DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/05/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3, 5-7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-3, 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over UEDA (US 2015/0100682 A1) in view of Oshurkov et al. (US 2017/0149829 A1) further in view of Maki (US 2010/0235499 A1).
With respect to Claim 1, UEDA’682 shows a monitoring apparatus (paragraphs [0018]-[0019] log information providing apparatus 70 manage log information by collecting log information generated in response to printing executed, figure 1) comprising: a processor (Figure 2 CPU 81) configured to:
in a case where printing information of an image forming apparatus managed by an audit log server (paragraph [0018 ], figure 1 print server 20 and document management server 10) contains information indicating that a specified document, [ ], has been printed by the image forming apparatus (paragraph [0037] when printing is executed, log information generated by the print controller 21 is accumulated in the log information accumulating unit 24 of the print server 20), [ ].
UEDA’682 does not specifically show information indicating that a specified document, for which a notification function to a designated notification destination has been enabled by a document manager who created the document; cause the audit log server to notify the designated notification destination of contents of an audit log that records a fact that the specified document has been printed.
Oshurkov’829 shows information indicating that a specified document, for which a notification function to a designated notification destination has been enabled by a document manager who created the document (paragraphs [0025]-[0026] digital rights management system (DRM) with a notification rule is set for each document managed by the system, where the rule is based on a DRM protection policy associated with the document, so that users who have permission to perform a type of act on a document (e.g. read, print, copy, etc.) are allowed to receive event notifications when other users perform the same type of act on that document, figure 1 notification policy table 18, figure 8); cause the audit log server to notify the designated notification destination of contents of an audit log that records a fact that the specified document has been printed (paragraphs [0034]-[0036], [0043] and [0051] figures 5-6, The notification policy table 18 and the notification rule table 19 together define how and to whom the event notifications will be sent for each document, setting up notification for a document with a destination and a notification to that destination when is printed).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify UEDA’682 to include information indicating that a specified document, for which a notification function to a designated notification destination has been enabled by a document manager who created the document; cause the audit log server to notify the designated notification destination of contents of an audit log that records a fact that the specified document has been printed method taught by Oshurkov’829. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the system’s ability to be able to better enforce the access control with event notifications help able to be setup (paragraph [0006]).
UEDA’682 and Oshurkov’829 fail to specifically show wherein the processor is configured to cause the audit log server to also notify the document manager of information about whether the specified document was printed via an operation at an operation screen of the image forming apparatus or whether the specified document was printed without operation at the operation screen of the image forming apparatus.
Maki’499 shows log information about whether the specified document was printed via an operation at an operation screen of the image forming apparatus or whether the specified document was printed without operation at the operation screen of the image forming apparatus (paragraph [0059] job history including communication records, paragraph [0061] shows print job log 406 showing print job that is input by remote operation, and hence does not include a print job input from the operation unit of the image forming apparatus 101 (having information on both so it can filter which to look at), paragraphs [0071]-[0073] show job history of only remote operation and not local operation on the operation unit, having information on print jobs and if they were remote (not by input from operation) or by input from operation unit).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify UEDA’682 and Oshurkov’829 to include cause the audit log server to also notify the document manager of information about whether the specified document was printed via an operation at an operation screen of the image forming apparatus or whether the specified document was printed without operation at the operation screen of the image forming apparatus method taught by Maki’499. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the system’s ability to be able to improve user friendliness by having more detailed information about a print job on the history of communication records (paragraph [0100]).
With respect to Claim 2, the combination of UEDA’682, Oshurkov’829 and Maki’499 shows the monitoring apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to cause the audit log server to also notify the document manager of at least part of pages of the specified document (in Oshurkov’829: paragraph [0058] figure 13 display 1300 is an example of a notification for a print event. The notification includes a description 1301 of the document that was printed, e.g. the document ID or some other identifiers such as a file name; the user ID 1302 of the user who printed the document; a description of the number of copies that the document was printed; a description 1303 of the printer where document was printed, e.g. a printer name and/or its location).
With respect to Claim 3, the combination of UEDA’682, Oshurkov’829 and Maki’499 shows the monitoring apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the processor is configured to cause the audit log server to notify the document manager of a first page of the specified document (in Oshurkov’829: paragraph [0058] figure 13 display 1300 is an example of a notification for a print event. The notification includes a description 1301 of the document that was printed, e.g. the document ID or some other identifiers such as a file name; the user ID 1302 of the user who printed the document; a description of the number of copies that the document was printed; a description 1303 of the printer where document was printed, e.g. a printer name and/or its location).
With respect to Claim 5, the combination of UEDA’682 and Oshurkov’829 shows the monitoring apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to, in a case where the specified document has been printed by an operation different from the operation on the operation screen, cause the audit log server to notify the document manager of the audit log in such a manner that the document manager is able to distinguish the notification from other notifications (in Oshurkov’829: paragraph [0058] figure 13 display 1300 is an example of a notification for a print event. The notification includes a description 1303 of the printer where document was printed, e.g. a printer name and/or its location, and in Maki’499: paragraph [0061] shows print job log 406 showing print job that is input by remote operation, and hence does not include a print job input from the operation unit of the image forming apparatus 101 as desired).
With respect to Claims 6-7, rejection analogous to those presented for claim 1, are applicable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nishio et al. (US 20130063777 A1): paragraph [0055] job monitoring part 22 detects completion of the print job transferred to the image forming apparatus 10, the log sending part 23 generates log information on the print job and sends the log information to the information management server 30.
Hamamura (US 2026/0044292 A1): paragraphs [0016] and [0062] an outputting step of outputting a printing history indicating a result of printing executed based on the printing instruction data including the same resultant product identification information in association with the resultant product identification information and the printing history output unit 112 integrates the printing history 121 executed by the printing execution unit 111 based on the printing instruction data including the same resultant product identification information, and outputs the integrated printing history in association with the resultant product identification information. This makes it possible to appropriately acquire and analyze the printing history 121 related to the resultant product 10 even in a case where printing of a plurality of layers is executed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IRIANA CRUZ whose telephone number is (571)270-3246. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Akwasi M. Sarpong can be reached at (571) 270-3438. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/IRIANA CRUZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681
Prosecution Insights