DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 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: acquirer in claim 1-9.
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.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre- AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
The CPU 11 causes the print control device 1 to implement the acquiring function FU1 and the control function FU2 (paragraph [0050]).
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 1-2 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tomita et al. (US 2008/0288879 A1).
With respect to Claim 1, Tomita’879 shows a print control device coupled to a print device including a plurality of hardware buttons (paragraph [0038] image forming apparatus 100 and a PC 170, image forming apparatus 100 including hardware buttons), comprising:
an acquirer configured to acquire, from the print device, state information indicating a state of the print device (paragraphs [0048]-[0049] the image forming apparatus 100 stores information indicating the current state of the user-interface image into the instance corresponding to the user-interface image, The image forming apparatus 100 transmits the created user-interface image along with the issued ID to the client having made the user-interface display request ), and a controller configured to, in accordance with the state information, select, among the plurality of hardware buttons, a hardware button to be displayed as a software button by a display and to cause the display to display the software button for receiving an operation corresponding to the selected hardware button (paragraph [0048] The remote user-interface image 210 includes a message 212 and software buttons 213. The message 212 indicates to the user that the scan and copy functions are disabled on the remote terminal. The software buttons 213 are provided correspondingly in function and appearance to hardware buttons provided on the operation panel 110).
With respect to Claim 2, Tomita’879 shows the print control device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to cause the display to display a screen appearing after switching depending on the state of the print device indicated by the state information, and to cause the display to display the software button in accordance with the screen (paragraph [0044] client issues a user-interface display request to the image forming apparatus, in response to a predetermined event, such as switch-on or a user operation, paragraph [0048] The states of user-interface image are hierarchically organized and switched from one another in response to a user operation, the image forming apparatus 100 stores information indicating the current state of the user-interface image into the instance corresponding to the user-interface image).
With respect to Claims 8 and 9, rejection analogous to those presented for claim 1, are applicable.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomita et al. (US 2008/0288879 A1) in view of Kanamori (US 2023/0208989 A1).
With respect to Claim 3, Tomita’879 shows the print control device according to claim 2, wherein when the state information indicates an error state of the print device, the controller is configured to cause the display to display the software button in accordance with the guidance screen (paragraph [0056] the image forming apparatus 100 creates an error message user-interface image), [ ].
Tomita’879 does not specifically shows the controller is configured to cause the display to as the screen, a guidance screen for clearing the error state and to cause the display to display the software button in accordance with the guidance screen.
Kanamori’989 shows controller is configured to cause the display to as the screen, a guidance screen for clearing the error state and to cause the display to display the software button in accordance with the guidance screen (paragraphs [0055]-[0057] displays an error handling method guidance screen on the display unit 108, figures 5A).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify Tomita’879 to include controller is configured to cause the display to as the screen, a guidance screen for clearing the error state and to cause the display to display the software button in accordance with the guidance screen method taught by Kanamori’989. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the system’s ability to be able to improve executing maintenance (paragraph [0047]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomita et al. (US 2008/0288879 A1) in view of Kakitsuba (US 2024/0402963 A1)
With respect to Claim 4, Tomita’879 does not specifically shows the print control device according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of hardware buttons include a cancel button for receiving an operation of cancelling a print job held by the print device while an operation of the print device is temporarily stopped, and when the state information indicates a temporary stop state of the operation that is a hold state of the print job, the controller is configured to cause the display to display a cancel operation area for receiving an operation of cancelling the print job.
Kakitsuba’963 shows wherein the plurality of hardware buttons include a cancel button for receiving an operation of cancelling a print job held by the print device while an operation of the print device is temporarily stopped, and when the state information indicates a temporary stop state of the operation that is a hold state of the print job, the controller is configured to cause the display to display a cancel operation area for receiving an operation of cancelling the print job (paragraphs [0051], [0061] and [0064] status of “print job paused”, cancel operation can be received by a user, figures 2 and 4B).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify Tomita’879 to include a cancel button for receiving an operation of cancelling a print job held by the print device while an operation of the print device is temporarily stopped, and when the state information indicates a temporary stop state of the operation that is a hold state of the print job, the controller is configured to cause the display to display a cancel operation area for receiving an operation of cancelling the print job method taught by Kakitsuba’963. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the system’s ability to be able to improve the usability of the print system when adding a cancel button to be provided to a dialogue (paragraph [0082]) .
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomita et al. (US 2008/0288879 A1) in view of Uruma (US 2022/0291883 A1).
With respect to Claim 7, Tomita’879 does not specifically shows the print control device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to acquire a frequency of use of the software button corresponding to each of the hardware buttons and to cause the display to display the software button placed in accordance with the frequency of use.
Uruma’883 shows wherein the controller is configured to acquire a frequency of use of the software button corresponding to each of the hardware buttons and to cause the display to display the software button placed in accordance with the frequency of use (figure 5 paragraphs [0040] and [0054] the application button 201 for executing a job which is high in use frequency and has a high possibility that the job is to be normally completed is displayed on the home screen 200, which makes it possible to increase the operability ).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify Tomita’879 to include the controller is configured to acquire a frequency of use of the software button corresponding to each of the hardware buttons and to cause the display to display the software button placed in accordance with the frequency of use method taught by Uruma’883. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the system’s ability to be able to improve increasing operability of a frequently used button (paragraph [0054]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang (US 2013/0081081 A1): paragraph [0046] and claim 7, key usage patterns, which include the frequency of remote control usage, the frequency of certain key usage, and the frequency of certain key transferring. In this work, probability tables are maintained for all these patterns, and used in identifying the user or user group and determining the content layout that fits the best into the user's behavior model.
Shimizu et al. (US 2022/0321714 A1): paragraph [0083] a display time, that is, an execution waiting time of the cancel button is preferably adjusted according to a cancel button use frequency of an individual user.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IRIANA CRUZ whose telephone number is (571)270-3246. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6.
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, Akwasi M. Sarpong can be reached at (571) 270-3438. 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.
/IRIANA CRUZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681