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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office action has been issued in response to amendment filed on 06/09/2026
Claims 1-10 and 12-13 are pending and 5-6 are cancelled. Applicants' arguments have been carefully and respectfully considered and addressed. Accordingly, this action has been made FINAL necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the amended claims were fully considered and are moot in view of the new ground of rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Allowance
Claim is 13 allowable.
Reason for Allowance
Independent claim 13 is allowable because the cited arts of record do not explicitly disclose, teach, or suggest the following limitations content management (in combination with all other features in the claim),
obtain, as log information of an operation performed on a digital file stored in a common region of the information processing apparatus, a first operation log recorded in the information processing apparatus and a second operation log recorded in a client device which has downloaded the digital file;
classify each of the obtained first operation log and second operation log as an operation log which has been received or as an operation log which has not been received, based on a recording time at which each of the first and second operation logs is recorded and a time at which the second operation log is obtained; obtain one or more second operation logs which has not or have not yet been sent to the information processing apparatus, the one or more second operation logs being sent together from the client device at a predetermined timing;
identify, for each client device, a latest time at which second operation logs have been obtained, and specify an earliest time among the identified latest times, based on content of each of the second operation logs; classify, among the obtained first operation logs and second operation logs, an operation log whose recording time is earlier than the specified earliest time as an operation log which has been received and an operation log whose recording time is later than the specified earliest time as an operation log which has not been received; and not to classify a second operation log which has not been obtained at the predetermined timing among the second operation logs stored in the client device.
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.
Claims 1-2, 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Luke Ernest Camery (hereinafter Camery) US Publication No 20210056233 in view of Bucher et al (hereinafter Bucher) US Publication No 20150287044.
As per claim 1, Camery teaches:
An information processing apparatus comprising:
a processor configured to:
obtain, as log information of an operation performed on a digital file stored in a common region of the information processing apparatus, a first operation log recorded in the information processing apparatus and a second operation log recorded in a client device which has downloaded the digital file;
(Paragraphs [0049, [0057]-[0058], [0071] and [0073], wherein the shared/collaboration environment is the common region as recited in paragraph [0010] of the instant specification)
and classify each of the obtained first operation log and second operation log as an operation log which has been received or as an operation log which has not been received, based on a recording time at which each of the first and second operation logs is recorded and a time at which the second operation log is obtained,
(Paragraphs [0049, [0057]-[0058], [0071] and [0073])
Camery does not explicitly teach wherein if the client device has not performed an operation on the digital file, the second operation log sent from the client device includes log information indicating that the operation has not been performed on the digital file, however in analogous art of content management, Bucher teaches:
wherein if the client device has not performed an operation on the digital file, the second operation log sent from the client device includes log information indicating that the operation has not been performed on the digital file.
(Paragraphs [0005], [0011]-[0012], [0021], [0028], [0035], [0038], [0053], [0078], wherein the audit trail is the log and wherein the completion status indicating not completed is operation not performed )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Camery and Bucher by incorporating the teaching of Bucher into the method of Camery. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Bucher into the system of Camery for the purpose of tracking user activity completion.
As per claim 2, Camery and Bucher teach:
The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to obtain one or more second operation logs which has not or have not yet been sent to the information processing apparatus, the one or more second operation logs being sent together from the client device at a predetermined timing.
(Paragraphs [0056] and [0088])(Camery)(Paragraph [0021] and [0028], wherein the deadline is the predetermined timing)(Bucher)
As per claim 9, Camery and Bucher teach:
The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to perform control to present information to a user so as to allow the user to distinguish the operation log which has been received and the operation log which has not been received from each other.
(Paragraphs [0049, [0057]-[0058], [0071] and [0073])(Camery) and (Paragraph [0021] and [0028])(Bucher)
As per claim 10, Camery and Bucher teach:
The information processing apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the processor is configured to present, as the information, information showing that, on a list including the operation log which has been received and the operation log which has not been received, an external appearance of the operation log which has been received and an external appearance of the operation log which has not been received are different from each other.
(Paragraphs [0049, [0057]-[0058], [0071] and [0073])(Camery) and (Paragraph [0021] and [0028])(Bucher)
Claim 12 is non-transitory computer medium storing claim corresponding to processing apparatus claim 1 and it is rejected under the same rational as claim 1.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Camery and Bucher in view of Endo et al (hereinafter Endo) US Publication No. 20200125379.
As per claim 3, Camery and Bucher do not explicitly teach identify, for each client device, a latest time at which second operation logs have been obtained, and specify an earliest time among the identified latest times, based on content of each of the second operation logs, however in analogous art of record management, Endo teaches:
identify, for each client device, a latest time at which second operation logs have been obtained, and specify an earliest time among the identified latest times, based on content of each of the second operation logs;
(Paragraphs [0059], [0073], [0104], [0106] and [0114], wherein write is the content according to paragraph [0045] of the instant specification)
and classify, among the obtained first operation logs and second operation logs, an operation log whose recording time is earlier than the specified earliest time as an operation log which has been received and an operation log whose recording time is later than the specified earliest time as an operation log which is has not been received.
(Paragraphs [0059], [0073], [0104], [0106] and [0114])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Camery and Bucher and Endo by incorporating the teaching of Endo into the method of Camery and Bucher. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Endo into the system of Camery and Bucher for the purpose of tracking I/O operation and managing log generation accordingly.
Conclusion
As necessitated by amendment, 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 extension fee 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 Tarek Chbouki whose telephone number is 571-2703154. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9 am to 6:00 pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aleksandr Kerzhner can be reached at 571-2701760. 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.
/TAREK CHBOUKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2165 10/10/2026
