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: The “acquisition unit”, “identification unit”, “setting unit”, “correction unit”, and “printing control unit” in claims 1-8 and 10.
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. The “acquisition unit”, “identification unit”, “setting unit”, “correction unit”, and “printing control unit” are being interpreted to cover the corresponding processor 31a described in the specification (par. 50-59) 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
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kanno (US 20210004186 A1).
Referring to claims 1, 5, 6, and 8:
Kanno discloses a printing control apparatus (par. 67-69: printing device 105, comprising a main board 301 and processor 306 running a printing control program, print driver OS 422, to control operations) comprising:
an acquisition unit configured to acquire a printing job from an external computer (par. 81: the printer device OS 422 examines whether or not a print job has been received from the terminal apparatus 104);
an identification unit configured to identify a type of program, i.e., the OS, operating in the external computer (par. 94, 111-113: printer device configuration generation unit 426 identifies the type of the OS 412 operating on the terminal apparatus 104);
a setting unit configured to cause a browser of the external computer to display a setting screen corresponding to the identified type , and receive setting of a user via the setting screen (par. 150: printer device configuration generation unit 426 returns the inquired attribute values to the terminal apparatus 104 to display the print setting menu in a browser as shown in Figs. 8-9);
a correction unit configured to correct the printing job according to the received setting (par. 125: printer driver 416 generates print data (job for printing) from the data created by the application software 415 based on print setting details displayed or set in the print setting menu); and
a printing control unit configured to cause a printer to execute printing based on the corrected printing job (par. 85, 127: software 417 transmits the print data generated by the printer driver 416 to the printer device 105 as a print job, and printing unit 424 generates a print image based on the print image information to be printer by printing unit 315).
Referring to claim 7:
Kanno discloses the identification unit also identifies a type of the printing job, and the setting unit causes the setting screen also corresponding to the type of the printing job to be displayed (par. 83: printer device OS 422 analyzes the received print job to separate the print job into option control information and print image information, and printer driver 416 determines whether or not an extended print setting, which is detailed print setting information, is to be displayed in accordance with the received operation instruction, as “OTHER SETTINGS” illustrated in FIG. 8 and FIG. 9).
Referring to claim 9:
This claim is the method for performing the corresponding functions of the apparatus as set forth in claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons as presented above.
Referring to claim 10:
This claim is the product or article of manufacture (i.e., a non-transitory computer readable storage medium) storing a printer control program for causing a computer to function as the apparatus as set forth in claim 1. Kanno discloses such a product for this purpose (par. 204). Therefore, this claim is rejected for the same reasons as presented above.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanno as applied to claim1 above, and further in view of Igawa (US 20140132978 A1).
Referring to claim 2:
While not disclosed by Kanno, identifying the type of the program based on access information from a browser of the external computer is taught for example by Igawa (par.64-65). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kanno in view of Igawa whereby the identification unit identifies the type of the program based on access information from a browser of the external computer in order to determine the display mode for the print setting screen.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanno as applied to claim1 above, and further in view of Kolhi et al (US 20160380900 A1).
Referring to claim 3:
While not disclosed by Kanno, issuing a network search packet and identifying the type of the program or OS based on a response to the network search packet is taught for example by Kolhi et al (par. 56: active OS fingerprinting). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kanno in view of Kolhi et al whereby the identification unit issues a network search packet, and identifies the type of the program based on a response to the network search packet in order to provide an accurate and rapid method of determining an OS running on a networked computer that is both flexible and comprehensive.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanno as applied to claim1 above, and further in view of Minakawa et al (US 20190196761 A1).
Referring to claim 4:
While not disclosed by Kanno, identifying the type of the program or OS based on an option selected by the user is taught for example by Minakawa et al (par. 67). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kanno in view of Minakawa et al whereby the identification unit presents the user with a plurality of options corresponding to the type of the program, and identifies the type of the program based on an option selected by the user in order to acquire program information not otherwise identified and thereby provide accurate information for the print setting screen.
