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 .
This office action is in response to claims filed 9/10/2025. This office action is Final.
Response to Amendments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10 have been considered but are moot because a new ground of rejection has been made in light of the claim limitations, Haba in view of Thakkar (2018/0077137).
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 1-4, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haba et al, (2017/0098066) in view of Thakkar (2018/0077137).
As per claim 1, Haba discloses a network system comprising:
an image processing apparatus (Haba: para. 0028, MFPs such as #100);
an information processing apparatus including a web browser (Haba: para. 0028, MFP connected to LAN or WAN);
a service providing system that provides a website (Haba: para. 0028, service provision server #300); and
a device management system that gathers and manages security information received from the image processing apparatus (Haba: para. 0028, management server such as #200), wherein
the information processing apparatus, in response to receiving, on the website, a display instruction for security information from a user logging into the website provided by the service providing system via the web browser, transmits a request for authorization information to the service providing system (Haba: para. 0031, 0054, 0057, policy table (i.e. security information)),
the information processing apparatus, in response to receiving authorization information issued by the device management system from the service providing system via the web browser, transmits a security information display request including the authorization information and a specification of a device identifier to the device management system (Haba: para. 0063, 0111-0112, transmits password (i.e. authorization information) and device identifier),
the device management system, when allowing the user logged into the service providing system access to the security information on a basis of verification of the authorization information included in the security information display request, transmits security information display information associated with the device identifier to the information processing apparatus (Haba: 0063, 0111, security information (i.e. password) and device identifier).
Haba does not explicitly disclose the information processing apparatus receives the security information display information from the device management and additionally displays the security display information via the web browser by embedding a screen including the security information display information on the website.
However, analogous art of Thakkar discloses the information processing apparatus receives the security information display information from the device management and additionally displays the security display information via the web browser by embedding a screen including the security information display information on the website (Thakkar: See fig. 1, para. 0010-0012, embedding a screen #20 with security information #22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the information processing apparatus receives the security information display information from the device management and additionally displays the security display information via the web browser by embedding a screen including the security information display information on the website of Thakkar with Haba, the motivation is that it enables a user to provide input, and/or view data it provides a visual presentation of the security information (Thakkar: para. 0048).
As per claim 2, Haba and Thakkar disclose the network system according to claim 1.
Haba further discloses wherein the device management system determines whether or not to allow the user logged into the service providing system to access the security information associated with the device identifier on a basis of a privilege included in the authorization information (Haba: para. 0085-0087, administrator login screen (i.e. determines whether the or not user logged into).
As per claim 3, Haba and Thakkar disclose the network system according to claim 2.
Haba further discloses wherein the device management system determines whether or not to allow the user to access the security information associated with the device identifier on a basis of a display setting of the security information in addition to the authorization information (Haba: para. 0085-0087, administrator login screen (i.e. determines whether the or not user is allowed to access security information).
Same motivation as claim 1 above.
As per claim 4, Haba and Thakkar disclose the network system according to claim 3.
Haba further discloses wherein the device management system determines whether or not to allow the user to access the security information associated with the device identifier on a basis of a setting of a department the user who is logged in belongs to in addition to the authorization information and the display setting of the security information (Haba: para. 0085-0087, security information #91, see fig. 9).
As per claim 9, Haba and Thakkar disclose the network system according to claim 1.
The combination of Haba and Thakkar further discloses wherein the web browser included in the information processing apparatus transmits the security information display request to the device management system (Haba: para. 0054) and displays the screen including the security information display information received from the device management system, by executing on the web browser a script embedded in display information for the website provided from the service providing system (Thakkar: para. 0010-0012, display security image setting screen).
Same motivation as claim 1 above.
As per claim 10, rejected under similar scope as claim 1 above.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haba et al, (2017/0098066) in view of Thakkar (2018/0077137), and further in view of Schneck (2006/0178997).
As per claim 8, Haba and Thakkar disclose the network system according to claim 1.
Haba and Thakkar do not disclose wherein the security information includes at least one category from among default settings diagnosis, tampering detection, user authentication lockout detection, and monitored time period login detection, and the device management system gathers
the at least one category for each device identifier as the security information from the image processing apparatus.
However, analogous art of Schneck discloses wherein the security information includes at least one category from among default settings diagnosis, tampering detection, user authentication lockout detection, and monitored time period login detection, and the device
management system gathers the at least one category for each device identifier as the security information from the image processing apparatus (Schneck: para. 0256, recites “at least one”, tamper detection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the security information includes at least one category from among default settings diagnosis, tampering detection, user authentication lockout detection, and monitored time period login detection, and the device management system gathers the at least
one category for each device identifier as the security information from the image processing apparatus of Schneck, the motivation is it ensures that an unauthorized user cannot intercept data send to a printer (Schneck: para. 0256).
Claim Objections
Claim 5-7 are objected, examiner notes claim 6 is only 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. The prior art of Haba and Thakkar do not disclose the claim limitations of claims 5 and 7.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 JENISE E JACKSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3791. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-3:30pm.
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, Philip J Chea can be reached at (571) 272-3951. 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.
12/11/2025
/J.E.J/Examiner, Art Unit 2499
/PHILIP J CHEA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2499
Prosecution Insights