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 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-12 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.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “concurrently” in claims 1-12 is used by the claim to mean “subsequently”, i.e., “an image of the document being scanned in is formed on a medium . . . after scanning of the document starts” while the accepted meaning is “operating, occurring, or acting at the same time or simultaneously.” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term. The term is used in the specification simply reflecting how the term is used in the claim, not explicitly redefining the term.
The claims have been interpreted for purposes of examination as if the term “concurrently” is not used at all.
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 1-4, 7, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bertoni et al (US 5107339 A) in view of Shirai (US 7567354 B2).
Referring to claim 1:
Bertoni et al teach an image processing system (system 2) comprising:
one or more processors (control 54) configured to:
when a document as a scanning target travels (by document handler 35) and by scanner section 6) is formed on a medium (by printer section 8), issue an instruction to start formation of the image on the medium after a transport distance traveled by the document or an elapsed time exceeds a threshold after scanning of the document starts (col. 9, lines 53-60: control 54 determines an optimum time or threshold time to commence printer operation, after scanning starts, based on parameters such as the number of documents to be scanned, scanner speed, printing speed, paper thickness, etc., to ensure maximum overlap of scanner operation and printer operation).
Bertoni et al does not teach the optimum time or threshold being set as a distance or a period for stabilizing transport of the document. However, Nakamura, in the same field of endeavor, teach stabilizing the transported state of document P by causing document P to pass through the registration and skew correction region 13 before document P is read as document P may have become unstable on its way through the transporting path 8 (col. 20, lines 6-12).
When considering the problems and solutions set forth in Bertoni et al and Nakamura et al, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the advantages of combining the teaching in Bertoni et al and Nakamura et al. Therefore, to that end, 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 set the optimum time or threshold as a distance or a period for stabilizing transport of the document in order ensure accurate image reading by stabilizing the transported state of the document when reading the image before starting printing.
Referring to claim 2:
Bertoni et al accept a setting for the threshold (data that determines the optimum time) via a screen operation (col. 9, lines 53-54: interface 52).
Referring to claim 3:
Bertoni et al accept the setting for the threshold for each speed to be used to transport the document as a scanning target (col. 9, lines 53-54: equates to entry of data on speeds of operation of scanner 6 entered via interface 52).
Referring to claim 4:
Bertoni et al accept the setting in such a manner that the threshold for a first speed is greater than the threshold for a second speed lower than the first speed (entry of data on speeds of operation of scanner 6 via interface 52 inherently means different speeds with one speed lower than another).
Referring to claim 7:
Bertoni et al change a setting for the threshold in response to a specification of a transport speed of the document as a scanning target. (col. 9, lines 53-54: equates to entry of data on speeds of operation of scanner 6 entered via interface 52).
Referring to claim 11:
This claim is the product or article of manufacture (i.e., a non-transitory computer readable medium) storing a program causing a computer to execute a process corresponding functions of the apparatus as set forth in claim 1. Bertoni et al discloses such a product for this purpose (col. 5, lines 6-9). Therefore, this claim is rejected for the same reasons as presented above.
Referring to claim 12:
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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 8-10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Referring to these claims, the prior art searched and of record neither anticipates nor suggests the limitations added in the claimed combinations.
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 06 November 2023 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 JP H08-97991 A (equivalent to US 5726762 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.
Shirai (US 7567354 B2) discloses a copy machine completes the reading in of the front surfaces of a plurality of documents, before starting reading in of the rear surfaces of the documents, and starts forming images before the reading in of the rear surfaces of all the documents has been completed. After the front surfaces of all the plurality of documents have been read in, the reading of the rear surfaces starts. It takes a period of time from a time T2 to a time T7 to read in image data of a quantity (Q2-Q1) from the rear surface of one document as apparent from a line segment 200a that is indicative of the speed at which the read-in image data is stored. The timing of printing start is offset to ensure that the line segment 200a and the line segment 300b do not intersect with each other. This makes it possible to start printing based on image data for the rear surface of the document while the reading of the subject surface of the subject document. It is possible to prevent the image data from running out regardless of the difference between the storing speed and the read-out speed.
Hirao (US 10057443 B2) discloses a control method for an image processing apparatus including a reading unit configured to read a document image and a printing unit configured to print the document image read by the reading unit is provided. The control method includes detecting an error in process of reading by the reading unit, causing the reading unit to perform reread processing for rereading the document image based on the error being detected, and refraining, in a case where the image processing apparatus operates in a mode in which the printing unit starts printing without waiting for the reading unit to complete reading a document image, from causing the reading unit to perform the reread processing based on the error being detected.
Takahashi (JP 6194771 B2) disclose image formation capable of determining whether or not the transfer speed for transferring image data read from an input medium to a storage area is changed during transfer and calculating an appropriate timing for starting an image formation process on an output medium It is an object to provide an apparatus and an image forming method. A storage unit that stores image data for performing image forming processing, a reading unit that generates the image data by reading an input medium, and transfers the image data to the storage unit; A determination means for determining whether or not the transfer speed is switched to a different transfer speed during transfer, and if it is determined that the transfer speed is switched during transfer, the image forming process is started based on the transfer speed to be switched. By providing start timing calculating means for calculating timing, and image forming means for acquiring the image data based on the calculated timing and performing the image forming process of the image data on an output medium.
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 the Patent Center. Unpublished application information in the Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in the Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about the 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
25 June 2026
Prosecution Insights