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 Objections
Claim 22 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “by color hue or pattern” should be rewritten as - - by color, hue or pattern - -. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-2, 4-5, 9-11, 13-20 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US 5,717,974) in view of Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) and in view of Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475).
Regarding claim 1, Park (US 5,717,974) teaches an apparatus (fig.1; col.2, ln.53-55) comprising: one or more hardware processors (fig.1, at least #20); and one or more memories (fig.1, at least #22) storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors, the one or more programs including instructions for: obtaining first condition information indicating a condition of a constituent part of a printing apparatus, specified based on a life of the part (fig.2A, #103; col.3, ln.4-9; col.3, ln.50-63); generating a display image representing the condition of the part indicated by the first condition information (fig.2A, #105 or #107; col.3, ln.4-9); and outputting a signal representing the display image (col.3, ln.4-9; col.4, ln.46-51), wherein the first condition information is information based on information indicating a lifetime number of uses of the part and information indicating a number of uses of the part after replacement of the part, or information based on information indicating a lifetime period of use of the part and information indicating a period of use of the part after replacement of the part (col.3, ln.50-63).
Regarding claim 2, Park (US 5,717,974) teaches an apparatus wherein the first condition information includes at least one of information indicating a indication for replacement of the part and information indicating a indication for cleaning of the part as information indicating a condition of the part (fig.2A&B, #104, #106, #108).
Regarding claim 4, Park (US 5,717,974) teaches an apparatus wherein the first condition information is information based on information indicating a number of uses of the part until the part needs cleaning and information indicating a number of uses of the part after cleaning of the part, or information based on information indicating a period of use of the part until the part needs cleaning and information indicating a period of use of the part after cleaning of the part (col.3, ln.50-67).
Regarding claim 11, Park (US 5,717,974) teaches an apparatus wherein the apparatus is an information processing apparatus that outputs print data for causing the printing apparatus to perform image forming (fig.1; col.2, ln.53-col.3, ln.24).
Regarding claim 13, Park (US 5,717,974) teaches an apparatus further comprising a display device that displays the display image, wherein the signal representing the display image is output to the display device to display the display image on the display device (col.3, ln.4-10: must be present to carry out the stated function; fig.1, #24).
Regarding claim 14, Park (US 5,717,974) teaches an apparatus wherein the printing apparatus from which the first condition information is obtained includes a display device that displays the display image, and the signal representing the display image is output to the display device to display the display image on the display device (col.3, ln.4-10: must be present to carry out the stated function; fig.1, #24).
Regarding claim 17, Park (US 5,717,974) teaches a system (fig.1; col.2, ln.53-55) comprising: one or more hardware processors (fig.1, at least #20); and one or more memories (fig.1, at least #22) storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors, the one or more programs including instructions for: controlling forming of an image on a print medium (some portion of fig.1 configured to perform col..2, ln.53-col.3, ln.24); specifying a condition of a part to be used in the forming of the image based on a life of the part to thereby obtain first condition information indicating a condition of the part which is based on the life of the part (fig.2A, #103; col.3, ln.4-9; col.3, ln.50-63); generating a display image representing the condition of the part indicated by the first condition information and the condition of the part indicated by second condition information (fig.2A, #105 or #107; col.3, ln.4-9); and outputting a signal representing the display image (col.3, ln.4-9; col.4, ln.46-51), wherein the first condition information is information based on information indicating a lifetime number of uses of the part and information indicating a number of uses of the part after replacement of the part, or information based on information indicating a lifetime period of use of the part and information indicating a period of use of the part after replacement of the part (col.3, ln.50-63).
