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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 May 25, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on May 25, 2026 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.
Response to Amendment
The amendment to the claims received on May 25, 2026 has been entered.
The amendment of claims 1, 7, 8-10 is acknowledged.
The new claims 11 and 12 are acknowledged.
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, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama’646 (US 2013/0135646), and further in view of Aizono’065 (US 2015/0181065).
With respect to claim 1, Akiyama’646 teaches an image forming apparatus (Fig.1) comprising:
a processor (Fig.2, item 33) configured to:
display a clearing method for clearing an initial error among multiple
errors that have occurred [one of the paper jams is considered as the initial error and multiple paper jams are occurred in different locations at the same time (Figs.5A-6B)], on a display part (Fig.2, item 34). Each paper jam is considered one error since each paper jam is located in different location and their solutions are different];
while the clearing method of the initial error of which the clearing method is displayed on the display part is displayed, receive a temporary clearing instruction for processing the initial error as being temporarily cleared [As shown in Figs.5A-6B, the screens associated with the clearing method for the paper jam are being displayed and the user follows the instruction displayed on the screen to remove the paper jam. Therefore, the paper jam in the image forming apparatus is considered being removed temporary according the displayed screens and the user’s instruction since the paper jam could not be permanently fixed];
Akiyama’646 does not teach each time the temporary clearing instruction is received with respect to a current processing error among the multiple errors that have occurred, process the current processing error as being temporarily cleared, and display clearing methods of subsequent errors of the current processing error on the display part in order in a switched manner; in response to determining that the temporary clearing instruction has not been received with respect to the current processing error, receive an operation of clearing the current processing error; and in a case where clearing operations for all clearing methods of the multiple errors that have occurred are completed, resume processing of a job paused by the multiple errors.
Aizono’065 teaches each time the temporary clearing instruction is received with respect to a current processing error among the multiple errors that have occurred, process the current processing error as being temporarily cleared, and display clearing methods of subsequent errors of the current processing error on the display part in order in a switched manner [as shown in Fig.8, the sheet running out error in step S803, the toner running out error is step S804 and the jam occurring error in step S805 might be occurred at the same time then they are being fixed one by one according the displayed instruction];
in response to determining that the temporary clearing instruction has not been received with respect to the current processing error, receive an operation of clearing the current processing error [as shown in Fig.8, the sheet running out error in step S803, the toner running out error is step S804 and the jam occurring error in step S805 might be occurred at the same time then they are being fixed one by one according the displayed instruction]; and
in a case where clearing operations for all clearing methods of the multiple errors that have occurred are completed, resume processing of a job paused by the multiple errors (Fig.8, step S806).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Akiyama’646 according to the teaching of Aizono’065 to continue to print an interrupted print job which is being interrupted by the paper jams in the printer after the paper jams are fixed (in a case where clearing operations for all clearing methods of the multiple errors that have occurred are completed, resume processing of a job paused by the multiple errors) because this will allow the print job to be printed more effectively.
With respect to claim 7, it is a claim regarding to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing thereon a computer program and it is analyzed and rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
With respect to claim 8, it is a method claim that claims and it is analyzed and rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama’646 (US 2013/0135646), Aizono’065 (US 2015/0181065) and further in view of
Yasui’526 (US 2012/0093526).
With respect to claim 3, which further limits claim 1, Akiyama’646 teaches
in a case where all of the multiple errors that have occurred are cleared, clear the temporary error [regarding to clear the paper jams in different location (Figs.5A-6B)].
Akiyama’646 does not teach wherein the processor is configured to: in a case where the multiple errors have occurred, cause a temporary error that has not occurred but that is set to a state where an error has occurred, separately from the multiple errors that have occurred.
Yasui’526 teaches wherein the processor is configured to: in a case where the errors have occurred (Fig.14, step ACT43), cause a temporary error that has not occurred but that is set to a state where the error has occurred, separately from the errors that have occurred [As shown in Fig.14, the type of paper jams are being determined and separately in step ACT44. Therefore, the skew-related jam error is considered being separated when the paper jam is being determined occurred but the skew-related jam error is not being detected]; and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 according to the teaching of Yasui’526 to continue to print an interrupted print job which is being interrupted by the paper jams in the printer after the paper jams are fixed (in a case where clearing operations for all clearing methods of the multiple errors that have occurred are completed, resume processing of a job paused by the multiple errors) because this will allow the print job to be printed more effectively.
