DETAILED ACTION
Notice of AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the AIA the first inventor to file provisions.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/13/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 12, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, Line 7 the term “displaying a UI screen” should be changed to “displaying a User Interface (UI) screen” to define the acronym before using it.
In claim 2, Line 2 the term “performs OCR processing” should be changed to “performs optical character recognition (OCR) processing” to define the acronym before using it.
In claim 7, Line 6 the term “OCR processing for a character string area” should be changed to “OCR processing for the character string area” for typographical/grammar issues to avoid clarity issues to prevent a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
In claim 8, Line 7 the term “OCR processing for a character string area” should be changed to “OCR processing for the character string area” for typographical/grammar issues to avoid clarity issues to prevent a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
In claim 12, Line 5 the term “displaying a UI screen” should be changed to “displaying a User Interface (UI) screen” to define the acronym before using it.
In claim 13, Line 7 the term “displaying a UI screen” should be changed to “displaying a User Interface (UI) screen” to define the acronym before using it.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8, and 12-13, recite limitations that use words like “means” (or “step”) or similar terms with functional language and do invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
Claim 1; recites the limitation, “a first external device having a scan function to scan …,” [Line 5].
Claim 1; recites the limitation, “a second external device, which has a function to obtain …,” [Line 9].
Claim 2; recites the limitation, “the second external device performs …,” [Line 2].
Claim 2; recites the limitation, “obtained from the first external device …,” [Line 3].
Claim 3; recites the limitation, “the second external device to perform …,” [Line 4].
Claim 4; recites the limitation, “the second external device to perform…,” [Line 5].
Claim 5; recites the limitation, “the second external device to perform …,” [Line 9].
Claim 8; recites the limitation, “the second external device to search …,” [Line 7].
Claim 12; recites the limitation, “first external device having a scan function to scan…,” [Line 3].
Claim 12; recites the limitation, “a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform …,” [Line 7].
Claim 13; recites the limitation, “first external device having a scan function to scan …,” [Line 5].
Claim 13; recites the limitation, “a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform …,” [Line 9].
Because this/these claim limitation(s) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
After a careful analysis, as disclosed above, and a careful review of the specification the following limitations in claim 1-5, 8, and 12-13:
“first external device” (Paragraph [0004] - “giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document; displaying a UI screen on a display unit, which receives a user operation for performing file transmission of a document image obtained by the scan; and giving second instructions to cause a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform file transmission, to perform file transmission of the document image based on a user operation received via the UI screen..” No figures shows the first external device, Thus, the “first external device” does not have sufficient structure associated with it).
“second external device” (Paragraph [0004] - “giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document; displaying a UI screen on a display unit, which receives a user operation for performing file transmission of a document image obtained by the scan; and giving second instructions to cause a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform file transmission, to perform file transmission of the document image based on a user operation received via the UI screen..” No figures shows the second external device, Thus, the “second external device” does not have sufficient structure associated with it).
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 § 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 1-5, 8, and 12-13 along with its dependent claims 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1; recites the limitation, “a first external device having a scan function to scan …,” [Line 5].
Claim 1; recites the limitation, “a second external device, which has a function to obtain …,” [Line 9].
Claim 2; recites the limitation, “the second external device performs …,” [Line 2].
Claim 2; recites the limitation, “obtained from the first external device …,” [Line 3].
Claim 3; recites the limitation, “the second external device to perform …,” [Line 4].
Claim 4; recites the limitation, “the second external device to perform…,” [Line 5].
Claim 5; recites the limitation, “the second external device to perform …,” [Line 9].
Claim 8; recites the limitation, “the second external device to search …,” [Line 7].
Claim 12; recites the limitation, “first external device having a scan function to scan…,” [Line 3].
Claim 12; recites the limitation, “a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform …,” [Line 7].
Claim 13; recites the limitation, “first external device having a scan function to scan …,” [Line 5].
Claim 13; recites the limitation, “a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform …,” [Line 9].
Claims 1-5, 8, and 12-13 respectively invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification is devoid of adequate structure to perform the claimed functions. The specification does not provide sufficient details such that one of the ordinary skill in the art would understand which structure performed(s) the claimed function.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-5, 8, and 12-13 along with its dependent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. As described above, the disclosure does not provide adequate structure to perform the claimed function in the recited limitation
Claim 1; recites the limitation, “a first external device having a scan function to scan …,” [Line 5].
Claim 1; recites the limitation, “a second external device, which has a function to obtain …,” [Line 9].