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 (i.e., a descriptive title that distinguishes the invention and is not a generic or general description). The new title should take into account any amendments to the claims to best indicate the claimed invention.
The title must be as short and specific as possible (see 37 CFR 1.72(a)). Applicant should distill a description of the claimed invention into as few words as possible to capture the essence of the claimed invention. Rather than reciting statutory categories (apparatus, method, product) and some generic descriptor (e.g., information processing), a title that is specific, but characterizes the essence or key aspect(s) of the claimed invention, should be submitted.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07 February 2024 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the examiner.
Applicant has provided an explanation of relevance of cited document US 202110334048 A1 (corresponds to JP 2021174196 A) on page 1 of the specification.
Cited Art
The prior art and other references made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Morooka et al (US 7102783 B2) disclose a client computer has a group printer driver which provides an interface as one printer driver by comprehensively managing a plurality of registered member printer drivers. This group printer driver provides a setting user interface for comprehensively setting setting items in the printer drivers, and a designating user interface for designating a desired one of these printer drivers. When a member printer driver is designated on the designating user interface, the individual user interface of the designated member printer driver is presented to make it possible to set individual items. This provides a user interface capable of efficiently and easily setting functions of a plurality of printers.
Kimura et al (US 7619765 B2) disclose a client server system which enables the user of a client computer to obtain the optimum printing result only by designating desired print settings, and to perform printing according to common print settings even if printers are modified or a new printer is added on a network. A favorite display module displays a print setting designating screen relating a printer. A data sending and receiving module transmits the print settings designated on the print setting designating screen by a user and an ID of a client computer to a server. A data sending and receiving module receives a printer driver adapted to the printer and print setting information from the server. A favorite setting changing module changes print settings of the printer driver according to the print setting information sent from the server. A favorite setting completion display module indicates that the changing of the print settings has been completed.
Kobayashi (US 10394503 B2) disclose an information processing device for controlling an output device capable of communication, the information processing device includes: circuitry configured to: receive an output setting of the output device including a combination of set values for a plurality of setting items; record, in response to determination of the output setting, the determined output setting including the combination of the set values for the setting items in a storage area; and present one or more output settings acquired from the storage area as a candidate to be reused.
Hirano (US 12026414 B2) discloses a printing system includes a printing device that returns, using IPP, a response to an inquiry of its printing capability to an information processing device, inclusive of information such that a printing settings screen is displayed on information processing device (see Fig. 5).
Mizoguchi (US 20060158674 A1) disclose a printer driver including: a user interface acquisition section for acquiring from an external print control device a user interface for allowing a user to make provisional print settings; a set value transmission section for transmitting to the print control device the provisional print settings using the user interface; and a print data generation section for acquiring ultimate print settings prepared on the basis of the provisional print settings transmitted to and in the print control device and for generating print data on the basis of the acquired ultimate print settings to transmit the print data to the print control device.
Hosomizo (US 20240402957 A1) discloses a computer-readable storage medium that stores computer-readable instructions supporting a general-purpose print program incorporated in an operating system of an information processing device. The instructions, when executed by a computer of the information processing device, cause the information processing device to obtain specific information to identify a selected printing device, obtain capability information indicating capabilities of the selected printing device, determine, in response to receiving a processing request from the general-purpose print program, whether the selected printing device is a virtual printer of a server on a network, based on the specific information, display a first print setting screen configured to accept print settings based on the capability information when the selected printing device is not the virtual printer, and display a second print setting screen configured to accept print settings based on common capabilities of printing devices connectable with the server when the selected printing device is the virtual printer.
Hirose (JP 2025-151911 A), by the assignee and not prior art, discloses a printing unit that performs printing in accordance with an instruction of an external computer. An acquisition unit acquires setting information of the external computer through communication with the external computer. A storage unit stores the setting information. An output unit outputs the setting information and performs processing for causing the external computer to perform setting using the setting information.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Scott Rogers whose telephone number is 571-272-7467. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am to 7 pm flex.
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, Abderrahim Merouan can be reached on 571-270-5254. 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.
/Scott A Rogers/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
07 February 2026