Regarding claim 18, Park (US 5,717,974) teaches a system wherein the system comprises a printing apparatus (col.2, ln.53-55; fig.1), an inspection apparatus (fig.1, some function of #20/#22), and an information processing apparatus (fig.1, some function of #20/#22), the printing apparatus comprising: one or more first hardware processors of the one or more hardware processors (fig.1, at least #20); and one or more first memories, of the one or more memories (fig.1, at least #22), storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more first hardware processors, the one or more programs including an instruction for controlling the forming of the image on the print medium (some portion of fig.1 configured to perform col..2, ln.53-col.3, ln.24), and the inspection apparatus comprising: a hardware processors of the one or more hardware processors (fig.1, at least #20); and a memory, of the one or more memories (fig.1, at least #22), storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors, the one or more programs including instructions for: specifying the condition of the part to be used in the forming of the image based on the life of the part to thereby obtain the first condition information indicating the condition of the part which is based on the life of the part (fig.2A, #103; col.3, ln.4-9; col.3, ln.50-63); generating the display image representing the condition of the part indicated by the first condition information (fig.2A, #105 or #107; col.3, ln.4-9); and outputting the signal representing the display image (col.3, ln.4-9; col.4, ln.46-51).
Regarding claim 19, Park (US 5,717,974) teaches a system wherein the system comprises a printing apparatus (col.2, ln.53-55; fig.1), an inspection apparatus (fig.1, some function of #20/#22), and an information processing apparatus (fig.1, some function of #20/#22), the printing apparatus comprising: one or more first hardware processors of the one or more hardware processors (fig.1, at least #20); and one or more first memories, of the one or more memories (fig.1, at least #22), storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors, the one or more programs including an instruction for controlling the forming of the image on the print medium (some portion of fig.1 configured to perform col..2, ln.53-col.3, ln.24), the inspection apparatus comprising: a hardware processor of the one or more hardware processors (fig.1, at least #20); and a memory, of the one or more memories (fig.1, at least #22), storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the hardware processor; and the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more hardware processors (fig.1, at least #20); and one or more memories (fig.1, at least #22) storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors, the one or more programs including instructions for: specifying the condition of the part to be used in the forming of the image based on the life of the part to thereby obtain the first condition information indicating the condition of the part which is based on the life of the part (fig.2A, #103; col.3, ln.4-9; col.3, ln.50-63); generating the display image representing the condition of the part indicated by the first condition information (fig.2A, #105 or #107; col.3, ln.4-9); and outputting the signal representing the display image (col.3, ln.4-9; col.4, ln.46-51).
Regarding claim 20, Park (US 5,717,974) teaches a system wherein the system comprises a printing apparatus (col.2, ln.53-55; fig.1), and an information processing apparatus (fig.1, some function of #20/#22), the printing apparatus comprising: one or more first hardware processors of the one or more hardware processors (fig.1, at least #20); and one or more first memories, of the one or more memories (fig.1, at least #22), storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors, the one or more programs including an instruction for controlling the forming of the image on the print medium (some portion of fig.1 configured to perform col..2, ln.53-col.3, ln.24), and the information processing apparatus comprising: a hardware processor of the one or more hardware processors (fig.1, at least #20); and a memory, of the one or more memories (fig.1, at least #22), storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the hardware processor, the one or more programs including instructions for: specifying the condition of the part to be used in the forming of the image based on the life of the part to thereby obtain the first condition information indicating the condition of the part which is based on the life of the part (fig.2A, #103; col.3, ln.4-9; col.3, ln.50-63); generating the display image representing the condition of the part indicated by the first condition information (fig.2A, #105 or #107; col.3, ln.4-9); and outputting the signal representing the display image (col.3, ln.4-9; col.4, ln.46-51).
However, Park (US 5,717,974) fails to teach obtaining second condition information indicating a condition of the part specified based on a scanned image obtained by reading a print medium on which an image has been formed by the printing apparatus.
