when the received use permit ID is legal, the printer 100 sets a value ‘1’ to the flag F2 (F2=1) to approve the use of the printer 100 (step S262)”.)
Hanaoka does not explicitly teach the abilities of having authentication information from the user that specifically emailed using an email address, notifying authentication information to the user, specifically by email message, periodically receive status information upon transmitted requests, execute a process for the server to be in a first state (i.e. interpreted as not providing the user the specific service) when information is periodically received prior to any connection established and if none of the authentication processes succeed, the system’s server remains in this first state. However, Schultz teaches:
….receives the authentication information, which was emailed to the terminal device using the email address where the body of the email contains the authentication information, (In C13; L7 – 13; Fig. 6 (607): teaches that the “mobile device 300 also includes messaging module 331 that is configured to receive, transmit, and/or process messages” such as the user’s “electronic mail messages” (see C11 - 12; L65 – 67 and L1 – 9) that are “received from (or transmitted to) printing platform 105 or any other suitable component or facility of system 100”. Further, “messaging module 331 may be configured to receive, transmit, and/or process print requests, pricing information, mobile device 300 and print station location information, terms of printing file, authenticating information and status updates” (see C13; L13 – 17). Refer to C11; L60 – 64 wherein the system can store user’s profile information including “contact lists, personal information, sensitive information, work related information, etc.” (see Fig. 6, element 607 for “user profile” tab that enable users to modify/update their personal info which may further include contact info such as email address). See for C10; L45 – 55 and C13; L7 – 20 more examples for email messages with authentication information send as the body of the message.)
in a case where the request is transmitted, periodically receive information related to a status of the device, from the device, using the constant connection; and (In C4; L14 – 29: this conditional limitation is taught as “the printing platform 105 may generate, and send to the mobile device 101 status updates regarding a print request”. Generally, the “printing platform 105 may “poll” or receive such spatial positioning information from mobile devices 101 in real-time, so as to provide presence service features related to mobile devices 101” (see C3; L38 – 41).)
execute a process in a case where the information is periodically received, and wherein prior to the establishment of the connection, the server is in a first state (In C19; L38 – 52; Fig. 5b (521 – 523); Fig. 4 (409): this conditional limitation is taught as “the printing platform 105 may take no further action unless the user agrees to the terms by inputting an agreement to the printing terms on the mobile device 101” wherein the “printing terms” were initially sent to the “mobile device 101” to receive an acceptance response from the user. Also, refer to C4; L5 – 10 wherein the “authenticating information may be used before printing the confidential file for the purpose of protecting sensitive information” or “the printed material may be generated and access restricted until the print station 103 receives authenticating information from a mobile device 101”.)
and in a case where any one of the first authentication and the second authentication is not successful, the server remains in the first state. (In C18; L39 – 57; Fig. 5a (517): teaches this limitation as “the printing platform 105 receives invalid authenticating information it may continue to restrict access of the printed material to the user presenting the invalid authenticating information, and generate a notification of access attempt”.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanaoka to provide the abilities of having authentication information from the user that specifically emailed using an email address, notifying authentication information to the user, specifically by email message, periodically receive status information upon transmitted requests, execute a process for the server to be in a first state (i.e. interpreted as not providing the user the specific service) when information is periodically received prior to any connection established and if none of the authentication processes succeed, the system’s server remains in this first state, as taught by Schultz in order to provide a “remotely secure mobile printing, such as for the purpose of printing confidential material outside of a secured office” and “reduce unauthorized access to printed materials.” (C2; L50 – 53 and L64 – 67; Schultz).
Regarding claim 2:
The combination of Hanaoka and Schultz, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Hanaoka further teaches:
wherein the identification information is used for the specific service, and (In ¶0073; Fig. 2 (262): teaches that the system compares the user’s provided “use permit IDs” with the “use permit IDs” stored in order to “approve the use of the printer 100 (step S262).” Refer to ¶0054 – 55 wherein the system also manages “pieces of information with regard to the users who use the printer rental service and the printers rented by the users (see FIG. 2)”.)
the first state is a state where the specific service is not provided to the user despite the identification information being stored in the memory. (In ¶0073; Fig. 2 (264): teaches that “When the error message is received” to the system directed to the first state, or “when the received use permit ID is different from the use permit ID stored in advance in the printer 100, the printer 100 sets a value ‘0’ to the flag F2 (F2=0) to prohibit the use of the printer 100 (step S264)”.)
