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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US 2021/0200488) in view of Hirai (US 2016/0039234).
Regarding Claim 1, Inoue teaches a control method of an information processing apparatus implemented by an application that extends a function of print data generation software stored in the information processing apparatus (Paragraph 26), comprising:
acquiring a medium type supported by a printing apparatus (Paragraphs 35 and 42, wherein the medium type is acquired);
identifying a display text corresponding to the medium type based on the acquired medium type (Paragraph 53, wherein the wording for displaying the paper type is determined).
Inoue does not teach identifying, based on the acquired medium type, a group to which the medium type belongs;
causing a display unit of the information processing apparatus to display the group in accordance with selection of an object for setting a medium type of a medium to be used for printing; and
controlling to cause the display unit to display the display text based on selection of the group.
Hirai does teach identifying, based on the acquired medium type, a group to which the medium type belongs (Paragraph 75, wherein paper types can be categorized);
causing a display unit of the information processing apparatus to display the group in accordance with selection of an object for setting a medium type of a medium to be used for printing (Paragraphs 134-137, wherein the category can be displayed); and
controlling to cause the display unit to display the display text based on selection of the group (Paragraphs 134-137, wherein based on the category selected the display is updated).
Inoue and Hirai are combinable because they both deal with determination of paper types.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Inoue with the teachings of Hirai for the purpose ensuring the preferred paper is selected by the user (Hirai: Paragraph 7).
Regarding Claim 2, Hirai further teaches wherein the group is identified based on some pieces of information included in the medium type (Paragraph 75, wherein paper types can be categorized).
Inoue and Hirai are combinable because they both deal with determination of paper types.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Inoue with the teachings of Hirai for the purpose ensuring the preferred paper is selected by the user (Hirai: Paragraph 7).
Regarding Claim 3, Inoue further teaches wherein the display text is acquired from the printing apparatus (Paragraph 39, wherein the language information is provided).
Regarding Claim 4, Hirai further teaches wherein whether to display the group is controlled in accordance with a setting by a user (Paragraphs 131 and 132, wherein the user can select a paper type category or a paper type).
Inoue and Hirai are combinable because they both deal with determination of paper types.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Inoue with the teachings of Hirai for the purpose ensuring the preferred paper is selected by the user (Hirai: Paragraph 7).
Regarding Claim 5, Inoue further teaches wherein acquisition of the medium type is performed by communication using a predetermined protocol (Paragraphs 33 and 47, wherein the capability information is obtained through IPP).
Regarding Claim 6, Inoue further teaches wherein the predetermined protocol is Internet Printing Protocol (IPP) (Paragraphs 33 and 47, wherein the capability information is obtained through IPP).
Regarding Claim 7, Inoue further teaches wherein the medium type is a media-type attribute value of the IPP (Paragraphs 33 and 37, wherein the capability information includes paper type).
Regarding Claim 8, Inoue further teaches wherein the print data generation software is software provided by an operating system of the information processing apparatus (Paragraphs 24 and 26, wherein the application is run by the operating system).
Regarding Claim 9, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 10, the limitations are similar to those treated in and are met by the references as discussed in claim 1 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additional cited prior art of A-D, F, H-K all relate to designating printing media types and categorizing the media type.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS PACHOL whose telephone number is (571)270-3433. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8-4.
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, George Eng can be reached at 571-272-7495. 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.
/NICHOLAS PACHOL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699