Claim 2; recites the limitation, “the second external device performs …,” [Line 2].
Claim 2; recites the limitation, “obtained from the first external device …,” [Line 3].
Claim 3; recites the limitation, “the second external device to perform …,” [Line 4].
Claim 4; recites the limitation, “the second external device to perform…,” [Line 5].
Claim 5; recites the limitation, “the second external device to perform …,” [Line 9].
Claim 8; recites the limitation, “the second external device to search …,” [Line 7].
Claim 12; recites the limitation, “first external device having a scan function to scan…,” [Line 3].
Claim 12; recites the limitation, “a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform …,” [Line 7].
Claim 13; recites the limitation, “first external device having a scan function to scan …,” [Line 5].
Claim 13; recites the limitation, “a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform …,” [Line 9].
The specification does not demonstrate that applicant has made an invention that achieves the claimed function because the invention is not described with sufficient detail such that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention.
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.
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 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.
Claims 1 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1) hereafter referenced as Kuroyanagi.
Regarding claim 1, Kuroyanagi teaches an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising (Fig. 2, Paragraph [0075]- Kuroyanagi discloses the computer 500 includes an input device 501, a display device 502, an external device interface (I/F) 503, a random access memory (RAM) 504, a read only memory (ROM) 505, a central processing unit (CPU) 506, a communication interface (I/F) 507 and a hard disk drive (HDD) 508, which are connected to one another via a bus B.):
one or more memories storing instructions (Fig. 2, Paragraph [0075]- Kuroyanagi discloses the computer 500 includes an input device 501, a display device 502, an external device interface (I/F) 503, a random access memory (RAM) 504, a read only memory (ROM) 505, a central processing unit (CPU) 506, a communication interface (I/F) 507 and a hard disk drive (HDD) 508, which are connected to one another via a bus B.);
and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform(Fig. 2, Paragraph [0075]- Kuroyanagi discloses the computer 500 includes an input device 501, a display device 502, an external device interface (I/F) 503, a random access memory (RAM) 504, a read only memory (ROM) 505, a central processing unit (CPU) 506, a communication interface (I/F) 507 and a hard disk drive (HDD) 508, which are connected to one another via a bus B. Further in Paragraph [0096]- Kuroyanagi discloses these units are functions that are implemented by or that are caused to function by operating any of the hardware elements illustrated in FIG. 3 in cooperation with the instructions of the CPU 611 according to the program or setting information expanded from the ROM 613, the NVRAM 614 and/or the HDD 615 to the RAM 612.):
giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document (Fig. 27, Paragraph [0230]- Kuroyanagi discloses the scanning unit 125, which is implemented by, for example, the scanner 606, executes scanning.);
displaying a UI screen on a display unit (Fig. 29, Paragraph [0246]- Kuroyanagi discloses after the process of step S510, the scan application 100A displays a UI that receives an operation by a user on the control panel 602, for example.),
which receives a user operation for performing file transmission of a document image obtained by the scan (Fig. 13, Paragraph [0180]- Kuroyanagi discloses when all of the processes in the workflow information acquired in step S111 are completed, the cloud workflow control unit 72 transmits image data, which is a result of the cloud workflow, to the workflow request transmitter/receiver 76.);
and giving second instructions to cause a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform file transmission, to perform file transmission of the document image based on a user operation received via the UI screen (Fig. 13a, Paragraph [0147]- Kuroyanagi discloses after receiving the image data, which is the result of the cloud workflow, the cloud workflow server apparatus 22 transmits the image data, which is the result of the cloud workflow, in response to receiving the image result acquisition request from the cloud workflow server link processing unit 112 of the image forming apparatus 12.).
Regarding claim 11, Kuroyanagi teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1,
Kuroyanagi further teaches wherein the second external device is a cloud server (Fig. 1, Paragraph [0068]- Kuroyanagi discloses the cloud environment 20, which is an example of a service provision environment, includes a cloud workflow server apparatus 22.).