Regarding claim 1, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach an apparatus (para.0002-0003) comprising: one or more hardware processors (para.0021); and one or more memories storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors (not explicitly stated, but typically included in some manner for processors to perform their stated functions), the one or more programs including instructions for: obtaining second condition information indicating a condition of the part specified based on a scanned image obtained by reading a print medium on which an image has been formed by the printing apparatus (para.0030,0034&0039); generating a display image representing the condition of the part indicated by the first condition information and the condition of the part indicated by the second condition information (para.0042-0043); and outputting a signal representing the display image (para.0045-0047), wherein the one or more programs further include instructions for: obtaining data of the scanned image (para.0030,0034&0039); and specifying a state of a problem in the scanned image, wherein the second condition information is obtained by specifying a condition of the part causing the problem in the scanned image based on the specified state of the problem in the scanned image (para.0028,0033&0042), wherein the display image is generated which indicates the condition only of parts permitted to be replaced or cleaned by an operator among the conditions of one or more of the parts indicated by the first condition information, and the condition only of parts permitted to be replaced or cleaned by the operator among the conditions of one or more of the parts indicated by the second condition information (para.0044-0047).
Regarding claim 5, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach an apparatus wherein the second condition information includes at least one of information indicating a indication for replacement of the part and information indicating a indication for cleaning of the part as information indicating a condition of the part (para.0028,0033&0042).
Regarding claim 9, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach an apparatus wherein the one or more programs further include an instruction for determining a measure to be taken to remedy the cause, wherein the display image is generated which indicates a content of the measure to be taken in addition to the condition of the part indicated by the first condition information and the condition of the part indicated by the second condition information (para.0044-0047).
Regarding claim 10, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach an apparatus further comprising a reading device that reads the image formed on the print medium (para.0030,0034&0039: inline full width array sensor), wherein data of the image obtained by the reading by the reading device is obtained as the data of the scanned image (para.0030,0034&0039).
Regarding claim 11, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach an apparatus wherein the apparatus is an information processing apparatus that outputs print data for causing the printing apparatus to perform image forming (para.0002-0003; para.0024,0031&0035-0036).
Regarding claim 13, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach an apparatus further comprising a display device that displays the display image, wherein the signal representing the display image is output to the display device to display the display image on the display device (not depicted, but must be present to facilitate the functionality of para.0045-0047).
Regarding claim 14, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach an apparatus wherein the printing apparatus from which the first condition information is obtained includes a display device that displays the display image, and the signal representing the display image is output to the display device to display the display image on the display device (not depicted, but must be present to facilitate the functionality of para.0045-0047).
Regarding claim 17, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach a system (para.0002-0003) comprising: one or more hardware processors (para.0021); and one or more memories storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors (not explicitly stated, but typically included in some manner for processors to perform their stated functions), the one or more programs including instructions for: controlling forming of an image on a print medium (for example, para.0024,0031&0035-0036); controlling reading of the image formed on the print medium (para.0030,0034&0039); obtaining data of a scanned image obtained by reading the image formed on the print medium (para.0030,0034&0039); specifying a state of a problem in the scanned image (para.0028-0029,0033, & 0042-0043); specifying a condition of the part based on the state of the problem in the scanned image to thereby specify a condition of the part which is based on the scanned image (para. 0028-0029,0033&0042-0043); obtaining second condition information indicating the specified condition of the part (para. 0028-0029,0033&0042-0043); generating a display image representing the condition of the part indicated by the first condition information and the condition of the part indicated by the second condition information (para.0043); and outputting a signal representing the display image (para.0045-0047), wherein the one or more programs further include instructions for: obtaining data of the scanned image (para.0030,0034&0039); and specifying a state of a problem in the scanned image, wherein the second condition information is obtained by specifying a condition of the part causing the problem in the scanned image based on the specified state of the problem in the scanned image (para.0028,0033&0042), wherein the display image is generated which indicates the condition only of parts permitted to be replaced or cleaned by an operator among the conditions of one or more of the parts indicated by the first condition information, and the condition only of parts permitted to be replaced or cleaned by the operator among the conditions of one or more of the parts indicated by the second condition information (para.0044-0047).
