DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Amendments and response received 02/11/2026 have been entered. Claims 11-24 and 36-51 are currently pending in this application. Claims 11-20, 22, 24, 36-47 and 49-51 have been amended. Amendments and response have been addressed hereinbelow.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 11-24 and 36-51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claims indicate the plurality of items include items corresponding to variable values and an item corresponding to a fixed value. The original disclosure does not explicitly set forth the plurality of items including variable and fixed items although the disclosure mentions items that can be viewed as fixed and other items which can be viewed as variable. The disclosure does not reasonably convey that both “at least one variable item” and “a fixed item” is selected by the user in naming the files.
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 11-24 and 36-51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koji Kobayashi (JP 2013120592 A) in view of Vasily Panferov et al (US 20140122479 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Kobayashi discloses an information processing apparatus (¶ [9]), comprising:
provide information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name (¶ [13]), wherein the setting screen enables a user to select one or more items from a plurality of items usable for the generation of the file name (¶ [19]), the plurality of items including items corresponding to variable values and an item corresponding to a fixed value (¶ [9]), and wherein the setting screen displays a message prompting the user to select at least one item, included in the items corresponding to the variable values, that (a) corresponds to a variable value (¶ [16] setting rule necessitates variable portion input) and (b) makes the file name to be generated unique (¶ [41] directing the user to set rule condition settings for file naming, including detailed condition setting (e.g., item differentiating the filename uniquely; see also ¶ [19]); and
store a file to which a generated file name is assigned into a folder within the information processing apparatus (¶ [36]), (¶ [38-39] named file destination folder).
Kobayashi fails to explicitly disclose the processing apparatus comprising a controller including a processor and a memory.
Panferov, in the same field of endeavor of generating a document name based on selected features providing a unique name (Abstract), teaches the processing apparatus comprising a controller including a processor and a memory (¶ [74]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed for the information processing apparatus as disclosed by Kobayashi which provides information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name to utilize the teachings of Panferov et al which teaches the processing apparatus comprising a controller including a processor and a memory as each element is well known in the art to provide functionality to the processing apparatus in an area of technology where growth is fast and further advancements are not easily foreseen.
Regarding claim 12, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the controller is further configured to:
store the one or more items, including the at least one item selected by the user (¶ [41] storing rule information comprising selected optional items); and
generate the file name by using values corresponding to the stored one or more items, wherein the at least one item makes the file name of each of the stored filed unique (see rejection of claim 11).
Regarding claim 13, Kobayashi discloses an information processing apparatus (see rejection of claim 11), comprising:
a controller including a processor and a memory (see rejection of claim 11), the controller configured to:
provide information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name, wherein the setting screen enables a user to select one or more items from a plurality of items usable for the generation of the file name (see rejection of claim 11), the plurality of items including items corresponding to variable values and an item corresponding to a fixed value, and wherein the setting screen displays a message prompting the user to select one item, included in the items corresponding to the variable values, that (a) correspond to a variable value and (b) makes the file name to be generated unique (see rejection of claim 11); and
store the one or more items, including the at least one item, selected by the user (see rejection of claim 12);
generate file names by using one or more values corresponding to the stored one or more items (¶ [8] file naming for multiple electronic files); and
store files to which generated file names are assigned into a folder within the information processing apparatus (see rejection of claim 11), identified by the user to store the files (¶ [16]),
wherein the at least one item makes each of the file names of the stored files unique among the file names (¶ [19]).
Regarding claim 14, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11), wherein one of the at least one item that (a) corresponds to the variable value [and] (b) makes the file name to be generated unique is an item related to date (¶ [15]).
Kobayashi fails to explicitly disclose an item that makes the file name unique includes a time.
Panferov et al teaches an item that makes the file name unique includes a time (¶ [41]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed for the information processing apparatus as disclosed by Kobayashi which provides information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name to utilize the teachings of Panferov et al which teaches an item that makes the file name unique includes a time to allow more useful names of files with a minimal amount of effort required by a user.
Regarding claim 15, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11).
Kobayashi fails to explicitly disclose wherein the file to which the generated file name is assigned is generated based on data generated by scanning a document with a scanner .
Panferov et al teaches the file to which the generated file name is assigned is generated based on data generated by scanning a document with a scanner (¶ [59]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed for the information processing apparatus as disclosed by Kobayashi which provides information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name to utilize the teachings of Panferov et al which teaches the file to which the generated file name is assigned is generated based on data generated by scanning a document with a scanner as a scanner provides a means for accumulating a large number of documents quickly and efficiently.
Regarding claim 16, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11).
Kobayashi fails to explicitly disclose wherein the file to which the generated file name is assigned is generated based on data received via a facsimile.
Panferov et al teaches the file to which the generated file name is assigned is generated based on data received via a facsimile (¶ [65]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed for the information processing apparatus as disclosed by Kobayashi which provides information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name to utilize the teachings of Panferov et al which teaches the file to which the generated file name is assigned is generated based on data received via a facsimile as a facsimile communication provides a means for transmitting a large number of documents quickly and efficiently.