Regarding claim 12, Kuroyanagi teaches a control method of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the control method comprising the steps of (Fig. 1, paragraph [0025]- Kuroyanagi discloses a workflow processing method is provided performed by a first information processing system that resides on a first network and communicably connected with a second information processing system that resides on a second network, the second network being different from the first network):
giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document (Fig. 27, Paragraph [0230]- Kuroyanagi discloses the scanning unit 125, which is implemented by, for example, the scanner 606, executes scanning.);
displaying a UI screen on a display unit (Fig. 29, Paragraph [0246]- Kuroyanagi discloses after the process of step S510, the scan application 100A displays a UI that receives an operation by a user on the control panel 602, for example.), which receives a user operation for performing file transmission of a document image obtained by the scan (Fig. 13, Paragraph [0180]- Kuroyanagi discloses when all of the processes in the workflow information acquired in step S111 are completed, the cloud workflow control unit 72 transmits image data, which is a result of the cloud workflow, to the workflow request transmitter/receiver 76.);
and giving second instructions to cause a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform file transmission, to perform file transmission of the document image based on a user operation received via the UI screen (Fig. 13a, Paragraph [0147]- Kuroyanagi discloses after receiving the image data, which is the result of the cloud workflow, the cloud workflow server apparatus 22 transmits the image data, which is the result of the cloud workflow, in response to receiving the image result acquisition request from the cloud workflow server link processing unit 112 of the image forming apparatus 12.).
Regarding claim 13, Kuroyanagi teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a program for causing a computer to perform a control method of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device (Fig. 5, Paragraph [0079]- Kuroyanagi the external device I/F 503 enables the computer 500 to read or write data from or to the storage medium 503a. Examples of the storage medium 503a include a flexible disc, a compact disc (CD), a digital versatile disc (DVD), a secure digital (SD) memory card, and a universal serial bus (USB) memory.),
the control method comprising the steps of: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document (Fig. 27, Paragraph [0230]- Kuroyanagi discloses the scanning unit 125, which is implemented by, for example, the scanner 606, executes scanning.);
displaying a UI screen on a display unit(Fig. 29, Paragraph [0246]- Kuroyanagi discloses after the process of step S510, the scan application 100A displays a UI that receives an operation by a user on the control panel 602, for example.), which receives a user operation for performing file transmission of a document image obtained by the scan (Fig. 13, Paragraph [0180]- Kuroyanagi discloses when all of the processes in the workflow information acquired in step S111 are completed, the cloud workflow control unit 72 transmits image data, which is a result of the cloud workflow, to the workflow request transmitter/receiver 76.);
and giving second instructions to cause a second external device, which has a function to obtain the document image from the first external device and perform file transmission, to perform file transmission of the document image based on a user operation received via the UI screen (Fig. 13a, Paragraph [0147]- Kuroyanagi discloses after receiving the image data, which is the result of the cloud workflow, the cloud workflow server apparatus 22 transmits the image data, which is the result of the cloud workflow, in response to receiving the image result acquisition request from the cloud workflow server link processing unit 112 of the image forming apparatus 12.).
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 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 of this title, 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 2-3 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Kuroyanagi (US 20190278630 A1) hereafter referenced as Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang et al. (US 20130294694 A1) hereafter referenced as Zhang.
Regarding claim 2, Kuroyanagi teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, Kuroyanagi further teaches wherein the second external device performs OCR processing for the document image obtained from the first external device (Fig. 3, Paragraph [0098]- Kuroyanagi discloses the processing unit 82 executes processes in the cloud environment 20, such as OCR (optical character recognition) processing, file conversion processing, and transmission processing to a storage service as described later. The processing unit 82 executes specific processing content in response to a request from the cloud workflow control unit 72.)
Kuroyanagi fails to explicitly teach the one or more processors further execute the instructions to perform: determining, based on a user operation to designate a character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen, predetermined information relating to file transmission by using results of the OCR processing for the designated character string area.
However, Zhang explicitly teaches the one or more processors further execute the instructions to perform: determining, based on a user operation to designate a character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen, predetermined information relating to file transmission by using results of the OCR processing for the designated character string area (Fig. 6, Paragraph [0061]- Zhang discloses the user may use a mouse to click and drag a rectangular selection box around the title zone 616. A user may utilize multiple simultaneous touches on a user interface 600 to create a rectangular selection box around the title zone 616. A user may input a set of top and left coordinates in addition to pixel height and length for the title zone 616. Further in fig. 6, Paragraph [0066]- Zhang discloses the select destination box 702 may include a document name label 708 and a document name text box 710 into which a user may input a document title or into which a default title may be automatically input.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Kuroyanagi of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document with the teachings of Zhang the one or more processors further execute the instructions to perform: determining, based on a user operation to designate a character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen, predetermined information relating to file transmission by using results of the OCR processing for the designated character string area.
