DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 and 18 have been cancelled.
Claims 2-17, 19 and 20 are currently pending.
Claims 9-15 are withdrawn from consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/24/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues on page 5 of the response in essence that: The claimed method is practically applied in the determination of authenticity of the first component and improves the imaging device by improving the determination of authenticity and therefore improving the device security. The improvements of the invention are discussed in more detail below, but briefly, allow out-of-band communication of functionality which therefore improves device security.
The claims do not provide an inventive concept as they do not provide an improvement to any type of particular machine. Detecting characteristics of a data line communication does not constitute a patentable improvement in computer technology. The claims do not improve the computer system that is implementing the abstract idea.
The Applicant argues on page 5 of the response in essence that: The clock signal is on the serial clock line, not on the data line. As such, the clock frequency is not a data line communication.
Fister discloses that at step 820, master I2C circuit 135 of bus master 130 transfers data to I2C circuit 810 of slave component 805 via shared bus system 200 (paragraph 49). At step 825, the frequency of the clock signals associated with the data transfer is determined (paragraph 49). Because the clock signal is associated with the data transfer, it is a feature of a communication. Therefore, the communication is transferred on the seral data line which is a data line communication.
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.
Claim 2-8, 16, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 19 recites “receiving data comprising: determining, by the second component, indirect data from a feature of a communication between the first and second components of the imaging device, wherein the communication is a data line communication; and determining whether the first component is authentic based on the received indirect data.” It is unclear whether the method of claim 19 requires the recited limitations because the claim does not recite that the method comprises receiving data. Therefore, the scope of claim 19 is unclear.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the data" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 2-8, 16, 17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The flow chart in MPEP 2106, Subject Matter Eligibility Test For Products and Processes, will be referenced to establish that the subject matter is ineligible.
Step 1: claim 1 recites a method and claim 17 recites a product. Claims 1 and 17 therefore fall under one of the four recognized statutory categories.
Step 2A Prong One: However, claims 1 and 17 are further directed to the abstract idea of detecting characteristics of a data line communication. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2). Furthermore, the claims do not preclude the limitations from being performed in the human mind.
Step 2A Prong Two: Additional elements include a first and second component of an imaging device, and a supply item. The involvement of a generic computer components does not provide additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the recitations to hardware involve no more than a generic computer performing generic computer functions that are well understood, routine and conventional activities previously known in the industry. That is, other than reciting “by a processor,” nothing in the claim precludes the steps from practically being performed in the human mind. See MPEP 2106.05(d)).
Step 2B: The claims do not provide an inventive concept as they do not provide an improvement to any type of particular machine. Detecting characteristics of a data line communication does not constitute a patentable improvement in computer technology. The claims do not improve the computer system that is implementing the abstract idea. While the Applicant’s Specification discusses the inventive concept of confirming the authenticity of a supply component of the printing system to ensure correction operation, this inventive concept is not embodied by the claims. The claims do not contain recitations to authenticating a component and preventing unauthenticated components from being used. Therefore claims 1-8 and 16-20 are non-statutory.
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.
Claims 2-4, 16, 17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fister et al. US Publication 2021/0181665 (hereafter “Fister”).
Referring to claim 2, Fister discloses wherein determining indirect data from the feature of the communication comprises measuring a property of the feature (paragraph 46, Authentic slave component 205 may measure a change in the SCL frequency in many different ways, depending on its available resources and the desired complexity of the algorithm).
Referring to claim 3, Fister discloses wherein measuring the property of the feature comprises counting (paragraph 45, For example, the clock may be slowed for a relatively long period. I2C circuit 225 or 230 may recognize this accumulation of slow bytes and respond accordingly once a certain threshold is reached).
Referring to claim 4, Fister discloses wherein the property is a number of bytes in the feature (paragraph 45, For example, the clock may be slowed for a relatively long period. I2C circuit 225 or 230 may recognize this accumulation of slow bytes and respond accordingly once a certain threshold is reached).
Referring to claim 16, Fister discloses sending the indirect data by the first component of the imaging device, to the second component of the imaging device by converting, by the first component, the data into a feature of a communication and causing the communication to occur between the first and second components (paragraph 49, At step 820, master I2C circuit 135 of bus master 130 may transfer data to I2C circuit 810 of slave component 805 via shared bus system 200 (FIG. 2)).
