Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/574,372

OPERATION DISPLAY SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD AND INFORMATION PROCESSING PROGRAM

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Dec 27, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, KENNY
Art Unit
2171
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Omron Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
49%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
65%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 49% of resolved cases
49%
Career Allow Rate
88 granted / 178 resolved
-5.6% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
210
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.7%
-33.3% vs TC avg
§103
51.6%
+11.6% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 178 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . This action is made non-final. Claims 1-19 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 10, and 11 are independent claims. Priority Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s claim to foreign priority of Japanese application JP2021-115279 filed 07/12/2021 in this national stage application, which is a 371 of PCT/JP2022/014420 filed 03/25/2022. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “input unit” in claim 1 “control unit” in claim 1 “acquisition unit” in claims 1 and 9 “generation unit” in claims 1-5 “display unit” in claim 6 Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baba (US 2006/0187483 A1). Regarding claim 1, Baba teaches an operation display system that constitutes at least a part of a control system for controlling a control target (MFP 100 of FIGS. 1 and 14 and [0044-0050]: operation display system/MFP 100 constitutes a control system, with various units outlined in FIG. 14, for controlling a control target/MFP), the operation display system comprising: a display unit (display 116 of FIG. 14 and [0049]); an input unit configured to receive a user operation (under 112(f), “input unit”, “control unit”, “acquisition unit”, and “generation unit” are interpreted as the corresponding unit(s) in conjunction with “a controller in a data processing unit 115” as stated in [0046]; input unit 113 of FIG. 14 and [0046-0047], FIG. 15 and [0053-0054]); a control unit configured to control the display unit to display a selected page of one or more pages prepared in advance, each of the pages including one or more first operation objects each for instructing predetermined processing (data processing unit 115 of FIGS. 14 and 15 and [0047-0053], FIG. 4 and [0073]: data processing unit 115/control unit controls display unit 116 to display a selected page, such as user interface screen 1400 of FIG. 4, in advance. This page includes a first operation object, such as Box mode key 1303, detailed in [0069-0070] and [0073], for predetermined processing); an acquisition unit configured to acquire an operation history including one or more contents of one or more operations on the one or more first operation objects ([0015]: “detecting unit configured to detect… history information about an operation command relating to the operation command from among the history information stored in the storing unit”; FIG. 7 and [0078], FIG. 10 and [0081-0082]: an operation history including one or more contents of operations 2103 on the one or more first operation objects, like Box mode key 1303 indicated by “BOX” under operation column 2103, is acquired. Aside from operation column 2103, operation history may include additional information seen in FIG. 10, like box name column 2104; See S106 of FIG. 11, FIG. 16, and [0085-0092] for additional details regarding acquisition of an operation history); and a generation unit configured to extract one or more operations each matching with a predetermined rule in the acquired operation history and that generates, based on the extracted one or more operations, one or more second operation objects each for instructing the same processing as processing of a corresponding one of the one or more first operation objects operated by a user (FIGS. 7-8 and [0078-0079] and FIG. 10 and [0081-0082]: generation unit involves data processing unit 115 in connection with input unit 113 and display unit 116 as supported by FIG. 14 and this figure’s corresponding paragraphs. An operation, like “BOX”, is extracted and matches a predetermined rule of the user having selected “BOX” as evident in the acquired operation history. Based on the extracted “BOX” operation, one or more second operation objects including at least shortcut key 1500 is generated for instructing the same processing as one of the one or more first operation objects operated by a user). Regarding claim 2, Baba further teaches the operation display system according to claim 1, wherein the generation unit is configured to extract an operation for outputting an instruction for controlling the control target, among the contents of the operations included in the operation history (FIGS. 7-8 and [0078-0079] and FIG. 10 and [0081-0082]: generation unit involves data processing unit 115 in connection with input unit 113 and display unit 116 as supported by FIG. 14 and this figure’s corresponding paragraphs. An operation, like “PRINTED”, is extracted for outputting a print instruction for controlling the MFP/control target, among the contents of the operations included in the operation history; See S106 of FIG. 11, FIG. 16, and [0085-0092] for additional details regarding acquisition of an operation history). Regarding claim 3, Baba further teaches the operation display system according to claim 1, wherein the generation unit is configured to exclude a user operation for page transition among the contents of the operations included in the operation history (S106 of FIG. 11, FIG. 16, and [0085-0092]: operation history includes at least information under operation column 2103 and box name column 2104. As detailed in [0091], “The history information extraction processing at step S124 extracts information common to the occurrences of the operation from the description of the operation specified by the user, contained in the operation column 2103 of FIG. 10, the box names accessed by the user, contained in the referenced box name column 2104, and the file names accessed by the user, contained in the referenced file name column 2105. For the box names accessed by the user contained in the referenced box name columns 2104, only the common portion of the box name, starting form the top-level name, is extracted.” Thus, a manual display operation, such as the manual display of files for “SCOREBOOK” box, analogous to the display of “REGULAR MEETING” box as supported in FIGS. 4-5 and [0073-0075], seen in the first row under the headers in the user’s use history reference screen 2100 in FIG. 10, is excluded from the extraction by the generation unit). Regarding claim 4, Baba further teaches the operation display system according to claim 1, wherein the generation unit is configured to exclude at least one of an alarm viewer checking operation, a troubleshooting information display operation, and