Wherein having Kuroyanagi’s system for workflow management wherein the one or more processors further execute the instructions to perform: determining, based on a user operation to designate a character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen, predetermined information relating to file transmission by using results of the OCR processing for the designated character string area.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to allow for a more efficient system, since both Kuroyanagi and Zhang are systems that scan and send document data. Wherein Kuroyanagi’s system wherein improved system efficiency, while Zhang’s system wherein improved searching and categorization of the system. Please see Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1), Paragraph [0149] and Zhang et al. (US 20130294694 A1) Paragraph [0083].
Regarding claim 3, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, Kuroyanagi fails to explicitly teach wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for designating a destination of file transmission and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to a destination designated based on a user operation to designate the destination via the UI screen.
However, Zhang explicitly teaches wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for designating a destination of file transmission (Fig. 7, Paragraph [0065]- Zhang discloses the destination box 702 enables the user to identify where files scanned using a zone template are subsequently stored.)
and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to a destination designated based on a user operation to designate the destination via the UI screen (Fig. 9, Paragraph [0080]- Zhang discloses finally, the electronic document is stored along with the metadata from the zones in a database 990. This storage will place the electronic document into a database along with the created XML (or other format) file (the "metadata file"), the metadata fields stored in the database according to the metadata map. The database may be hosted on a server, such as server 120 (FIG. 1) or hosted on the internet or in the cloud. Further in Fig. 9, paragraph [0082]- Zhang discloses the electronic document and metadata file may be transmitted to, for example, a Microsoft.RTM. Sharepoint.RTM. server which generates web-accessible file shares.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Kuroyanagi of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document with the teachings of Zhang wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for designating a destination of file transmission and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to a destination designated based on a user operation to designate the destination via the UI screen.
Wherein having Kuroyanagi’s system for workflow management wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for designating a destination of file transmission and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to a destination designated based on a user operation to designate the destination via the UI screen.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to allow for a more efficient system, since both Kuroyanagi and Zhang are systems that scan and send document data. Wherein Kuroyanagi’s system wherein improved system efficiency, while Zhang’s system wherein improved searching and categorization of the system. Please see Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1), Paragraph [0149] and Zhang et al. (US 20130294694 A1) Paragraph [0083].
Regarding claim 9, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 2,
Kuroyanagi fails to explicitly teach wherein the predetermined information is a file name in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage.
However, Zhang explicitly teaches wherein the predetermined information is a file name in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage (Fig. 6, Paragraph [0061]- Zhang discloses the user may use a mouse to click and drag a rectangular selection box around the title zone 616. A user may utilize multiple simultaneous touches on a user interface 600 to create a rectangular selection box around the title zone 616. A user may input a set of top and left coordinates in addition to pixel height and length for the title zone 616. Further in fig. 6, Paragraph [0066]- Zhang discloses the select destination box 702 may include a document name label 708 and a document name text box 710 into which a user may input a document title or into which a default title may be automatically input.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Kuroyanagi of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document with the teachings of Zhang wherein the predetermined information is a file name in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage.
Wherein having Kuroyanagi’s system for workflow management wherein the predetermined information is a file name in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to allow for a more efficient system, since both Kuroyanagi and Zhang are systems that scan and send document data. Wherein Kuroyanagi’s system wherein improved system efficiency, while Zhang’s system wherein improved searching and categorization of the system. Please see Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1), Paragraph [0149] and Zhang et al. (US 20130294694 A1) Paragraph [0083].
Regarding claim 10, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, Kuroyanagi fails to explicitly teach wherein the predetermined information is metadata attached to a file of the document image in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage.
However, Zhang explicitly teaches wherein the predetermined information is metadata attached to a file of the document image in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage (Fig. 6, Paragraph [0061]- Zhang discloses the user may use a mouse to click and drag a rectangular selection box around the title zone 616. A user may utilize multiple simultaneous touches on a user interface 600 to create a rectangular selection box around the title zone 616. A user may input a set of top and left coordinates in addition to pixel height and length for the title zone 616. Further in Fig. 6, Paragraph [0063]- Zhang discloses additional zones with associated metadata fields may also be selected in a similar manner.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Kuroyanagi of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document with the teachings of Zhang wherein the predetermined information is metadata attached to a file of the document image in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage.
Wherein having Kuroyanagi’s system for workflow management wherein the predetermined information is metadata attached to a file of the document image in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to allow for a more efficient system, since both Kuroyanagi and Zhang are systems that scan and send document data. Wherein Kuroyanagi’s system wherein improved system efficiency, while Zhang’s system wherein improved searching and categorization of the system. Please see Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1), Paragraph [0149] and Zhang et al. (US 20130294694 A1) Paragraph [0083].