Regarding claim 17, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11), wherein one of the at least one item that (a) corresponds to the variable value (b) makes the file name to be generated unique is an item related to an identification number (¶ [26]).
Regarding claim 18, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11).
Kobayashi fails to explicitly disclose wherein the information processing apparatus is an apparatus equipped with a scanner.
Panferov et al teaches wherein the information processing apparatus is an apparatus equipped with a scanner (¶ [73]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed for the information processing apparatus as disclosed by Kobayashi which provides information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name to utilize the teachings of Panferov et al which teaches the information processing apparatus is an apparatus equipped with a scanner as a scanner provides a means for accumulating a large number of documents quickly and efficiently.
Regarding claim 19, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11).
Kobayashi fails to explicitly disclose wherein the information processing apparatus is an apparatus equipped with a facsimile.
Panferov et al teaches the information processing apparatus is an apparatus equipped with a facsimile (¶ [73] and ¶ [65]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed for the information processing apparatus as disclosed by Kobayashi which provides information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name to utilize the teachings of Panferov et al which teaches the information processing apparatus is an apparatus equipped with a facsimile as a facsimile communication provides a means for transmitting a large number of documents quickly and efficiently.
Regarding claim 20, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11).
Kobayashi fails to explicitly disclose wherein the file to which the generated file name is attached is a PDF file.
Panferov et al teaches wherein the file to which the generated file name is attached is a PDF file (¶ [24]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed for the information processing apparatus as disclosed by Kobayashi which provides information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name to utilize the teachings of Panferov et al which teaches the file to which the generated file name is attached is a PDF file as a PDF file is easily stored, retrieved and transmitted in electronic format.
Regarding claim 21, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11, wherein a name of the folder identified by the user includes a character string input by the user (¶ [19]).
Regarding claim 22, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11), wherein the at least one item that (a) corresponds to the variable value (b) makes the file name to be generated unique is at least one of an item related to date and time and an item related to an identification number (see rejection of claim; see also ¶ [43] wherein a “serial number” may be added).
Regarding claim 23, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11).
Kobayashi fails to explicitly disclose wherein, a name of the folder identified by the user includes a date
Panferov et al teaches wherein, a name of the folder identified by the user includes a date (¶ [29] and ¶ [64] folder named based on or more tags; tags include dates).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed for the information processing apparatus as disclosed by Kobayashi which provides information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name to utilize the teachings of Panferov et al which teaches a name of the folder identified by the user includes a date to allow more useful names of folders with a minimal amount of effort required by a user.
Regarding claim 24, Kobayashi discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 13, wherein making each name of the generated file names unique is to make each name of the generated file names being different form each other (¶ [19]).
Regarding claim 36, Kobayashi discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program for causing one or more processors to execute (see rejection of claim 11; processor and memory executing program instructions) a method of controlling an information processing apparatus, the method comprising:
providing information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name, wherein the setting screen enables a user to select one or more items from a plurality of items usable for the generation of the file name, the plurality of items including items corresponding to variable values and an item corresponding to a fixed value, and wherein the setting screen displays a message prompting the user to select at least one item, included in the items corresponding to the variable values, that (a) corresponds to a variable value and (b) makes the file name to be generated unique (see rejection of claim 11); and
storing a file to which the generated file name is assigned into a folder, within the information processing apparatus, identified by the user to store the file (see rejection of claim 11).
Regarding claim 37, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36 (see rejection of claim 36), the method further comprising:
storing the one or more items, including the at least one item selected by the user (see rejection of claim 12); and
generating the file name by using values corresponding to the stored one or more items (see rejection of claim 12),
wherein the at least one item makes the file name of each of the stored files (see rejection of claim 12).
Regarding claim 38, Kobayashi discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program for causing one or more processors to execute a method of controlling an information processing apparatus (¶ [17-18] software implemented in PC environment; see rejection of claim 13), the method comprising:
providing information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name, wherein the setting screen enables a user to select one or more items from a plurality of items usable for the generation of the file name, the plurality of items including items corresponding to variable values and an item corresponding to a fixed value and wherein the setting screen displays a message prompting the user to select at least one item, included in the items corresponding to the variable values, that (a) corresponds to a variable value and (b) makes the file name to be generated unique (see rejection of claim 13); and
storing the one or more items, including the at least one item, selected by the user (see rejection of claim 13);
generating file names by using one or more values corresponding to the stored one or more items (see rejection of claim 13); and
storing files to which generated file names are assigned into a folder, within the information processing apparatus, identified by the user to store the files (see rejection of claim 13),
wherein the at least one item makes each of the file names of the stored files unique among the file names (see rejection of claim 13).
Regarding claim 39, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36 (see rejection of claim 36), wherein one of the at least one item that (a) corresponds to the variable value (b) makes the file name to be generated unique is an item related to date and time (see rejection of claim14).
Regarding claim 40, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36 (see rejection of claim 36), wherein the file to which the generated file name is assigned is generated based on data generated by scanning a document with a scanner (see rejection of claim 15).