Regarding claim 8:
The combination of Hanaoka and Schultz, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Hanaoka does not explicitly teach the abilities of sending screen data with a specific instruction accepting screen including a button for accepting an instruction for the supply of the device to the user and having the input screen include input fields for accepting input of the user information. However, Schultz further teaches:
wherein the predetermined communication includes: sending screen data corresponding to an instruction accepting screen to the terminal device via the communication interface, the instruction accepting screen including a button for accepting an instruction for a supply of the device to the user; and (In C19; L38 – 46; Fig. 5B (525): teaches that “once the printing platform 105 sends the printing terms to the mobile devices 101, it receives a response indicating acceptance of pickup terms from the mobile device 101. At step 525, the mobile device 101 receives a selection from an input interface such as a keypad 311, or microphone 313 and mobile device 101 indicating agreement to the pickup terms and the printing platform 105, specifically, the transaction communicator 203 receives the acceptance through the one or more networks 107-113 shown on FIG. 1”. Also, the “keypad 311” can include “input controls, such as one or more button controls” (see C11; L16 – 20))
sending screen data corresponding to an input screen to the terminal device via the communication interface in a case where the button is selected by the user, the input screen including an input field for accepting input of the user information. (In Fig. 6 (601): teaches an interface for secure mobile printing which includes input fields such as “INPUT A LOCATION” (see C20; L22 – 42 for more details).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanaoka to provide the abilities of sending screen data with a specific instruction accepting screen including a button for accepting an instruction for the supply of the device to the user and having the input screen include input fields for accepting input of the user information, as taught by Schultz in order to enable “subscribers to modify corresponding user profile information, such as user default information to the secure mobile printing services of system 100, update personal information, and the like..” (C20; L39 – 42; Schultz).
Regarding claim 10:
The combination of Hanaoka and Schultz, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Hanaoka further teaches:
wherein the specific service includes a service of shipping a consumable article that is used in the device to a destination included in the user information. (In ¶0052: teaches that “the service center provides each registered user with a dedicated ink cartridge 300 for the printer rental service and charges the user for the consumption of ink in the ink cartridge 300.”)
Regarding claim 12:
The combination of Hanaoka and Schultz, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Hanaoka teaches that “other pieces of information may be used for the authentication” of a user to access the printing services (see ¶0054; Hanaoka) and can generate and transmit “access information” to the “device” or printer when the system recognizes and authenticates the user credentials at step S240 - 242 and the computer server then provides the “use permit ID allocated to the MAC address to the printer 100 (step S242)” to further approve the use or service of the printer (see ¶0072 – 73; Hanaoka). However, Hanaoka does not explicitly teach the abilities of having access information that is specifically an access token being used and that the controller can generate and transmit this token to the device. Thus, Schultz further teaches:
wherein the access information is an access token used in the particular protocol and the controller generates the access token and transmits the access token to the device, (In C4; L34 – 60; Fig. 4 (411 – 413); Fig. 5a (509): teaches that the “signals generated by, for example, authenticating information from printing platform 105 may be transmitted to mobile devices 101 via one or more of communication networks 107-113” (i.e. directed to the generation of the access token) and to “prevent unauthorized individuals from accessing printing platform 105, authenticating information may be required” which is directed to the access token transmitted to the device or printer. The “authenticating information” can include “an electronic token transmitted (e.g., near field communication) by a security token such as hardware token, hardbad token, authentication token, USB token, cryptographic token, key fob, hardware dongle and software token”. But also, it is “contemplated that mobile device 101 may be configured to enable use as a security token”, in accordance to the example given in ¶0060 – 61 from Applicant’s disclosure.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanaoka to provide the abilities of having access information that is specifically an access token being used and that the controller can generate and transmit this token to the device, as taught by Schultz in order to use authenticating information such as an access token, “before printing the confidential file for the purpose of protecting sensitive information” (C4; L4 – 7; Schultz) and provide a “remotely secure mobile printing, such as for the purpose of printing confidential material outside of a secured office” and “reduce unauthorized access to printed materials.” (C2; L50 – 53 and L64 – 67; Schultz).
Regarding claims 13 and 15:
The combination of Hanaoka and Schultz, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 14, respectively.
Hanaoka teaches that the system can use and require “other pieces of information” such as “Permit ID” first for authentication that is correlated to the identification information of “a user number assigned to each user, the user's name, a user ID and a password required for authentication, a model and a MAC address of the printer rented by the use” (see ¶0054 – 55; Hanaoka) and this prior art system permits any or “other modifications, changes, and alterations” of the main characteristics of the present invention (see ¶0076 – 77; Hanaoka). Hanaoka does not explicitly teach the ability of providing an example with the specific sequence of upon the first authentication is successful a second authentication can be executed. However, Schultz further teaches:
wherein the second authentication is executed in a case where it is determined that the first authentication is successful. (In C4; L37 – 60: teaches this conditional limitation under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), as an example that in order to “prevent unauthorized individuals from accessing printing platform 105, authenticating information may be required”, wherein “authenticating information may be any sequence of information transmitted in various forms including for example, audio, visual, or a combination thereof”. In one example, “authenticating information includes the detection of a code sequence input, such as a personal identification number (PIN), or user name password combination” which is directed to implementing a first authentication (i.e. activation key or “code sequence input” or “security token”) that upon being successful, a second authentication related to providing an identification information such as providing user’s credentials and matching “user name password”. Refer to C9; L1 – 13 wherein an example is provided for “a cross-reference table” that may “link the print file, authenticating information and information linking it to a physical code stored on packaging” wherein “it is contemplated that any physical tagging may be used to associate, for example, numeric, alpha-numeric, dimensional barcode (e.g., QR code), or industry standard barcode (e.g., bookland EAN, ISSN, OPC, UPC shipping container symbol)” and in C9; L21 – 46 for the verification of a “valid authentication information” example.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanaoka to provide the ability of providing an example with the specific sequence of upon the first authentication is successful a second authentication can be executed, as taught by Schultz in order to require a specific order of authenticating information such as an access token, “before printing the confidential file for the purpose of protecting sensitive information” (C4; L4 – 7; Schultz) and provide a “remotely secure mobile printing, such as for the purpose of printing confidential material outside of a secured office” and “reduce unauthorized access to printed materials.” (C2; L50 – 53 and L64 – 67; Schultz).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanaoka (U.S. Pub No. 20060045595 A1) in view of Schultz (U.S. Pub No. 9110608 B2) in further view of Nagasaki (EP Pub No. 3343345 B1).
