Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/219,358

PRINTING SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR DYNAMICALLY CONFIGURED CONFLICT CHECKING IN PRINTING OPERATIONS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jul 07, 2023
Examiner
WALLACE, JOHN R
Art Unit
2682
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Kyocera Document Solutions Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
283 granted / 366 resolved
+15.3% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
388
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.9%
-33.1% vs TC avg
§103
60.1%
+20.1% vs TC avg
§102
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
§112
18.0%
-22.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 366 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 10-16 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made to Species A (corresponding to claims 1-9 and 17-20, shown in Figures 4-7) without traverse in the reply filed on 23 June 2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 8, 9, and 17-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasama (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2022/0308803) in view of Woolfe et al. (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2008/0143738). Regarding claim 1, Hasama (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2022/0308803) discloses: A method for dynamic conflict checking for printing operations, the method comprising: setting a plurality of configurable attributes relating to printing operations at a digital front end (DFE) of a first printing device (paragraph [0144]-[0149], a plurality of configurable print options are provided on the screen) defining a first plurality of settings for the first printing device based on the plurality of configurable attributes (paragraphs [0147]-[0150], the user may change and then input provided print options); modifying the first plurality of settings based on a conflict with at least one of the plurality of configurable attributes (paragraphs [0151]-[0152], constraint information is used to determine print setting conflicts; modifications are made to resolve conflicts); storing the first plurality of settings in a first device capabilities file (paragraph [0154], the determined print settings are transmitted to the cloud print driver; the transmission of data implies at least temporary storage of the settings); and providing the first plurality of settings using the first device capabilities file during the printing operations at the first printing device (paragraph [0154], print data is generated based on the received print setting) Even assuming arguendo that Hasama does not explicitly disclose: setting a plurality of configurable attributes relating to printing operations at a digital front end (DFE) of a first printing device Woolfe et al. (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2008/0143738) discloses: setting a plurality of configurable attributes relating to printing operations at a digital front end (DFE) of a first printing device (paragraphs [0034], [0046], the system determines the available settings to be displayed to the user available on DFE) Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the system of Woolfe with the system of Hasama such that the system would have been configured to allow setting of a plurality of configurable attirbutes related to printing options at a DFE of a printing device as described in Wollfe et al. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to implement a system capable of allowing “the user…[to] easily identify the combination that delivers the most satisfactory results” (paragraph [0034] of the Wollfe reference). Regarding claim 2, Hasama additionally discloses: wherein setting the plurality of configurable attributes includes setting the plurality of configurable attributes for at least one paper (paragraphs [0065], [0136], for example, paper settings such as plain paper or stationary can be set) Regarding claim 3, Hasama additionally discloses: wherein modifying the plurality of configurable attributes includes modifying the plurality of configurable attributes related to print ticket settings (paragraphs [0133]-[0135], the settings for the print ticket can be modified) Regarding claim 6, Hasama additionally discloses: further comprising configuring the plurality of configurable attributes by an administrator or an operator (paragraphs [0144]-[0150], the screen displays options that the user may change/input); Woolfe et al. discloses: further comprising configuring the plurality of configurable attributes by an administrator or an operator (paragraphs [0034], [0046], the system determines the available settings to be displayed to the user available on DFE) Regarding claim 8, Hasama additionally discloses: further comprising receiving a print condition for a print job generated by a printer driver in conjunction with the print ticket editor (paragraphs [0133]-[0134], the print condition is generated by the printer driver in conjunction with the print ticket editor) Regarding claim 9, Hasama additionally discloses: further comprising determining whether a print setting conflict exists between the print condition and the first plurality of settings (paragraphs [0133]-[0134], [0151]-[0152], constraint information is used to determine print setting conflicts; modifications are made to resolve conflicts); Regarding claim 17, Hasama discloses: A printing system comprising: a first printing device (see Figure 1); a processor (see, for example, paragraphs [0027]-[0030], [0037], [0042], [0050]]; and a memory storing instructions (see, for example, paragraphs [0027]-[0030], [0037], [0042], [0050]]; wherein the instructions, when executed on the processor, configure the printing system to set a plurality of configurable attributes related to printing operations at the first printing device (paragraph [0144]-[0149], a plurality of configurable print options are provided on the screen); define a first plurality of settings for the first printing device based on the plurality of configurable attributes (paragraphs [0147]-[0150], the user may change and then input provided print options);; modify the first plurality of settings based on a conflict with at least one of the plurality of configurable attributes (paragraphs [0151]-[0152], constraint information is used to determine print setting conflicts; modifications are made to resolve conflicts); store the first plurality of settings in a first device capabilities file (paragraph [0154], the determined print settings are transmitted to the cloud print driver; the transmission of data implies at least temporary storage of the settings); and provide the first plurality of settings using the first device capabilities file during the printing operations at the first printing device (paragraph [0154], print data is generated based on the received print setting) Even assuming arguendo that Hasama does not explicitly disclose: set a plurality of configurable attributes related to printing operations at the first printing device Woolfe et al. (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2008/0143738) discloses: set a plurality of configurable attributes related to printing operations at the first printing device (paragraphs [0034], [0046], the system determines the available settings to be displayed to the user available on DFE) Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the system of Woolfe with the system of Hasama such that the system would have been configured to allow setting of a plurality of configurable attirbutes related to printing options at a DFE of a printing device as described in Wollfe et al. