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 .
Response to Applicant’s Amendments / Arguments Regarding 35 U.S.C. § 112 & 35 U.S.C. § 103
The applicant’s remarks, on page 1 of the response / amendment, the applicant argues that the present amendments overcome the 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejections. The examiner asserts that the present amendments fail to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) and directs the applicant to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) included below. Thus, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) is maintained.
The applicant’s remarks, on pages 2-5 of the response / amendment, the applicant argues the features which allegedly distinguish over the previously cited references cited in the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections.
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Amended claim 5 recites: “transmit the (i) setting information of the first electronic apparatus encrypted with the encryption key and (ii) information on the first electronic apparatus to the information processing apparatus,” (emphasis added) where “information on the first electronic apparatus” in claim 5 is referring to “information on the first electronic apparatus” of claim 1. After review of the specification and the claims, the examiner asserts that “information on the first electronic apparatus” of claim 5 is the same as “information on the first electronic apparatus” of claim 1. Therefore, proper antecedent basis requires that claim 5 instead recite, “transmit the (i) setting information of the first electronic apparatus encrypted with the encryption key and (ii) the information on the first electronic apparatus to information processing apparatus.” (emphasis added). The examiner will instead interpret this feature of claim 5, as recited above, including the bolded term, not included in the applicant’s amendments. Appropriate correction of claim 5 is required.
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.
Claims 1-10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180351742 to Yamazaki et al. (hereinafter Yamazaki), in view of in view of US 20190114122 to Tani (hereinafter Tani).
Regarding claim 1, Yamazaki teaches,
An information processing apparatus (fig. 5, server 30) for supporting migration of setting information from a first electronic apparatus to a second electronic apparatus, (fig. 5, first electronic device 40-1, second electronic device 40-2) comprising circuitry configured to: (Abstract and [0005] teaches a first and second electronic device, where setting information is provided from the first electronic device to the second device. See also fig. 5, discussed further below, including discussion of [0119-120] teaching circuitry.) (Applicant’s fig. 1 shows that the information processing apparatus 10 is separate from the first (image forming) electrical apparatus 101 and second (image forming) electrical apparatus 102.)
store, in a memory, a conversion rule including a rule for converting setting information corresponding to the first electronic apparatus; (fig. 5 and [119-120] teaching data conversion unit 36 and conversion table 39b. See also, [0084-85].)
acquire encrypted setting information and information on the first electronic apparatus from the first electronic apparatus; (Abstract, [0005], and [0119-120] teach first electronic device providing encrypted setting information. [0119-120] teaches providing encrypted setting information to server. [0120] and [0123] teach model number (“information”) of an electronic device being provided. See also [0127-128] teaching the acquisition of model specific profile 7, also shown in fig. 5. )
receive information on the second electronic apparatus; and ([0127-128] teaching the acquisition of model specific profile 7, also shown in fig. 5. See also [0120] and [0123] discussed above. See also [0144] teaching model of second electronic device being received.)
transmit the encrypted setting information ([0145] teaches the setting information being received by the second electronic device 40-2 of fig. 5, where the setting information is already converted by the server. See also, Abstract, [0005], and [0119-120], as discussed above.)
Yamazaki fails to teach transmitting the conversion rule to the second electronic device that corresponds to the first electronic device,
However, Tani teaches,
transmit the encrypted setting information and the conversion rule corresponding to the first electronic apparatus to the second electronic apparatus, (Abstract & fig. 1 teach apparatus setting information 12a & 12b. [0034] teaches apparatus setting information 12 includes information of data structure / “conversion rule”. [0060] teaches encoding / decoding unit 124 encodes the document file (10a), which includes apparatus setting information 12a (with data structure information), before sending to the other (second) image forming apparatus. [0054] teaches that encoding / decoding unit 124 perform encryption / decryption.) said encrypted setting information being converted by the second electronic apparatus based on the conversion rule. ([0029] teaches the second (another) image forming apparatus converts first document into second document. See also [0039] Abstract & [0040] teach converting apparatus setting information 12a being converted into apparatus setting information 12b having a data structure processable by another (second) image forming apparatus / migration destination apparatus.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Yamazaki, which teaches first and second devices (e.g., printers) which provide model information to a server, and the first device provides setting data to a server, where the server provides the setting data to the second device in a converted form based on the models of the first and second devices, and also teaches encryption of the setting data (fig. 5 & [0118-120]), with Tani, which also teaches the setting data and data structure of the setting data of a printer, and conversion of the setting data between two different printers by using the data structure of the setting data (Abstract & fig. 2a), and additionally teaches sending the encrypted setting information and data structure (“conversion rule”) ([0034]) to another (second) image forming device where the second image forming device converts the setting information ([0060]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Yamazaki with the added ability to provide the encrypted setting data and conversion data to the second printer so that the second printer may perform the conversion, as taught by Tani, for the purpose of increasing security by providing setting and conversion data to the printer, in an encrypted form, and to increase computational / network efficiency by allowing the receiving (second) printer to perform the conversions because it is most aware of its own data formatting, thus saving, server processing and network resources because the first / sending printer is not required to receive information about the second / receiving printers formatting.