Regarding claim 18, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach a system wherein the system comprises a printing apparatus (para.0002-0003&0019), an inspection apparatus (para.0030,0034&0039: inline full width array), and an information processing apparatus (must be present to achieve: para.0028-0029,0033, & 0042-0043 in conjunction with para.0030,0034&0039), the printing apparatus comprising: one or more first hardware processors of the one or more hardware processors (para.0021); and one or more first memories, of the one or more memories, storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors (not explicitly stated, but typically included in some manner for processors to perform their stated functions), the one or more programs including an instruction for controlling the forming of the image on the print medium (for example, para.0024,0031&0035-0036), and the inspection apparatus comprising: a hardware processor of the one or more hardware processors; and a memory, of the one or more memories, storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the hardware processor (must be present to perform the recited functions from para.0028-0043 with an inline full width array as seen in para.0030,0034&0039), the one or more programs including instructions for: controlling reading of the image formed on the print medium (para.0030,0034&0039); obtaining the data of the scanned image obtained by reading the image formed on the print medium (para.0030,0034&0039); specifying the state of the problem in the scanned image (para.0028-0029,0033, & 0042-0043); specifying the condition of the part based on the state of the problem in the scanned image to thereby specify the condition of the part which is based on the scanned image (para. 0028-0029,0033&0042-0043); obtaining the second condition information indicating the specified condition of the part (para. 0028-0029,0033&0042-0043); generating the display image representing the condition of the part indicated by the second condition information (para.0043); and outputting the signal representing the display image (para.0045-0047).
Regarding claim 19, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach a system wherein the system comprises a printing apparatus (para.0002-0003&0019), an inspection apparatus (para.0030,0034&0039: inline full width array), and an information processing apparatus (must be present to achieve: para.0028-0029,0033, & 0042-0043 in conjunction with para.0030,0034&0039), the printing apparatus comprising: one or more first hardware processors of the one or more hardware processors (para.0021); and one or more first memories, of the one or more memories, storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors (not explicitly stated, but typically included in some manner for processors to perform their stated functions), the one or more programs including an instruction for controlling the forming of the image on the print medium (for example, para.0024,0031&0035-0036), the inspection apparatus comprising: a hardware processor of the one or more hardware processors; and a memory, of the one or more memories, storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors (must be present to perform the recited functions from para.0028-0043 with an inline full width array as seen in para.0030,0034&0039), the one or more programs including instructions for: controlling reading of the image formed on the print medium (para.0030,0034&0039); obtaining the data of the scanned image obtained by reading the image formed on the print medium (para.0030,0034&0039); specifying the state of the problem in the scanned image (para.0028-0029,0033, & 0042-0043); specifying the condition of the part based on the state of the problem in the scanned image to thereby specify the condition of the part which is based on the scanned image (para. 0028-0029,0033&0042-0043); and outputting the second condition information indicating the specified condition of the part (para.0045-0047), and the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more hardware processors; and one or more memories storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors (must be present to perform the recited functions from para.0028-0043 with an inline full width array as seen in para.0030,0034&0039), the one or more programs including instructions for: obtaining the second condition information indicating the condition of the part (para. 0028-0029,0033&0042-0043); generating the display image representing the condition of the part indicated by the second condition information (para.0043); and outputting the signal representing the display image (para.0045-0047), and wherein the information processing apparatus obtains the second condition information output by the inspection apparatus (para.0030,0034&0039).