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable Kuroyanagi (US 20190278630 A1) hereafter referenced as Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang et al. (US 20130294694 A1) hereafter referenced as Zhang and Tecu et al. (US 20050102258 A1) hereafter referenced as Tecu.
Regarding claim 4, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang fails to explicitly teach wherein after file transmission of the document image to a first destination is completed, the UI screen makes a transition into a state capable of receiving a user operation to designate a second destination different from the first destination, and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to the second destination designated based on a user operation to designate the second destination via the UI screen after the transition.
However, Tecu explicitly teaches wherein after file transmission of the document image to a first destination is completed (Fig. 9, Paragraph [0061]- Tecu discloses after saving the profile, the SAMF system 114 closes the Save Profile GUI 900 and returns to the previous GUI from which file parameters were selected so that the user may proceed with further actions.), the UI screen makes a transition into a state capable of receiving a user operation to designate a second destination different from the first destination (Fig. 4, paragraph [0046]- Tecu discloses the SAMF system 114 preferably creates a different filename default and/or a different location default to avoid duplicity of the same file in the same location. Further in Fig. 9, Paragraph [0061]- Tecu discloses after saving the profile, the SAMF system 114 closes the Save Profile GUI 900 and returns to the previous GUI from which file parameters were selected so that the user may proceed with further actions.),
and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to the second destination designated based on a user operation to designate the second destination via the UI screen after the transition (Fig. 4, Paragraph [0047]- Tecu discloses When a user has selected all file formats, corresponding file format options to which the active file is to be converted, filenames, and locations where the files are to be saved, then the user may select the "OK" button 428 in order to initiate the save operation. The command-accepting module 208 receives the "OK" or "Initiate Save" command, and in response, signals the file-saving module 210 to convert the active file into the selected file formats according to the selected file format options, name the new files with the new selected filenames, and saves the new files in the selected locations.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document with the teachings of Tecu wherein after file transmission of the document image to a first destination is completed, the UI screen makes a transition into a state capable of receiving a user operation to designate a second destination different from the first destination, and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to the second destination designated based on a user operation to designate the second destination via the UI screen after the transition.
Wherein having Kuroyanagi’s system for workflow management wherein after file transmission of the document image to a first destination is completed, the UI screen makes a transition into a state capable of receiving a user operation to designate a second destination different from the first destination, and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to the second destination designated based on a user operation to designate the second destination via the UI screen after the transition.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to allow for an improved file saving experience, since both Kuroyanagi and Tecu are systems that scan and send document data. Wherein Kuroyanagi’s system wherein improved system efficiency, while Tecu’s system wherein improved file saving process. Please see Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1), Paragraph [0149] and Tecu et al. (US 20050102258 A1) Paragraph [0050].
Regarding claim 5, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang and Tecu teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 4, Kuroyanagi fails to explicitly teach wherein in a case where the second destination is designated via the UI screen after the transition, the UI screen makes a transition into a state capable of selecting whether to utilize the predetermined information on file transmission to the first destination as the predetermined information on file transmission to the second destination, in the determining, the predetermined information on file transmission to the second destination is determined based on a user operation on the UI screen after the transition.
Although Zhang explicitly teaches wherein in a case where the destination is designated via the UI screen after the transition (Fig. 7, Paragraph [0065]- Zhang discloses the destination box 702 enables the user to identify where files scanned using a zone template are subsequently stored.),
the UI screen makes a transition into a state capable of selecting whether to utilize the predetermined information on file transmission to the first destination as the predetermined information on file transmission to the destination (Fig. 6, Paragraph [0061]- Zhang discloses the user may use a mouse to click and drag a rectangular selection box around the title zone 616. A user may utilize multiple simultaneous touches on a user interface 600 to create a rectangular selection box around the title zone 616. A user may input a set of top and left coordinates in addition to pixel height and length for the title zone 616. Further in fig. 6, Paragraph [0066]- Zhang discloses the select destination box 702 may include a document name label 708 and a document name text box 710 into which a user may input a document title or into which a default title may be automatically input.),
in the determining, the predetermined information on file transmission to the second destination is determined based on a user operation on the UI screen after the transition (Fig. 9, Paragraph [0080]- Zhang discloses finally, the electronic document is stored along with the metadata from the zones in a database 990. This storage will place the electronic document into a database along with the created XML (or other format) file (the "metadata file"), the metadata fields stored in the database according to the metadata map. The database may be hosted on a server, such as server 120 (FIG. 1) or hosted on the internet or in the cloud. Further in Fig. 9, paragraph [0082]- Zhang discloses the electronic document and metadata file may be transmitted to, for example, a Microsoft.RTM. Sharepoint.RTM. server which generates web-accessible file shares.),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Kuroyanagi of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document with the teachings of Zhang wherein in a case where the second destination is designated via the UI screen after the transition, the UI screen makes a transition into a state capable of selecting whether to utilize the predetermined information on file transmission to the first destination as the predetermined information on file transmission to the second destination, in the determining, the predetermined information on file transmission to the second destination is determined based on a user operation on the UI screen after the transition.