With respect to claim 4, which further limits claim 3, Akiyama’646 does not teach wherein the processor is configured to: after clearing the temporary error, resume the processing of the job paused by the multiple errors
Aizono’065 teaches wherein the processor is configured to: after clearing the temporary error, resume the processing of the job paused by the errors (Fig.8, step S806).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Akiyama’646 and Yasui’526 according to the teaching of Aizono’065 to continue to print an interrupted print job which is being interrupted by the paper jams in the printer after the paper jams are fixed (in a case where clearing operations for all clearing methods of the multiple errors that have occurred are completed, resume processing of a job paused by the multiple errors) because this will allow the print job to be printed more effectively.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama’646 (US 2013/0135646), Aizono’065 (US 2015/0181065) and further in view of Iwata’319 (US 2008/0307319).
With respect to claim 2, which further limits claim 1, Akiyama’646 does not teach wherein the processor is configured to: store information about the temporarily cleared error and, in a case where all of the multiple errors are temporarily cleared, restore the temporarily cleared errors
Aizono’065 teaches in a case where all of the errors are temporarily cleared, restore the temporarily cleared errors [As shown in Fig.8, the printer is being continues after the sheet running out error in step S803, the toner running out error is step S804 and the jam occurring error in step S805 are fixed but the paper jams might be occurred again (restore) in the next printing operation].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Akiyama’646 according to the teaching of Aizono’065 to continue to print an interrupted print job which is being interrupted by the paper jams in the printer after the paper jams are fixed and to report the paper jams again if they are occurred again during the next print job because this will allow the print job to be printed more effectively.
The combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 does not teach wherein the processor is configured to: store information about the temporarily cleared error.
Iwata’319 teaches wherein the processor is configured to: store information about the temporarily cleared error [as shown in Fig.21, the paper jam history is being displayed. Therefore, the JAM history is considered being stored first before displaying it.].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 according to the teaching of Iwata’319 to store the paper jam history which is being cleared because this will allow the paper jam to be monitored more effectively.
Claims 5, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama’646 (US 2013/0135646), Aizono’065 (US 2015/0181065) and further in view of Yamada’884 (US 2007/0201884).
With respect to claim 5, which further limits claim 1, Akiyama’646 teaches a cover that is provided in a front portion of the image forming apparatus and through which an inside of the image forming apparatus is accessible by opening the cover (Figs.5A-5E), wherein the clearing method for clearing an error is performed by opening the cover (Figs.5A-5E), and
The combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 does not teach the processor is configured to: in a case where the cover is closed, check whether or not the error is cleared.
Yamada’884 teaches the processor is configured to: in a case where the cover is closed, check whether or not the error is cleared (Fig.12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 according to the teaching of Yamada’884 to detect if the paper jam has been removed after detecting the cover door is closed because this will allow the paper jam to be monitored and removed more effectively.
With respect to claim 11, which further limits claim 1, Akiyama’646 does not teach, wherein the processor is further configured to: cause a temporary error to occur after the current processing error is processed as being temporarily cleared; in response to determining that a front cover of the image forming apparatus has been closed, determine whether an error other than the temporary error has occurred; and in response to determining that no error other than the temporary error has occurred, clear the temporary error.
Aizono’065 teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: cause a temporary error to occur after the current processing error is processed as being temporarily cleared [as shown in Fig.8, the sheet running out error in step S803, the toner running out error is step S804 and the jam occurring error in step S805 might be occurred at the same time then they are being fixed one by one according the displayed instruction. The errors including the sheet running out error, the toner running out error and the jam occurring error are considered as one of the temporary error to be occurred after the current processing error for one of the sheet running out error, the toner running out error and the jam occurring error is being processed as being temporarily cleared when a new print job is being processed];
in response to determining that no error other than the temporary error has occurred, clear the temporary error [as shown in Fig.8, the sheet running out error in step S803, the toner running out error is step S804 and the jam occurring error in step S805 might be occurred at the same time then they are being fixed one by one according the displayed instruction.].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Akiyama’646 according to the teaching of Aizono’065 to continue to print an interrupted print job which is being interrupted by the paper jams in the printer after the paper jams are fixed because this will allow the print job to be printed more effectively.
The combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 does not teach in response to determining that a front cover of the image forming apparatus has been closed, determine whether an error other than the temporary error has occurred.
Yamada’884 teaches in response to determining that a front cover of the image forming apparatus has been closed, determine whether an error other than the temporary error has occurred (Fig.12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 according to the teaching of Yamada’884 to detect if the paper jam has been removed after detecting the cover door is closed because this will allow the paper jam to be monitored and removed more effectively.
With respect to claim 12, which further limits claim 11, the combination of Akiyama’646 and Yamada’884 does not teach wherein the processor is configured to: resume processing of the job paused by the multiple errors after the temporary error is cleared.
Aizono’065 teaches wherein the processor is configured to: resume processing of the job paused by the multiple errors after the temporary error is cleared (Fig.8, step S806).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Akiyama’646 according to the teaching of Aizono’065 to continue to print an interrupted print job which is being interrupted by the paper jams in the printer after the paper jams are fixed because this will allow the print job to be printed more effectively.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama’646 (US 2013/0135646), Aizono’065 (US 2015/0181065), Iwata’319 (US 2008/0307319) and further in view of Akasaka’430 (US 2002/0152430).
With respect to claim 6, which further limits claim 2, the combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 does not teach wherein the processor is configured to: store the information about the temporarily cleared error until a determination that all of the multiple errors that have occurred are cleared is made.
Akasaka’430 teaches wherein the processor is configured to: store the information about the temporarily cleared error until a determination that all of the multiple errors that have occurred are cleared is made (paragraph 86).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Akiyama’646, Aizono’065 and Iwata’319 according to the teaching of Akasaka’430 to delete the paper jam error information from a memory after the paper jam is be cleared because this will allow the paper jam status to monitor more effectively.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama’646 (US 2013/0135646), Aizono’065 (US 2015/0181065) and further in view of
Yoshida’408 (US 9,811,408).
With respect to claim 9, which further limits claim 1, the combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 teaches wherein the multiple errors that have occurred comprise at least one device error of the image forming apparatus and at least one operation error with respect to the job.
Yoshida’408 teaches wherein the multiple errors that have occurred comprise at least one device error of the image forming apparatus and at least one operation error with respect to the job [As shown in Fig.6, when at last the printer error and/or the job error occurred, they are being reported. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize that the printer error and the job error would be occurred at the same time as disclosed in Fig.9].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 according to the teaching of Yoshida’408 to report the detected error including the printer error and the job error because this will allow the print job to be printed more effectively.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama’646 (US 2013/0135646), Aizono’065 (US 2015/0181065) and further in view of
Fujisawa’891 (US 2017/0269891).
With respect to claim 10, which further limits claim 1, the combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 does not teach wherein the multiple errors that have occurred comprise at least two of paper jammed inside the image forming apparatus, the image forming apparatus being out of paper sheets, and a front cover of the image forming apparatus being open.
Fujisawa’891 teaches wherein the multiple errors that have occurred comprise at least two of paper jammed inside the image forming apparatus, the image forming apparatus being out of paper sheets, and a front cover of the image forming apparatus being open [A print status indicates a print processing status for each piece of print data. This print processing status includes statuses that indicate print results: “waiting” that indicates before a print start, “printing” that indicates that print processing is being performed normally, and “interrupt” that indicates that printing by the printer has been interrupted for some reason. As an example of interrupt, for example a toner outage of the printer, a paper feed tray being out of paper, an open cover, the occurrence of a jam, or the like can be given (paragraph 54).].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Akiyama’646 and Aizono’065 according to the teaching of Yoshida’408 to report the detected error including the printer error and the job error because this will allow the print job to be printed more effectively.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUO LONG CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3759. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9am - 5pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tieu, Benny can be reached on (571) 272-7490. 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.
/HUO LONG CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682
Prosecution Insights