a manual display operation among the contents of the operations included in the operation history (S106 of FIG. 11, FIG. 16, and [0085-0092]: operation history includes at least information under operation column 2103 and box name column 2104. As detailed in [0091], “The history information extraction processing at step S124 extracts information common to the occurrences of the operation from the description of the operation specified by the user, contained in the operation column 2103 of FIG. 10, the box names accessed by the user, contained in the referenced box name column 2104, and the file names accessed by the user, contained in the referenced file name column 2105. For the box names accessed by the user contained in the referenced box name columns 2104, only the common portion of the box name, starting form the top-level name, is extracted.” Thus, a manual display operation, such as the manual display of files for “SCOREBOOK” box, analogous to the display of “REGULAR MEETING” box as supported in FIGS. 4-5 and [0073-0075], seen in the first row under the headers in the user’s use history reference screen 2100 in FIG. 10, is excluded from the extraction by the generation unit). Regarding claim 5, Baba further teaches the operation display system according to claim 1, wherein the generation unit is configured to generate a new page including the one or more second operation objects (FIG. 8 and [0079]: new page/user interface screen seen in FIG. 8, is generated including the one or more second operation objects, which includes the created shortcut key 1500). Regarding claim 6, Baba further teaches the operation display system according claim 1, wherein the display unit is configured to display a page that does not include an operation object other than the one or more second operation objects (under 112(f), “display unit” is interpreted as the corresponding unit(s) in conjunction with “a controller in a data processing unit 115” as stated in [0046]; FIG. 8 and [0079]: the one or more second operation objects includes at least shortcut key 1500 in addition to other operation objects, 1301-1304 and box keys under box name column 1401. Each of these objects is each for instructing the same processing as processing of a corresponding one of the one or more first operation objects operated by a user as seen initially in FIG. 4 and [0073]. Thus an operation object other than the one or more second operation objects is not included on the page as seen in FIG. 8). Regarding claim 7, Baba further teaches the operation display system according to claim 1, wherein each of the one or more second operation objects is a copy of a corresponding first operation object (FIG. 8 and [0079]: the one or more second operation objects includes at least shortcut key 1500 in addition to other operation objects, 1301-1304 and box keys under box name column 1401. Each of these objects is each for instructing the same processing as processing of a corresponding one of the one or more first operation objects operated by a user as seen initially in FIG. 4 and [0073]. Note that shortcut key 1500 is a copy of a corresponding first operation object of a box name key “REGULAR MEETING”. Thus, each of the one or more second operation objects is a copy of a corresponding first operation object). Regarding claim 8, Baba further teaches the operation display system according to claim 1, wherein each of the one or more second operation objects includes an instruction for accessing a corresponding first operation object (FIG. 8 and [0079]: the one or more second operation objects includes at least shortcut key 1500 in addition to other operation objects, 1301-1304 and box keys under box name column 1401. Each of these objects is each for instructing the same processing as processing of a corresponding one of the one or more first operation objects operated by a user as seen initially in FIG. 4 and [0073]. The only special button is shortcut key 1500 which is a copy of a corresponding combination of first operation objects). Regarding claim 9, Baba further teaches the operation display system according to claim 1, wherein the acquisition unit is configured to start acquiring the operation history in response to receiving a predetermined specific user operation ([0015]: “detecting unit configured to detect, detect, on the basis of an operation command received by the receiving unit, history information about an operation command relating to the operation command from among the history information stored in the storing unit”; S106 of FIG. 11, FIG. 16, and [0085-0092]: a predetermined specific user operation corresponds to S102 in which the box operation command is selected, which eventually proceeds to S106 for acquiring the operation history). Regarding claims 10 and 12-15, the claims recite an information processing method in a control system for controlling a control target, the information processing method comprising limitations corresponding to the operation display system of claims 1-5, respectively, and are therefore rejected on the same premises. Regarding claims 11 and 16-19, the claims recite non-transitory computer-readable medium storing thereon an information processing program to be executed by a computer that constitutes at least a part of a control system for controlling a control target, the information processing program, when executed by the computer, causing the computer to perform (MFP 100 of FIGS. 1 and 14-15 and [0044-0050]: DRAM and/or SRAM represents non-transitory computer-readable medium. Computer/MFP 100 constitutes at least part of a control system, with various units outlined in FIG. 14, for controlling a control target/MFP). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, including: US 2015/0277672 A1: user selection frequency threshold for insertion of shorts into a shortcut list US 2017/0301349 A1: acquisition of operation inputs as operation history Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4980. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7AM to 5PM. 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, MATTHEW ELL can be reached on (571)270-3264. 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. /KENNY NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 27, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Apr 04, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602452
FILTERING OF DYNAMIC OBJECTS FROM VEHICLE GENERATED MAP
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12579481
Fluid Machine, Fluid Machine Managing Method and Fluid Machine Managing System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578202
NAVIGATION PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578847
SECURE SCREEN RENDERING WITH ACCESSIBILITY DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579456
COGNITIVE PLATFORM FOR DERIVING EFFORT METRIC FOR OPTIMIZING COGNITIVE TREATMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
49%
Grant Probability
65%
With Interview (+15.9%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 178 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month