Wherein having Kuroyanagi’s system for workflow management wherein in a case where the second destination is designated via the UI screen after the transition, the UI screen makes a transition into a state capable of selecting whether to utilize the predetermined information on file transmission to the first destination as the predetermined information on file transmission to the second destination, in the determining, the predetermined information on file transmission to the second destination is determined based on a user operation on the UI screen after the transition.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to allow for a more efficient system, since both Kuroyanagi and Zhang are systems that scan and send document data. Wherein Kuroyanagi’s system wherein improved system efficiency, while Zhang’s system wherein improved searching and categorization of the system. Please see Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1), Paragraph [0149] and Zhang et al. (US 20130294694 A1) Paragraph [0083].
Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang fails to explicitly teach a second destination and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to the second destination.
However, Tecu explicitly teaches a second destination (Fig. 2, Paragraph [0033]- Tecu discloses the GUI of the text file parameters further includes input locations for the user's entry of filename and location.)
and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to the second destination (Fig. 4, Paragraph [0047]- Tecu discloses When a user has selected all file formats, corresponding file format options to which the active file is to be converted, filenames, and locations where the files are to be saved, then the user may select the "OK" button 428 in order to initiate the save operation. The command-accepting module 208 receives the "OK" or "Initiate Save" command, and in response, signals the file-saving module 210 to convert the active file into the selected file formats according to the selected file format options, name the new files with the new selected filenames, and saves the new files in the selected locations.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document with the teachings of Tecu a second destination and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to the second destination.
Wherein having Kuroyanagi’s system for workflow management wherein a second destination and the second instructions are instructions to cause the second external device to perform file transmission of the document image to the second destination.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to allow for an improved file saving experience, since both Kuroyanagi and Tecu are systems that scan and send document data. Wherein Kuroyanagi’s system wherein improved system efficiency, while Tecu’s system wherein improved file saving process. Please see Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1), Paragraph [0149] and Tecu et al. (US 20050102258 A1) Paragraph [0050].
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Kuroyanagi (US 20190278630 A1) hereafter referenced as Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang et al. (US 20130294694 A1) hereafter referenced as Zhang and Kanada et al. (US 20190197305 A1) hereafter referenced as Kanada.
Regarding claim 6, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang fails to explicitly teach wherein the predetermined information is a name of a folder used as a storage destination in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage.
However, Kanada explicitly teaches wherein the predetermined information is a name of a folder used as a storage destination in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage (Fig. 7, Paragraph [0087]- Kanada discloses in step S240, the file save support unit 21 generates a folder name to be attached when saving the document image data acquired in step S200, using the results of steps S220 and S230. In this case, the file save support unit 21 generates a folder name including the specific character string detected from the character strings in the data in the search in step S220 and the date information extracted from the character strings in the data in step S230.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document with the teachings of Kanada wherein the predetermined information is a name of a folder used as a storage destination in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage.
Wherein having Kuroyanagi’s system for workflow management wherein the predetermined information is a name of a folder used as a storage destination in a case where a file is transmitted and stored in a storage.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to allow for further improving system efficiency, since both Kuroyanagi and Kanada are systems that scan and send document data. Wherein Kuroyanagi’s system wherein improved system efficiency, while Kanada’s system wherein improved efficiency of the system. Please see Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1), Paragraph [0149] and Kanada et al. (US 20190197305 A1) Paragraph [0008].
Regarding claim 7, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang and Kanada teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 6, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang fails to explicitly teach wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for creating a new folder as a folder used as the storage destination and in the determining, in a case where a user operation to designate creation of the new folder is received via the UI screen,a name of the new folder is determined by using results of the OCR processing for a character string area designated based on a user operation to designate the character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen.