Regarding claim 20, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach a system wherein the system comprises a printing apparatus (para.0002-0003&0019), a reading apparatus (para.0030,0034&0039: inline full width array), and an information processing apparatus (must be present to achieve: para.0028-0029,0033, & 0042-0043 in conjunction with para.0030,0034&0039), the printing apparatus comprising: one or more first hardware processors of the one or more hardware processors (para.0021); and one or more first memories, of the one or more memories, storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors (not explicitly stated, but typically included in some manner for processors to perform their stated functions), the one or more programs including an instruction for controlling the forming of the image on the print medium (for example, para.0024,0031&0035-0036), the reading apparatus comprising: a hardware processor of the one or more hardware processors; and a memory, of the one or more memories, storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the hardware processor (must be present to perform the recited functions from para.0028-0043 with an inline full width array as seen in para.0030,0034&0039), the one or more programs including instructions for: controlling reading of the image formed on the print medium (para.0030,0034&0039); and outputting data of the image (para.0030,0034&0039), and the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more hardware processors; and one or more memories storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more hardware processors (must be present to perform the recited functions from para.0028-0043 with an inline full width array as seen in para.0030,0034&0039), the one or more programs including instructions for: obtaining the data of the scanned image obtained by reading the image formed on the print medium (must be present to perform the recited functions from para.0028-0043 with an inline full width array); specifying the state of the problem in the scanned image (para.0028-0029,0033, & 0042-0043); specifying the condition of the part based on the state of the problem in the scanned image to thereby specify the condition of the part which is based on the scanned image (para. 0028-0029,0033&0042-0043); obtaining the second condition information indicating the condition of the part (para. 0028-0029,0033&0042-0043); generating the display image representing the condition of the part indicated by the second condition information (para.0043); and outputting the signal representing the display image (para.0045-0047), and wherein the information processing apparatus obtains the data of the image output by the reading apparatus as the data of the scanned image (para.0030,0034&0039).
Regarding claim 22, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) teach an apparatus wherein the display image comprises: (a) a first graphical indicator that visualizes a first status, and (b) a second graphical indicator that visualizes a second status, the first graphical indicator and the second graphical indicator being disposed on the same display page and being distinguishable from each other by color hue or pattern (para.0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus, system, and method of Park (US 5,717,974) by incorporating the automatic defect detection process of Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) because it is merely combining equivalents known for the same purpose ["It is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose.... [T]he idea of combining them flows logically from their having been individually taught in the prior art." In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846, 850, 205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980) (citations omitted) – MPEP 2144.06, sect.I].
Regarding claims 1 and 17, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) additionally teach an apparatus and system wherein the display image is generated in which a first image region representing the condition of the part indicated by the first information and a second image region representing the condition of the part indicated by the second condition information are disposed in an identifiable manner, wherein the first image region and the second image region are displayed on a same display page (para.0045: on the Customer Parts Life screen multiple pieces of information are displayed in different regions of the same screen in an identifiable manner).
However, Park (US 5,717,974) in view of Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) do not explicitly teach displaying first condition information and second condition information wherein the first condition information includes a first numerical value related to the first condition and the second condition information includes a second numerical value related to the second condition.
Regarding claims 1 and 17, Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475) teaches an apparatus and a system configured to: obtain first condition information indicating a condition of a constituent part of a printing apparatus, specified based on a life of the part (fig.3, #124; fig.4C, #437; para.0044-0046); obtaining second condition information indicating a condition of the part specified based on another metric based on images being formed by the printing apparatus (fig.3, #123; fig.4C, #436; para.0045); generating a display image wherein the display image is generated in which a first image region representing the condition of the part indicated by the first condition information (fig.4C, #437) and a second image region representing the condition of the part indicated by the second condition information (fig.4C, #436) are disposed in an identifiable manner (see fig.4C), wherein the first image region and the second image region are displayed on a same display page (see fig.4C), and wherein the first condition information includes a first numerical value related to the first condition and the second condition information includes a second numerical value related to the second condition (see fig.4C, #436 & #437), wherein the display image is generated which indicates the condition only of parts permitted to be replaced or cleaned by an operator among the conditions of one or more of the parts indicated by the first condition information, and the condition only of parts permitted to be replaced or cleaned by the operator among the conditions of one or more of the parts indicated by the second condition information (para.0021; fig.6C).
Regarding claim 22, Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475) teaches an apparatus wherein the display image comprises: (a) a first graphical indicator that visualizes the first numerical value (fig.6C, column #636), and (b) a second graphical indicator that visualizes the second numerical value (fig.6C, column #637), the first graphical indicator and the second graphical indicator being disposed side-by-side on the same display page (see fig.6C).