Regarding claim 2, Yamazaki and Tani teach,
The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein:
Yamazaki teaches,
the first electronic apparatus is a first image forming apparatus; and ([0003-4] teach that the electronic devices are printers.)
the second electronic apparatus is a second image forming apparatus of a model different from a model of the first image forming apparatus. ([0003-4] teach that the electronic devices are printers. [0119-120] teach converting settings from a first electronic device to a second electronic device, based on model of devices.)
Regarding claim 3, Yamazaki and Tani teach,
The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein:
Yamazaki teaches,
the information on the first electronic apparatus includes information that specifies the model of the first image forming apparatus; and ([0003-4] teach that the electronic devices are printers. [0119-120] teach converting settings from a first electronic device to a second electronic device, based on model of devices.)
the information on the second electronic apparatus includes information that specifies the model of the second image forming apparatus. ([0003-4] teach that the electronic devices are printers. [0119-120] teach converting settings from a first electronic device to a second electronic device, based on model of devices.)
Regarding claim 4, Yamazaki and Tani teach,
The information processing apparatus according to claim 3,
Yamazaki teaches,
wherein the conversion rule includes conversion information for converting the setting information on a first model that is the model of the first image forming apparatus into setting information of a second model that is the model of the second image forming apparatus. (fig. 5 and [0119-120] teach the conversion of setting information based on models of devices. Also, [0127-128] teaching the acquisition of model specific profile 7, also shown in fig. 5. See also [0120] and [0123] discussed above. See also [0144] teaching model of second electronic device being received.)
Regarding claim 5, Yamazaki and Tani teach,
An information processing system comprising:
the information processing apparatus according to claim 1; and (see rejection of claim 1 above.)
Yamazaki teaches,
a first electronic apparatus (fig. 5, first electronic device 40-1) to communicate with the information processing apparatus (fig. 5, server 30) via a communication network, including first circuitry configured to: (fig. 5)
receive an input of an encryption key for encrypting setting information of the first electronic apparatus; and ([0159] teaches encryption keys being entered at the first electronic device.)
transmit (i) the setting information of the first electronic apparatus encrypted with the encryption key and (ii) information on the first electronic apparatus to the information processing apparatus. ([0169] teaches transmitting the encrypted setting information and model profile 7. [0172] teaches transmitting the encryption key to server 30 (“information processing apparatus”).)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Yamazaki, which teaches first and second devices (e.g., printers) which provide model information to a server, and the first device provides setting data to a server, where the server provides the setting data to the second device in a converted form based on the models of the first and second devices, and also teaches encryption of the setting data (fig. 5 & [0118-120]), with Tani, which also teaches the setting data and data structure of the setting data of a printer, and teaches conversion of the setting data between two different printers by using the data structure of the setting data (Abstract, fig. 2a, & [0029]), and additionally teaches sending the encrypted setting information and data structure (“conversion rule”) ([0034]) to another (second) image forming device where the second image forming device converts the setting information ([0060]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Yamazaki with the added ability to provide the encrypted setting data and conversion data to the second printer so that the second printer may perform the conversion, as taught by Tani, for the purpose of increasing security by providing setting and conversion data to the printer, in an encrypted form, and to increase computational / network efficiency by allowing the receiving (second) printer to perform the conversions because it is most aware of its own data formatting, thus saving, server processing and network resources because the first / sending printer is not required to receive information about the second / receiving printers formatting.
Regarding claim 6, Yamazaki and Tani teach,
An information processing system comprising:
the information processing apparatus according to claim 1; and (see rejection of claim 1 above.)
a second electronic apparatus to communicate with the information processing apparatus via a communication network, including second circuitry configured to: (Yamazaki, fig. 5, second electronic device 40-2)
receive the encrypted setting information and the conversion rule from the information processing apparatus; (Yamazaki, ([0145] teaches the setting information being received by the second electronic device 40-2 of fig. 5. ) (Tani, [0060] teaches sending the apparatus setting data 12a of the first image forming apparatus to the second image forming apparatus, which is used for conversion)
receive an input of an encryption key for the encrypted setting information; (Yamazaki, [0159] teaches encryption keys being entered at the first electronic device. See also rejection of claim 5.)