However, Kanada explicitly teaches Kanada explicitly teaches wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for creating a new folder as a folder used as the storage destination and in the determining (Fig. 7, Paragraph [0092]- Kanada discloses the control unit 11 detects an operation on a predetermined button (OK button 55 in the example of FIG. 8) on the folder setting screen 50, the folder name set in the folder name input field 53 at that point in time is determined as the folder name for saving the document image data acquired in step S200. That is, the user may attach the file name to the scan data (document image data) of the document read by the scanner 30 merely by visually recognizing the folder name automatically generated in step S240 in the folder name candidate field 54 (second field 54b), and selecting and approving the folder name (pressing the OK button 55). Further in Fig. 7, Paragraph [0094]- Kanada discloses the control unit 11 creates a folder to which the folder name determined in step S260 is attached (step S270), for the document image data acquired in step S200. This completes the flowchart of FIG. 7.),
in a case where a user operation to designate creation of the new folder is received via the UI screen (Fig. 5, Paragraph [0065]- Kanada discloses the user may set an appropriate file name as the file name of the scan data (document image data) of the document scanned by the scanner 30 merely by viewing the candidate file names in the file name candidate field 46 (second field 46b), selecting a file name, making a minimal edit on the file name, and approving (pressing the OK button 45).),
a name of the new folder is determined by using results of the OCR processing for a character string area designated based on a user operation to designate the character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen (Fig. 7, Paragraph [0087]- Kanada discloses in step S240, the file save support unit 21 generates a folder name to be attached when saving the document image data acquired in step S200, using the results of steps S220 and S230. In this case, the file save support unit 21 generates a folder name including the specific character string detected from the character strings in the data in the search in step S220 and the date information extracted from the character strings in the data in step S230.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document with the teachings of Kanada wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for creating a new folder as a folder used as the storage destination and in the determining, in a case where a user operation to designate creation of the new folder is received via the UI screen, a name of the new folder is determined by using results of the OCR processing for a character string area designated based on a user operation to designate the character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen.
Wherein having Kuroyanagi’s system for workflow management wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for creating a new folder as a folder used as the storage destination and in the determining, in a case where a user operation to designate creation of the new folder is received via the UI screen,a name of the new folder is determined by using results of the OCR processing for a character string area designated based on a user operation to designate the character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to allow for further improving system efficiency, since both Kuroyanagi and Kanada are systems that scan and send document data. Wherein Kuroyanagi’s system wherein improved system efficiency, while Kanada’s system wherein improved efficiency of the system. Please see Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1), Paragraph [0149] and Kanada et al. (US 20190197305 A1) Paragraph [0008].
Regarding claim 8, Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang and Kanada teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 6, Although Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang teaches character string area designated based on a user operation to designate the character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen (Fig. 6, Paragraph [0061]- Zhang discloses the user may use a mouse to click and drag a rectangular selection box around the title zone 616. A user may utilize multiple simultaneous touches on a user interface 600 to create a rectangular selection box around the title zone 616. A user may input a set of top and left coordinates in addition to pixel height and length for the title zone 616. Further in fig. 6, Paragraph [0066]- Zhang discloses the select destination box 702 may include a document name label 708 and a document name text box 710 into which a user may input a document title or into which a default title may be automatically input.).
Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang fails to explicitly teach wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for searching for a folder as the storage destination from existing folders, the one or more processors further execute the instructions to perform: obtaining, in a case where a user operation to designate the search is received, search results by requesting the second external device to search for the existing folder by using results of the OCR processing for a character string area designated based on a user operation to designate the character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen, and in the determining, a folder used as the storage destination is determined based on a user operation to select a specific folder via the UI screen on which the search results are displayed.
