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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a generation computer, a conversion computer, and a printing control computer, in claim 1; the generation computer, in claims 2-3, the conversion computer, in claims 7-8, and the printing control computer, in claim 9.
In figure 2 (i.e., user terminal 10) and in paragraph 0027, i.e., “the processor 10a of the user terminal 10 functions as a generation computer”, is/are interpreted to read on: a generation computer, in claim 1; and the generation computer, in claims 2-3.
In figure 2 (i.e., user terminal 10) and in paragraph 0029, i.e., “the processor 10a of the user terminal 10 functions as a conversion computer”, is/are interpreted to read on: a conversion computer, in claim 1; and the generation computer, in claims 7-8.
In par. 0037, “the processor 20a of the printer 20 functions as a printing control computer” and in figure 3 (i.e., printer 20), is/are interpreted to read on: a printing control computer, in claim 1; and the printing control computer, in claim 9.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NAKAMURA (US 2019/0332905 A1).
As to claim 1, NAKAMURA discloses a printing system (see figure 1) comprising: a generation computer (see figure 1, i.e., PC) configured to receive a print image to be printed (see paragraphs 0052, 0053 and 0055, i.e., printing image data) and an operation instruction (see pars 52, 53 and 55, i.e., the cutting command) and generate a processing image (i.e., generated printing image data), which is an image obtained by adding an instruction image (i.e., the cutting command is added to the generated printing image data) corresponding to the operation instruction to the print image; a conversion computer (see figure 1) configured to receive the processing image and convert the processing image into a processing job (see figure 6, S102, and see par 32, i.e., printer driver 28 requests the OS 32 to convert the vector-format image data, which is received together with the print command, to bitmap-format image data, and see pars 52, 53, 54, 55, i.e., driver 28 generates the printing image data, adds the cutting command to the printing image data and transmits the same to the printer); and a printing control computer (see figure 1, i.e., printer 50) configured to receive the processing job, discriminate the instruction image (i.e., the cutting command) from an image of the processing job, and operate according to the operation instruction corresponding to the instruction image to cause a printing unit to print the print image (see figures 1, 6, 7, S128, 8, S136-S142 and figures 10A, 10B and 10C).
As to claim 2, NAKAMURA discloses wherein the generation computer (see figure 1, i.e., PC) generates the processing image in which the instruction image is added to a position corresponding to the operation instruction (see par 0074, and see figures 10A-C, i.e., boundary line 86 and/or particular mark 88).
As to claim 3, NAKAMURA discloses wherein the generation computer (see figure 1, i.e., PC) adds the instruction image to a position that the user designated with any operation such as click, tap, or drag (see par 0024, i.e., “input I/F 18 an interface through which user operations are input and includes a keyboard, a mouse and the like. It should be noted that the input I/F 18 needs not be limited to the keyboard and the like. That is, the input I/F 18 may be a touch panel overlaid on a display screen of the LCD 16.” And pars 0027 and 0028, i.e., “The PC 10 operated by the user accesses the server 52 to obtain image data representing an image to be printed on commodity labels 70.” And “The user obtains image data of the commodity labels 70 corresponding to the number of commodities subject to selling, namely barcode image data representing barcode images corresponding to the number of commodities subject to selling from the server 52.” And par 0030 “When a print button 82 is operated on the barcode image display screen 80”).
As to claim 4, NAKAMURA discloses wherein the instruction image is a frame line of a predetermined type indicating a printing range (see figures 10A, 10B and 10C).
As to claim 5, NAKAMURA discloses wherein the instruction image is a frame line indicating a range of a variable section in which a number of rows can be variable and is a frame line of a type different from the frame line indicating the printing range (see figures 10A-C).
As to claim 6, NAKAMURA discloses wherein the instruction image is a barcode or a two-dimensional code (see par 0054, i.e., “The printer driver 28 performs the same process (S126-S130) repeatedly to generate the printing image data for the barcode image 72 of two commodities B and add the cutting command to the generated printing image data.”).
As to claim 9, NAKAMURA discloses wherein the printing control computer (see figure 1, i.e., printer 50) does not cause the printing unit (see figure 1, i.e., printer 50) to print the instruction image (i.e., the cutting command) included in the image of the processing job (i.e., the printing image data).
As to claim 10, NAKAMURA discloses a processing image production method comprising: receiving a print image to be printed (see paragraphs 0052, 0053 and 0055, i.e., printing image data) and an operation instruction (see pars 52, 53 and 55, i.e., the cutting command); and generating a processing image (i.e., generated printing image data) obtained by adding an instruction image (i.e., the cutting command is added to the generated printing image data) corresponding to the operation instruction (see pars 52, 53 and 55, i.e., the cutting command) to the print image (see paragraphs 0052, 0053 and 0055, i.e., printing image data).
As to claim 11, NAKAMURA discloses a print production method comprising: receiving a processing image obtained by adding an instruction image corresponding to an operation instruction to a print image (see pars 52-53 and 55, i.e., printing image data, and the cutting command, and generated printing image data); discriminating the instruction image from the processing image (see par 52, 53 and 55, the cutting command is added to the printing image data and see figures 10A-C, i.e., a boundary line 86 and/or particular mark 88, see par 0074); and operating according to the operation instruction corresponding to the instruction image to cause a printing unit to print the print image (see pars 52, 53, 55 and 74, printer 50 prints the print image, i.e., a receipt sheet, and the instruction image is the cutting command, i.e., a boundary line 86 and/or particular mark 88).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 are 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding dependent claim 7, the closest prior art of record, namely, NAKAMURA (US 2019/0332905 A1), discussed above, does not disclose, teach or suggest, wherein the conversion computer does not include a function of adding, to the processing job, as a command, the operation instruction of a nonstandard type that a specific printer driver can add as a command, as recited in dependent claim 7.
Claim 8 is objected to because claim 8 is dependent on objected to claim 7 discussed above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Oyama et al. (US 2014/0285844 A1) teaches POS terminal (1) connected to printer (2), and in a POS terminal (1), commands are added to the print data output from the application, and linear codes and 2D codes can be printed (see par 0056).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOV POPOVICI whose telephone number is (571)272-4083. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am- 4:30 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, 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.
/DOV POPOVICI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681