Referring to claim 17, Fister discloses a supply item for an imaging device, the supply item configured to perform an authentication algorithm based on indirect data (paragraph 46, Authentic slave component 205 may measure a change in the SCL frequency in many different ways, depending on its available resources and the desired complexity of the algorithm), when installed in the imaging device and the supply item further configured to:
receive the indirect data from a first component of the imaging device by:
determining the indirect data from a feature of a communication between the first component of the imaging device and the supply item, wherein the communication is a data line communication (paragraph 49, At step 825, slave I2C circuit 810 may determine whether the frequency of the clock signals from master I2C circuit 135, associated with the data transfer in step 820, has been inconsistent (i.e., not delivered at a fixed frequency)), and/or
send the indirect data to the first component of the imaging device by:
converting the indirect data into a feature of a communication and causing the communication to occur between the first component and the supply item, wherein the communication is a data line communication (paragraph 49, At step 820, master I2C circuit 135 of bus master 130 may transfer data to I2C circuit 810 of slave component 805 via shared bus system 200 (FIG. 2)).
Referring to claim 19, Fister discloses a method of determining authenticity of a first component installed in an imaging device, the method comprising:
receiving indirect data from the first component of an imaging device, by a second component of the imaging device (paragraph 49, At step 835, slave I2C circuit 810 may send the generated response determined at step 830a or the identified response at step 830b to master I2C circuit 135, depending on whether step 830a or step 830b is performed), receiving data comprising:
determining, by the second component, indirect data from a feature of a communication between the first and second components of the imaging device, wherein the communication is a data line communication (paragraph 49, At step 820, master I2C circuit 135 of bus master 130 may transfer data to I2C circuit 810 of slave component 805 via shared bus system 200 (FIG. 2))
determining whether the first component is authentic based on the received data (paragraph 51, At step 850, processor 220 may determine whether, based on the comparison, slave I2C circuit 810 is part of authentic slave component 205 or non-authentic slave component 210).
Referring to claim 20, Fister discloses wherein determining whether the first component is authentic comprises using the indirect data to perform an authentication algorithm (paragraph 46, Authentic slave component 205 may measure a change in the SCL frequency in many different ways, depending on its available resources and the desired complexity of the algorithm).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fister et al. US Publication 2021/0181665 as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Foley et al. US Publication 2019/0320084 (hereafter “Foley”).
Referring to claim 5, Fister discloses wherein determining indirect data from the feature of the communication comprises measuring a property of the feature (paragraph 46, Authentic slave component 205 may measure a change in the SCL frequency in many different ways, depending on its available resources and the desired complexity of the algorithm), but does not disclose expressly wherein the property is a number of transmissions.
Foley discloses wherein the property is a number of transmissions (paragraph 32, If supply chip 110 is still busy processing the most recent write command (preceding the one or more Get Response commands received) upon receiving a read command from controller 20 corresponding to the Get Response command at step 502, supply chip 110 again sends a busy response to controller 20 over data line 32 of communication bus 30 at step 503 [determining that supply chip 110 is still busy requires determining that at least two busy responses have been sent]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to measure a number of transmissions from a communication. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable efficient communication between the imaging device and supply components. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Foley with Fister to obtain the invention as specified in claim 5.
Referring to claim 6, Foley discloses wherein the number of transmissions is a number of a type of transmission (paragraph 32, If supply chip 110 is still busy processing the most recent write command (preceding the one or more Get Response commands received) upon receiving a read command from controller 20 corresponding to the Get Response command at step 502, supply chip 110 again sends a busy response to controller 20 over data line 32 of communication bus 30 at step 503).
Referring to claim 7, Foley discloses wherein the type of transmission is a busy response (paragraph 32, If supply chip 110 is still busy processing the most recent write command (preceding the one or more Get Response commands received) upon receiving a read command from controller 20 corresponding to the Get Response command at step 502, supply chip 110 again sends a busy response to controller 20 over data line 32 of communication bus 30 at step 503).
Referring to claim 8, Foley discloses wherein the number of transmissions is a number of consecutive transmissions, each transmission in the consecutive transmissions being of a same type (paragraph 32, If supply chip 110 is still busy processing the most recent write command (preceding the one or more Get Response commands received) upon receiving a read command from controller 20 corresponding to the Get Response command at step 502, supply chip 110 again sends a busy response to controller 20 over data line 32 of communication bus 30 at step 503 [determining that supply chip 110 is still busy requires determining that at least two busy responses have been sent]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER K HUNTSINGER whose telephone number is (571)272-7435. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00.
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, Benny Q Tieu can be reached at 571-272-7490. 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.
/PETER K HUNTSINGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682