Regarding claim 7:
The combination of Hanaoka and Schultz, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Neither Hanaoka or Schultz explicitly teach the ability of having two separate timing events for the device being transported to the predetermined place and generating and sending email message. However, Nagasaki further teaches:
wherein a timing when the device is transported to a predetermined place is different from a timing when the email message is generated and sent. (In ¶0048: teaches the different timing events claimed in an example of when a “transmission of the S/N from the printer 50 to the management server 100 is not appropriately completed after the elapse of a predetermined period of time since the printer 50 was delivered to the user” (i.e. directed to a time when device being transported to the predetermined place), a confirmation mail that may prompt registration of the printer 50 in the management server 100 may be sent to an email address included in the customer information CI stored in the sales server20, as a destination address” (i.e. directed to a time when generating and sending email message).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanaoka and Schultz to provide the ability of having two separate timing events for the device being transported to the predetermined place and generating and sending email message, as taught by Nagasaki in order to provide “obtain the consumable components delivery service, in association with each other, before the user connects the printer 50 to the Internet 6 after obtained the printer 50 from the EC site company. That is, this configuration may avoid the necessity for the user to perform various operations on the printer 50 for registering all the necessary pieces of information in association with each other, which may result in reduction of the number of user's operation events that may be burdensome to the user.” (¶0061; Nagasaki).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Krampe (U.S. Pub No. 20110153442 A1) is pertinent because it “relates to establishing credit on a Cash Register or Cash Register System or by creating a credit/debit card receipt on a printer.”
Cochran (U.S. Pub No. 20130070278 A1) is pertinent because it “relates to the field of printing systems, and in particular, to pre-authorization of print jobs that are submitted for printing.”
Iwasaki (U.S. Pub No. 20150153981 A1) is pertinent because it “relates to a printing system, an information processing apparatus, a computer readable medium, and an image forming apparatus.”
Sako (U.S. Patent No. 11010106 B2) is pertinent because it “relates to a printing apparatus, a control method, and a program for the printing apparatus.”
Laurent (U.S. Patent No. 9058138 B2) is pertinent because it “relates to a method and system for releasing print jobs based on location information. In particular, the present invention relates to a modifying a user interface of a mobile network terminal to prompt the user for the authentication information to release a print job from a nearby printer resource.”
Hatada (U.S. Pub No. 20210314461 A1) is pertinent because it “discloses a technique in which a server provides a service using a printer.”
Fujinawa (U.S. Pub No. 20020113998 A1) is pertinent because it “relates to a print system in which a printer voluntarily connects to a host at a predetermined time to obtain contents or information from the host and prints the contents by the printer on the basis of set information of a user, and more particularly, to a print system including a host which determines whether requested contents should be delivered depending on an identification (ID) of a printer.”
Jazayeri (WO Pub No. 2011115987 A2) is pertinent because it is a “print server may include an application manager configured to receive a print request over a network from an application executing on a device, and configured to provide, over the network, a print dialog to a user of the application, the print dialog configured to provide for a selection of at least one printer associated with a user account of the user and thereafter receive a selected printer from the selection.”
Watanabe (U.S. Pub No. 20130222837 A1) is pertinent because it “relates to tools, such as systems, apparatuses, methodologies, computer program products, etc., for providing a cloud print service.
Muranaka (U.S. Patent No. 8854665 B2) is pertinent because it is “an information processing system including a first management device that manages, for each user, information on a function of a printer that the user is permitted to use in the printer; a second management device that accepts registration of a virtual printer corresponding to a set of a printer and a function to be used in the printer, and that manages the registered virtual printer; and a registration device that registers a virtual printer in the second management device.”
Matsuda (U.S. Pub No. 20220171838 A1) is pertinent because it “discloses art that enables a communication device to operate suitably in accordance with communication path(s) used in receiving a request.”
Ansari (U.S. Pub No. 20210409239 Al) is pertinent because it “relates to a service management system, for remotely managing delivery of voice controlled application services by one or more gateway devices at respective user premises, which may also selectively provide secure communications and exchange of information among gateway devices and among endpoint devices associated with the gateway devices.”
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ivonnemary Rivera Gonzalez whose telephone number is (571)272-6158. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00AM - 5:30PM.
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, Nathan Uber can be reached at (571) 270-3923. 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.
/IVONNEMARY RIVERA GONZALEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3626
/NATHAN C UBER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3626