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to implement a system capable of allowing “the user…[to] easily identify the combination that delivers the most satisfactory results” (paragraph [0034] of the Wollfe reference). Regarding claim 18, Hasama additionally discloses: further comprising a client device having a print ticket editor to receive the first device capabilities file (paragraphs [0133]-[0135], [0162], [0165], the print capabilities the print settings are converted into a print ticket) Regarding claim 19, the limitations recited amount to a duplication of the functions of parent claim 17 for a second printing device. As Hasama discloses the functions noted supra in regards to multiple printing devices (see, for example, paragraph [0105], [0195] of Hasama), the combination of Hasama and Wolllfe disclose claim 19 for analogous reasons as those set forth with regard to claim 17 above. Regarding claim 20, Hasama additionally discloses: further comprising a digital front end (DFE) for the first printing device to generate the first device capabilities file (paragraphs [0133]-[0135], the first printing device contains the DFE and generates the capability information) Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasama in view of Woolfe et al., further in view of Low et al. (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2006/0290961). Regarding claim 4, the combination of Hasama and Woolfe et al. discloses the method of the parent claim (claim 1). The combination of Hasama and Woolfe do not explicitly disclose: wherein setting the plurality of configurable attributes includes setting the plurality of configurable attributes for queue defaults within the DFE. Low discloses: wherein setting the plurality of configurable attributes includes setting the plurality of configurable attributes for queue defaults within the DFE (paragraph [0022], the queue attributes can be set as queue defaults) Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the system of Low et al. with the combination of Hasama and Woolfe such that the system would be configured to have the plurality of configurable attributes include setting the plurality of configurable attributes for queue defaults within the DFE as described in Low. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to implement a system capable of having “each print queue…be thought of as a virtual printer wherein sending a print job to a print queue picks up attributes of that print queue” (paragraph [0022] of the Low reference). Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasama in view of Woolfe et al., further in view of Feng et al. (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2018/0189617). Regarding claim 5, the combination of Hasama and Woolfe et al. discloses the method of the parent claim (claim 1). The combination of Hasama and Woolfe do not explicitly disclose: wherein setting the plurality of configurable attributes includes setting the plurality of configurable attributes for at least one tray at the first printing device. Feng et al. (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2018/0189617) discloses: wherein setting the plurality of configurable attributes includes setting the plurality of configurable attributes for at least one tray at the first printing device (paragraph [0095], the settings for the tray can be configured) Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the system of Feng et al. with the combination of Hasama and Woolfe such that the configurable attributes included setting the plurality of configurable attributes for at least one tray as described in Feng et al.. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to implement a system capable of “ensur[ing] that the correct or proper paper media is housed within the feeder tray of the printer or MFP” (paragraph [0009] of the Feng reference; see also paragraphs [0010]-[0012]). Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasama in view of Woolfe et al., further in view of Kai (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2020/0310701). Regarding claim 7, the combination of Hasama and Woolfe et al. discloses the method of the parent claim (claim 1). The combination of Hasama and Woolfe do not explicitly disclose: further comprising downloading the first device capabilities file from the DFE of the first printing device using a uniform resource locator (URL) corresponding to an internet protocol (IP) address. Kai (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2020/0310701) discloses: further comprising downloading the first device capabilities file from the DFE of the first printing device using a uniform resource locator (URL) corresponding to an internet protocol (IP) address (paragraph [0070], the capability information is downloaded using a URL; a URL corresponds to an IP address) Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the system of Kai with the combination of Hasama and Woolfe et al. such that the system would have been configured to download the first device capabilities first using a URL as described. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to implement a system capable of “increas[ing] the number of opportunities for the user to be aware of the existence of the [capabilities]….[such that] the device-specific functions of the printer can be utilized” (paragraph [0070] of the Kai reference). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN R WALLACE whose telephone number is (571)270-1577. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 8:30-5 PM. 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, Benny Tieu can be reached at 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 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. /JOHN R WALLACE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 07, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 07, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 27, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 06, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 06, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596509
IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS AND NON-TRANSITORY RECORDING MEDIUM STORING COMPUTER READABLE CONTROL PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592080
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, AND RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591953
Image reassembly system, method and computer-readable storage medium applied to magnetic resonance imaging
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584845
A SYSTEM AND METHOD THEREOF FOR REAL-TIME AUTOMATIC LABEL-FREE HOLOGRAPHY-ACTIVATED SORTING OF CELLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585414
METHOD, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR ADJUSTING DOCUMENT STYLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+26.1%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 366 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month