DETAILED ACTION
Notice of AIA Status
1. 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 Arguments
2. Applicant’s remarks received on 05/11/2026 with respect to the amended independent claims have been acknowledged and are moot in view of a new ground of rejection necessitated by the corresponding amendment. Currently claims 1 and 3-10 are rejected and claim 2 is objected.
Response to Amendment
Double Patenting
3. The terminal disclaimer filed on May 11, 2026, overcomes the non-statutory double patenting over Patent: 11,755,264.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 of this title, 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.
5. Claims 1 and 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al (US Pub: 2013/0201518) (Previously cited reference) and in further view of Itoh (US Pub: 2004/0190049), Kim (US Pub: 2015/0277809), and Baker (WO 91/06071).
Regarding claim 1 (currently amended), Pan et al teaches: An application server comprising: memory; a processor, the processor capable of operating a process comprising: receiving a print request, the print request comprising a print job and a target zone for the print job [fig. 4: 90, p0059 (User 90 could be working on an application server for sending a print request. Location of the user is identified for proximity determination.)]; querying a host server for a list of printers located in the target zone, the host server being different from the application server [fig. 4: 70/12, p0058, p0059]; receiving, from the host server, the list of printers located in the target zone based on respective printer location signals [p0059, abstract (Proximity which reflects a printer location respective to a user is usually determined by using Received Signal Strength Indicator through Bluetooth Low Energy or Ultra-Wideband.)]; selecting a printer from the list of printers in the target zone; and transmitting the print job to the selected printer [p0060, fig. 6: R17, R18].
For a redundant teaching in the same field of endeavor, Itoh further teaches: the print request comprising a print job and a target zone for the print job; querying a host server for a list of printers located in the target zone, the host server being different from the application server [p0065, p0066, p0163]. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of the two to obtain print out location information from a different server per design choice.
Pan et al in view of Itoh does not seem to track printer location signals. In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches: maintaining, in a host server database, current printer zone associations based on respective printer location signals that each include a printer identification, a beacon identification, and a received signal strength indicator for a transmission received by respective printers [p0100, p0101, p0203, fig. 6]. Therefore, given Kim’s teaching on updating printer location based on wireless signal having printer identification, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of all to identify printer zone based on printer location signals in real time for improved accuracy.
Itoh in view of Kim further teaches: receiving, from the host server, the list of printers located in the target zone based on the respective printer location signals [Itoh: p0065; Kim: p0184-p0185].
Pan et al in view of Itoh and Kim does not generate a print request triggered by a weight sensor. In the same field of endeavor, Baker teaches: wherein a weight sensor supporting a bin in the target zone automatically generates and sends the print request to the application server when the weight sensor detects the bin has triggered predetermined threshold or a maximum threshold of the weight sensor [fig. 2: 109-130 (When a monitored stable weight change meets a predetermined condition, a print request is initiated.)]. Therefore, given Baker’s disclosure on monitoring weight signal and waiting for weight change to meet a predetermined condition for initiating printing, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of all to initiate printing request to a printer based on weight signal for selected label printing.
Regarding claim 3 (original), the rationale applied to the rejection of claim 1 has been incorporated herein. Pan et al further teaches: The application server of claim 1, wherein the print request is manually sent by a user [p0004].
Regarding claim 4 (original), the rationale applied to the rejection of claim 1 has been incorporated herein. Pan et al further teaches: The application server of claim 1, wherein the selected printer is selected automatically [p0064 (selected automatically)].
Regarding claim 5 (previously presented), the rationale applied to the rejection of claim 1 has been incorporated herein. Pan et al further teaches: The application server of claim 1, wherein the list of printers in the target zone is maintained on the host server [p0059].
Regarding claim 6 (previously presented), the rationale applied to the rejection of claim 1 has been incorporated herein. Pan et al further teaches: The application server of claim 1, wherein selecting a printer from the list of printers in the target zone is done via a user interface of a mobile computing device [fig. 4, p0050 (Job request and printer selection done by cloud consumers can be implemented and performed on any computing device.)].
Regarding claim 7 (previously presented), the rationale applied to the rejection of claim 1 has been incorporated herein. Pan et al further teaches: The application server of claim 1, wherein the list of printers in the target zone is maintained in a database on the application server [p0058 (The entire system can be on one cloud server/computing environment.)].
Regarding claim 8 (original), the rationale applied to the rejection of claim 1 has been incorporated herein. Pan et al further teaches: The application server of claim 1, wherein the print job comprises instructions for the selected printer to complete a task [abstract].
Regarding claim 9 (original), the rationale applied to the rejection of claim 8 has been incorporated herein. Pan et al or Ikeda does not teach label printing. In the same field of endeavor, Baker further teaches: The application server of claim 8, wherein the task is to print a label [abstract].
6. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al (US Pub: 2013/0201518) (Previously cited reference), Itoh (US Pub: 2004/0190049), Kim (US Pub: 2015/0277809), and Baker (WO 91/06071); and in further view of Ogawa (US Pub: 2022/0137902) (Previously cited reference).
Regarding claim 10 (previously presented), the rationale applied to the rejection of claim 8 has been incorporated herein. Pan et al in view of Itoh, Kim, and Baker does not display an alert. In the same field of endeavor, Ogawa teaches: The application server of claim 8, wherein the task is to display an alert on the user interface of the selected printer [p0046]. Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of all to display an alert on printer user interface for reminding purpose.
Conclusion
7. There is a new ground of rejection necessitated by the corresponding amendment presented in this Office Action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP 706.07(a).
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.
Contact
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FAN ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3751. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00.
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 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.
/Fan Zhang/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2682
Prosecution Insights