decrypt the encrypted setting information with the encryption key to obtain first setting information; and (Yamazaki, Abstract teaches the second electronic device decrypting setting information, and [0178] teaches second electronic device decrypting the setting information.)
set second setting information converted from the first setting information with the conversion rule in the second electronic apparatus. (Tani, Abstract, teaches “convert the first data structure of the setting information in the first document file into the second data structure of the setting information processable by the information processing apparatus when determining that the first data structure and the second data structure are different.”)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Yamazaki, which teaches first and second devices (e.g., printers) which provide model information to a server, and the first device provides setting data to a server, where the server provides the setting data to the second device in a converted form based on the models of the first and second devices, and also teaches encryption of the setting data (fig. 5 & [0118-120]), with Tani, which also teaches the setting data and data structure of the setting data of a printer, and teaches conversion of the setting data between two different printers by using the data structure of the setting data (Abstract, fig. 2a, & [0029]), and additionally teaches sending the encrypted setting information and data structure (“conversion rule”) ([0034]) to another (second) image forming device where the second image forming device converts the setting information ([0060]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Yamazaki with the added ability to provide the encrypted setting data and conversion data to the second printer so that the second printer may perform the conversion, as taught by Tani, for the purpose of increasing security by providing setting and conversion data to the printer, in an encrypted form, and to increase computational / network efficiency by allowing the receiving (second) printer to perform the conversions because it is most aware of its own data formatting, thus saving, server processing and network resources because the first / sending printer is not required to receive information about the second / receiving printers formatting.
Regarding claim 7, Yamazaki and Tani teach,
An information processing method performed by an information processing apparatus for supporting migration of setting information from a first electronic apparatus to a second electronic apparatus, the method comprising:
storing, in a memory, a conversion rule including a rule for converting setting information corresponding to a first electronic apparatus;
acquiring encrypted setting information and information on the first electronic apparatus from the first electronic apparatus;
receiving information on a second electronic apparatus; and
transmitting the encrypted setting information and the conversion rule corresponding to the first electronic apparatus to the second electronic apparatus, said encrypted setting information being converted by the second electronic apparatus based on the conversion rule.
Claim 7 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 8, Yamazaki teaches,
A non-transitory recording medium storing a plurality of program codes which, when executed by one or more processors, causes the one or more processors to perform a method, the method comprising: ([0090] teaches memory operating with processors and a communication network to execute instructions.)
Yamazaki and Tani teach,
storing, in a memory, a conversion rule including a rule for converting setting information corresponding to a first electronic apparatus;
acquiring encrypted setting information and information on the first electronic apparatus from the first electronic apparatus;
receiving information on a second electronic apparatus; and
transmitting the encrypted setting information and the conversion rule corresponding to the first electronic apparatus to the second electronic apparatus, said encrypted setting information being converted by the second electronic apparatus based on the conversion rule.
Claim 8 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, Yamazaki and Tani teach,
The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the circuitry is configured to:
acquire, from among the conversion rules, a conversion rule corresponding to the first electronic apparatus, and (Tani, Abstract & fig. 1 teach apparatus setting information 12a & 12b. [0034] teaches apparatus setting information 12 includes information of data structure / “conversion rule”.)
transmit the conversion rule corresponding to the first electronic apparatus to the second electronic apparatus. ([0060] teaches encoding / decoding unit 124 encodes the document file (10a), which includes apparatus setting information 12a (with data structure information), before sending to the other (second) image forming apparatus.)
Regarding claim 10, Yamazaki and Tani teach,
The information processing apparatus according to claim 9,
wherein the conversion rule includes identification information for identifying a migration source of the setting information, and (Tani, [0061] teaches apparatus information identifies the model number of the different apparatuses that is used to identity differences in the data structures of the apparatus setting information. See also [0186].) (Yamazaki, [0165] teaches model specific data used for setting information.)
wherein the circuitry is configured to:
acquire the conversion rule corresponding to the first electronic apparatus based on the identification information. (Tani, [0186] teaches using the identification number of the model of the image forming apparatus, to determine if conversion is needed. Thus, if no conversion is needed, no further processing is performed. Otherwise see conversion of data structures discussed in the Abstract.)
Regarding claim 12, Yamazaki and Tani teach,
The information processing apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein the encrypted setting information includes a password or authentication information related to user settings, (Yamazaki, [0115] teaches using a password for the encryption.)
wherein the second electronic apparatus comprises an image forming apparatus configured to decrypt the encrypted setting information and apply the converted setting information, and (Tani, [0054-55] teach decoding unit 124 performing decryption. Tani, [0039] teaches second device performing the conversion.)
wherein the conversion of the encrypted setting information based on the conversion rule is performed by the second electronic apparatus after the encrypted setting information is decrypted using an encryption key input to the second electronic apparatus. (Tani, [0054-55] teach decoding unit 124 performing decryption.) (Yamazaki, Abstract teaches decryption. [0159-160] teaches the encryption / decryption key.)