However, Kanada explicitly teaches wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for searching for a folder as the storage destination from existing folders (Fig. 4, Paragraph [0052]- Kanada discloses the user may set an arbitrary folder (an existing folder or a newly created folder) in the folder setting field 42 by operating the operation receiving unit 13 or the like. In addition, in response to a predetermined operation (for example, a display instruction of a pull-down menu) on the folder setting field 42 by the user, the display control unit 22 displays a folder candidate field 44 in the vicinity of the folder setting field 42, as illustrated in FIG. 4.),
the one or more processors further execute the instructions to perform: obtaining, in a case where a user operation to designate the search is received, search results by requesting the second external device to search for the existing folder by using results of the OCR processing for a character string area designated to designate the character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen (Fig. 7, Paragraph [0087]- Kanada discloses the file save support unit 21 generates a folder name to be attached when saving the document image data acquired in step S200, using the results of steps S220 and S230. In this case, the file save support unit 21 generates a folder name including the specific character string detected from the character strings in the data in the search in step S220 and the date information extracted from the character strings in the data in step S230.),
and in the determining, a folder used as the storage destination is determined based on a user operation to select a specific folder via the UI screen on which the search results are displayed (Fig. 8, Paragraph [0089]- Kanada discloses the folder setting field 52 is an input field for setting a folder (for example, a folder in the storage unit 15) as a save destination of the document image data acquired in step S200. The user may set an arbitrary folder (an existing folder or a newly created folder) in the folder setting field 52 by operating the operation receiving unit 13 or the like.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Kuroyanagi in view of Zhang of an information processing apparatus capable of communicating with an external device, the information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform: giving first instructions to cause a first external device having a scan function to scan a document with the teachings of Kanada wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for searching for a folder as the storage destination from existing folders, the one or more processors further execute the instructions to perform: obtaining, in a case where a user operation to designate the search is received, search results by requesting the second external device to search for the existing folder by using results of the OCR processing for a character string area designated based on a user operation to designate the character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen, and in the determining, a folder used as the storage destination is determined based on a user operation to select a specific folder via the UI screen on which the search results are displayed.
Wherein having Kuroyanagi’s system for workflow management wherein the UI screen is configured to be capable of receiving a user operation for searching for a folder as the storage destination from existing folders, the one or more processors further execute the instructions to perform: obtaining, in a case where a user operation to designate the search is received, search results by requesting the second external device to search for the existing folder by using results of the OCR processing for a character string area designated based on a user operation to designate the character string area for the document image preview-displayed on the UI screen, and in the determining, a folder used as the storage destination is determined based on a user operation to select a specific folder via the UI screen on which the search results are displayed.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to allow for further improving system efficiency, since both Kuroyanagi and Kanada are systems that scan and send document data. Wherein Kuroyanagi’s system wherein improved system efficiency, while Kanada’s system wherein improved efficiency of the system. Please see Kuroyanagi et al. (US 20190278630 A1), Paragraph [0149] and Kanada et al. (US 20190197305 A1) Paragraph [0008].
Conclusion
Listed below are the prior arts made of record and not relied upon but are considered
pertinent to applicant`s disclosure.
Wang et al. (US 20140317544 A1)- A method and a terminal for creating a folder on a user interface are provided. The method includes: receiving, by a terminal, a multiple-selection operation of a user, where the multiple-selection operation refers to a selection operation performed by the user for at least two icons on a user interface simultaneously; creating, by the terminal, a new folder on the user interface according to the multiple-selection operation; and placing, by the terminal, the at least two icons selected simultaneously by the user on the user interface into the new folder...................Please see Fig. 1. Abstract.
KUWANO et al. (US 20240062406 A1)- An information processing apparatus includes a processor configured to: acquire captured data of an image captured surface that is captured by an image capturer, a document, a first definition portion in which a first process that is performed on image data of an image of the document is defined, and a second definition portion in which a second process that differs from the first process is defined being placed on the image captured surface; and perform the first process that is defined in the first definition portion and the second process that is defined in the second definition portion on the image data of the document that is contained in the captured data that is acquired....................Please see Fig. 1. Abstract.
TAKANO et al. (US 20200100056 A1)- An information processing system includes a position detector and a terminal apparatus identifying unit. The position detector detects a position of a terminal apparatus capable of receiving information that is provided. The terminal apparatus identifying unit identifies, as a terminal apparatus to which the information is provided, a terminal apparatus positioned at a predetermined position and associated with a user who belongs to a disclosure range of the information that is provided.....................Please see Fig. 1. Abstract.
UTOH et al. (US 20210014371 A1)- An information processing system includes a service providing system and an apparatus that mutually communicate via a network. The service providing system includes a processing method storage configured to register a processing method in association with identification information of output data; and a first communicator that transmits, to the apparatus, the output data to which the identification information is appended. The apparatus includes an outputter that outputs the output data received from the service providing system together with the identification information; an inputter that accepts input of input data based on the output data output by the outputter; and a second communicator that transmits, to the service providing system, the input data input by the inputter, to which the identification information is appended. The service providing system performs a process on the input data by the processing method associated with the identification information appended to the input data......................Please see Fig. 1. Abstract.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCIUS C.G. ALLEN whose telephone number is (703)756-5987. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8-5pm (EST).
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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at (571)272-9752. 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.
/LUCIUS CAMERON GREEN ALLEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2673
/CHINEYERE WILLS-BURNS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2673