Regarding claim 23, Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475) teaches an apparatus further comprising an authorization storage that stores, for each constituent part, permission information indicating whether replacement or cleaning by an operator is allowed, wherein the display image is generated after automatically filtering, on the basis of the permission information, the constituent parts whose conditions are to be displayed (fig. 1, #111; para.0052).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the condition information display of Park (US 5,717,974) in view of Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) by having the multiple pieces of information displayed numerically on the same screen as in Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475) because it is a known way to configure a Parts Life screen and to allow the user to preferentially check the degree of consumption and condition metrics to make a decision for part replacement especially for a part that does not result in apparatus/system stoppage (para.0005).
Regarding claims 18-20, Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) is silent as to a use of processors, memories or the like. Park (US 5,717,974) discloses a controller (fig.1, #20) and a memory (fig.1, #22), but the actual hardware/circuitry configurations of the two are not discussed, so it is unclear if there is merely one hardware processor or a plurality contained within the black box ‘controller’. As best the Office can tell, the wording of claims 18-20 is merely a duplication of parts and thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use at two controllers and memories to achieve the same programming and processing results as in Park (US 5,717,974) in view of Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) and in view of Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475) because it would not produce an unexpected result. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) resulted in the court holding that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, the limitations of the method and the non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a program for causing a computer to perform a control method are met by the apparatus of Park (US 5,717,974) in view of Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) and in view of Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475) as applied to claim 1 and therefore stand rejected on the same grounds.
Upon combination, the Office believes that the display content limitations of claims 1, 15, 16 and 17 would necessarily be met to fulfill the end result (communication of status of parts arising from the determinations) required by both Park (US 5,717,974) and Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) and in view of Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475); however, even if it were not, it would be easily arrived at by one of ordinary skill in the art without undue experimentation to convey the part life/status determined by the different methods, allowing the user flexibility in maintenance with all of the available information clearly set forth.
Upon combination, the limitations of claim 22 would easily be arrived at from the teachings of Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) and Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 is 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:
Prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed “the second condition information includes a quantified index that is calculated by comparing the scanned image with a pre-stored reference image, and the quantified index is numerically displayed in the second image region together with the second numerical value” in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 21.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 19 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant presents the newly amended claim language and a portion of paragraph 0098 from the specification stating “As the content of work in the display region 513, only a content of work that can be performed by the operator may be displayed.” The applicant then states that “none of the cited references, either alone or in combination, teach or suggest these patentable features.”
Soures et al. (US Pub.2009/0297174) para.0045, which the applicant references, discloses specifically that: “The Customer Parts Life screen is a listing or library (synonymously referred herein as "window"), i.e., a log, or display of the customer replaceable items and their status”.
Additionally, Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475) para.0021 states “Furthermore, while, in the present embodiment, these consumable parts are described as consumable parts which are replaceable by the user”.
Both of the references disclose displaying only parts that are replaceable or cleanable by the user.
The applicants then argue against Soures by stating that it does not teach “the condition only of parts permitted to be replaced or cleaned by the operator among the conditions of one or more of the parts indicated by the second condition information specified based on the scanned image, as required by amended Claim 1”. As can be seen in the rejection above, the claims are rejected over a combination of the references cited in the prior art of record and does not rely solely on one reference to teach specific concepts. Soures does, in fact, teach displaying only parts permitted to be replaced or cleaned and does teach evaluating part condition by way of a scanning unit to determine service need.
Tachibana (US Pub.2019/0227475) is the reference that teaches displaying two different metrics/conditions for determining the need for serice.
The office maintains that given the cited prior art in the rejection, the references, when taken as a whole, would render the claim obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art and easily arrived at without undue experimentation. As a result, the Office does not find the applicant’s arguments to be persuasive.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA K ROTH whose telephone number is (571)272-2154. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30AM-3:30 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached on 571-272-3555. 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.
/LKR/
2/17/2026 /STEPHANIE E BLOSS/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852