Regarding claim 41, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36 (see rejection of claim 36), wherein the file to which the generated file name is assigned is generated based on data received via a facsimile (see rejection of claim 16).
Regarding claim 42, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36 (see rejection of claim 36), wherein one of the at least one item that (a) corresponds to the variable value (b) makes the file name to be generated unique is an item related to an identification number (see rejection of claim 17).
Regarding claim 43, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36 (see rejection of claim 36), wherein the information processing apparatus is an apparatus equipped with a scanner (see rejection of claim 18).
Regarding claim 44, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36 (see rejection of claim 36), wherein the information processing apparatus is an apparatus equipped with a facsimile (see rejection of claim 19).
Regarding claim 45, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36 (see rejection of claim 36), wherein the file to which the generated file name is attached is a PDF file (see rejection of claim 20).
Regarding claim 46, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36, wherein a name of the folder identified by the user includes a character string input by the user (see rejection of claim 21).
Regarding claim 47, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36 (see rejection of claim 36), wherein the at least one item that (a) corresponds to the variable value (b) makes the file name to be generated unique is at least one of an item related to date and time and an item related to identification number (see rejection of claim 22).
Regarding claim 48, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 36 (see rejection of claim 36), wherein a name of the folder identified by the user includes a date (see rejection of claim 23).
Regarding claim 49, Kobayashi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 38 (see rejection of claim 38), wherein making each name of the generated file names unique is to make each name of the generated file names being different from each other (see rejection of claim 24).
Regarding claim 50, Kobayashi discloses a method of controlling an information processing apparatus (see rejection of claim 11), comprising:
providing information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name, wherein the setting screen enables a user to select one or more items from a plurality of items usable for the generation of the file name, the plurality of items including items corresponding to variable values and an item corresponding to a fixed value, and wherein the setting screen displays a message prompting the user to select at least one item, included in the items corresponding to the variable values, that (a) corresponds to a variable value and (b) makes the file name to be generated unique (see rejection of claim 11); and
storing a file to which a generated file name is assigned into a folder, within the information processing apparatus, identified by the user to store the file (see rejection of claim 11).
Regarding claim 51, Kobayashi discloses a method of controlling an information processing apparatus (see rejection of claim 13), comprising:
providing information of a setting screen related to generation of a file name, wherein the setting screen enables a user to select one or more items from a plurality of items usable for the generation of the file name, the plurality of items including items corresponding to variable values and an item corresponding to a fixed value, and wherein the setting screen displays a message prompting the user to select at least one item, included in the items corresponding to the variable values, that (a) corresponds to a variable value and (b) makes the file name to be generated unique (see rejection of claim 13); and
storing the one or more items, including the at least one item, selected by the user (see rejection of claim 13);
generating file names by using one or more values corresponding to the stored one or more items (see rejection of claim 13); and
storing files to which generated file names are assigned into a folder, within the information processing apparatus, identified by the user to store the files (see rejection of claim 13),
wherein the at least one item makes each of the file names of the stored files unique among the file names (see rejection of claim 13).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s remarks: Kobayashi, Panferov, and Matsumoto fail to teach or suggest all of the recited features of amended independent claim 11. Paragraph [0019] of Kobayashi discloses displaying a rule condition setting screen that arranges items such as ISO document number and document name. As described in paragraph [0049] of Kobayashi, the rule condition setting screen displays "rule condition setting" for setting a condition when a file name is given, with [item type], [condition designation], and [detailed condition] being set for each row. As best understood by Applicant, Kobayashi merely discloses displaying a screen for setting a condition when a file name is given. However, Kobayashi is silent regarding displaying a screen which enables a user to select one or more items for the generation of the file name from a plurality of items usable, including items corresponding to variable values and an item corresponding to a fixed value. Therefore, Kobayashi fails to teach or suggest "the plurality of items including items corresponding to variable values and an item corresponding to a fixed value," and "wherein the setting screen displays a message prompting the user to select at least one item, included in the items corresponding to the variable values, that (a) corresponds to a variable value and (b) makes the file name to be generated unique," as recited in amended independent claim 11.
Panferov relates to "methods for determining a type and semi-unique features of electronic files." (Panferov, Abstract.) As best understood by Applicant, Panferov merely discloses automatic renaming of an electronic file based on the contents of the electronic file. However, Panferov is silent regarding displaying a screen enabling a user to select one or more items for the generation of the file name from a plurality of items usable including items corresponding to variable values and an item corresponding to a fixed value.
Examiner’s response: Kobayashi, as shown in the rejections above, teaches the user utilizing a “user menu” on a screen for setting file naming rule items which provide unique names for each file to be stored. The prior art indicates that the standard rule comprises a fixed part constituting a fixed item and a variable part consisting of a predetermined arbitrary item which can be changed by the user. The user is able to change/delete settings from a plurality of settings to establish the file naming rule. The selectable settings are ”items” by which the documents are automatically named and filed.
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 JAMARES Q WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571) 270-1585. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-4:30pm.
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, 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.
/JAMARES Q WASHINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681
April 3, 2026