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki, in view of Tani, in view of US 20040193871 to Seshadri (hereinafter Seshadri), in view of US 20220026594 to Mohanty et al. (hereinafter Mohanty).
Regarding claim 11, Yamazaki and Tani teach,
The information processing apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein the circuitry is configured to:
acquire, from the first electronic apparatus, the encrypted setting information and (As discussed above in the rejection of claim 1, both Yamazaki and Tani teach sending of setting / configuration information that is encrypted or unencrypted.)
wherein the conversion rule includes a first conversion rule for converting the encrypted setting information and a second conversion rule for converting the unencrypted setting information, and (Tani, as discussed above, uses the data structure / “conversion rules” to convert the data. It is inherent that some of the setting data is converted with part of the data structure, and another portion of the setting data is converted with another portion of the data structure. See discussion of conversion of part of the data below.)
transmit the . (Tani, Abstract & fig. 1 teach apparatus setting information 12a & 12b. [0034] teaches apparatus setting information 12 includes information of data structure / “conversion rule”. [0060] teaches encoding / decoding unit 124 encodes the document file (10a), which includes apparatus setting information 12a (with data structure information), before sending to the other (second) image forming apparatus. [0054] teaches that encoding / decoding unit 124 perform encryption / decryption.)
wherein the circuitry is configured to:
convert the unencrypted setting information based on the second conversion rule, and (Tani, [0039] teaches the second image formatting device performs the converting. [0043] teaches the first image forming device / migration source performing the converting. Both conversions are based on the data structure / “conversion rule”, as discussed above in the rejection of claim 1.)
Yamazaki and Tani fail to teach data sending a data that is partially encrypted and partially un-encrypted,
However, Seshadri teaches,
acquire, from the first electronic apparatus, the encrypted ([0035] teaches transmitting data where a portion of the data is encrypted and another portion of the data is unencrypted, based on security levels taught in [0033].)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Yamazaki, which teaches first and second devices (e.g., printers) which provide model information to a server, and the first device provides setting data to a server, where the server provides the setting data to the second device in a converted form based on the models of the first and second devices, and also teaches encryption of the setting data (fig. 5 & [0118-120]), with Tani, which also teaches the setting data and data structure of the setting data of a printer, and conversion of the setting data between two different printers by using the data structure of the setting data (Abstract & fig. 2a), and additionally teaches sending the encrypted setting information and data structure (“conversion rule”) ([0034]) to another (second) image forming device where the second image forming device converts the setting information ([0060]), with Seshadri, which also teaches transmission of encrypted data (Abstract), and additionally teaches partial encryption of data (Title & [0035]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Yamazaki and Tani with the added ability to partially encrypt data that is transmitted, as taught by Seshadri, for the purpose of increasing computational efficiency by reducing the amount of encryption while maintaining security by protecting data with higher security needs.
Yamazaki, Tani and Seshadri fail to teach partially converting a portion of data at a first device while not converting other data and sending the converted and un-converted data together,
However, Mohanty teaches,
wherein the circuitry is configured to:
transmit the converted . (Abstract, teaches partially converting data using configurations and parameters, and transmitting the data.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Yamazaki, which teaches first and second devices (e.g., printers) which provide model information to a server, and the first device provides setting data to a server, where the server provides the setting data to the second device in a converted form based on the models of the first and second devices, and also teaches encryption of the setting data (fig. 5 & [0118-120]), with Tani, which also teaches the setting data and data structure of the setting data of a printer, and conversion of the setting data between two different printers by using the data structure of the setting data (Abstract & fig. 2a), and additionally teaches sending the encrypted setting information and data structure (“conversion rule”) ([0034]) to another (second) image forming device where the second image forming device converts the setting information ([0060]), with Mohanty, which also teaches conversion of data using different standards (Abstract), and additionally teaches partially converting the data and transmitting the data over a network (Abstract & fig. 2). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Yamazaki and Tani with the added ability to partially convert data and providing the data, which is partially converted, to another device, as taught by Mohanty, for the purpose of increasing computational efficiency by providing partial conversion before sending data.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BRIAN WILLIAM AVERY whose telephone number is (571)272-3942. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM.
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, Farid Homayounmehr can be reached on (571)272-3739.
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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/B.W.A./
/FARID HOMAYOUNMEHR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2495