Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/588,128

INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUM

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Feb 27, 2024
Priority
Feb 27, 2023 — JP 2023-027966
Examiner
LEGGETT, ANDREA C.
Art Unit
2171
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Casio Computer Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
492 granted / 649 resolved
+20.8% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
679
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
77.5%
+37.5% vs TC avg
§102
20.9%
-19.1% vs TC avg
§112
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 649 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 in response to the amendments filed on February 19, 2026. Claims 1-3, 5-8 and 11-20 are amended; and claims 1-20 are pending and examined below. Specification The objection of the Specification has been withdrawn pursuant to Applicant amendment. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2, 12 and 17 are allowed. 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)(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. Claims 1, 3-11, 13-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Inoue (U.S. 2022/0284825). With regard to claim 1, Inoue teaches an information processing device ([0028] a display screen for a web application stored in the server 10 is displayed on the web browser in the terminal 20) comprising a computer (Fig. 1) configured to: detect that second information for first information acquired from a database is input by a user operation ([0024] The terminal 20 includes a CPU 21; [0061] the CPU 21 updates the storage contents and the display contents in the process input field 101b2… the CPU 21 displays the calculation result in a calculation result display field 101b23 of the process input field 101b2); and generate, in response to detecting an instruction to generate an object for the second information ([0053] FIG. 6 shows the test sticky note 101 in a state in which the equation creation tool is activated. As shown in FIG. 6, an equation creation tool 101b22 is activated in the lower region of the process input field 101b2; [0063] the CPU 21 determines whether a drag operation is performed. The drag operation according to the embodiment is an operation of moving a selection position in a state in which an equation or the like displayed in the process input field 101b2 is selected), a first object including the first information ([0067] the answer input to the answer input field 101b1 using the drag-and-drop operation as a first operation can be displayed), and not including the second information (Fig. 5, Answer input field 101b1; as shown in Fig. 5, the answer portion is considered blank and does not contain an actual answer), a second object including the second information ([0067] FIG. 7 shows an example in which an equation y=4x−4 indicated by A in the calculation result display field 101b23 is copied to the answer input field 101b1), and information indicating that the first object and the second object are in a correspondence relationship ([0067] a first operation can be displayed, for example, as shown in FIG. 7. FIG. 7 shows an example in which an equation y=4x−4 indicated by A in the calculation result display field 101b23 is copied to the answer input field 101b1). With regard to claim 3, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches wherein the first object and the second object are display objects displayable on the object display screen (Fig. 12, test sticky note 101 and check sticky note 102), and the information indicating that the first object and the second object are in the correspondence relationship includes image information indicating that the first object and the second object are associated with each other ([0097] contents input to the answer input area 101b of the test sticky note 101 may be copied to the check equation input area 102b of the check sticky note 102 or, reversely, contents input to the check equation input area 102b of the check sticky note 102 may be copied to the answer input area 101b of the test sticky note 101). With regard to claim 4, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches wherein the first object and the second object (Fig. 12, test sticky note 101 and check sticky note 102) include information regarding storage destinations in which the first information and the second information are stored, respectively ([0037] The answer submit button 101e is a button that accepts an operation of sending, to the server 10, the answer input to the answer input field 101b1. As will be described later, in the embodiment, when the answer submit button 101e is selected, the process input to the process input field 101b2 is sent to the server 10 together with the answer input to the answer input field 101b1). With regard to claim 5, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches wherein the computer is further configured to: update the second information according to a user operation on the second object ([0097] contents input to the answer input area 101b of the test sticky note 101 may be copied to the check equation input area 102b of the check sticky note 102 or, reversely, contents input to the check equation input area 102b of the check sticky note 102 may be copied to the answer input area 101b of the test sticky note 101). With regard to claim 6, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches wherein each of the first information and the second information includes at least one element selected from the group consisting of a character ([0097] Additionally, the test sticky note 101 and the check sticky note 102 may be associated as one group. At this time, a string 105 indicating that the test sticky note 101 and the check sticky note 102 are associated may be displayed between the test sticky note 101 and the check sticky note 102), a sound, a still image ([0097] Additionally, the test sticky note 101 and the check sticky note 102 may be associated as one group. At this time, a string 105 indicating that the test sticky note 101 and the check sticky note 102 are associated may be displayed between the test sticky note 101 and the check sticky note 102), and a moving image. With regard to claim 7, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches wherein the computer is further configured to: transfer corresponding object information including the first object, the second object, and the information indicating that the first object and the second object are in the correspondence relationship from a first device communicatively connected to the information processing device to a second device communicatively connected to the information processing device ([0024] The terminal 20 may be an electronic device such as a personal computer (PC), a tablet terminal, or a smartphone. In addition, the terminal 20 may be a scientific calculator or the like having a communication function; [0028] the user designates the address of the server 10 on a web browser that operates on the terminal 20. At this time, a display screen for a web application stored in the server 10 is displayed on the web browser in the terminal 20. A request to the server 10 is issued in accordance with an operation performed on the display screen via the input device 25). With regard to claim 8, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches wherein the computer is further configured to: cause, in case of receiving the corresponding object information by the second device, the second device to output the first information and the second information to an output device according to the received corresponding object information (According to the information stated in [0097], the web-based application environment and a server is disclosed and the additional devices in a web-based environment to edit information is insignificant); update the second object according to a user operation on the second information output to the output device ([0067] assuming that the equation or the like copied in step S115 is the answer input by the user, the CPU 21 updates the contents of the answer stored in, for example, the RAM 23. In addition, the CPU 21 updates the display contents in the answer input field 101b1); and transfer the corresponding object information in which the second object is updated from the second device to the first device ([0086] the CPU 21 updates the storage contents and the display contents in the check equation input field 102b2 based on the calculation result). With regard to claim 9, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches wherein the first object and the second object are electronic sticky notes (Fig. 12, test sticky note 101 and check sticky note 102). With regard to claim 10, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches wherein the first information indicates a test question (Fig. 2; Figs. 5-7; Figs. 9-12; [abstract] accepting input of an answer to a question and a process until the answer is derived, displaying the answer and the process on a display), and the second information indicates an answer input by a user to the test question (Fig. 2; Figs. 5-7; Figs. 9-12; [0034] The test sticky note 101 includes a question display area 101a and an answer input area 101b. The question display area 101a is an area used to display a test question. The answer input area 101b is an area used by the user to input an answer to the question. The answer input area 101b is provided with an answer input field 101b1 and a process input field 101b2. The answer input field 101b1 is an input field to input an answer). With regard to claim 11, the method claim corresponds to the device claim 1, respectively, and is rejected with the same rationale. With regard to claim 13, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches further comprising: updating the second information according to a user operation on the second object ([0067] assuming that the equation or the like copied in step S115 is the answer input by the user, the CPU 21 updates the contents of the answer stored in, for example, the RAM 23. In addition, the CPU 21 updates the display contents in the answer input field 101b1). With regard to claim 14, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches further comprising: transferring corresponding object information including the first object, the second object, and the information indicating that the first object and the second object are in the correspondence relationship from a first device communicatively connected to the information processing device to a second device communicatively connected to the information processing device ([0024] The terminal 20 may be an electronic device such as a personal computer (PC), a tablet terminal, or a smartphone. In addition, the terminal 20 may be a scientific calculator or the like having a communication function; [0028] the user designates the address of the server 10 on a web browser that operates on the terminal 20. At this time, a display screen for a web application stored in the server 10 is displayed on the web browser in the terminal 20. A request to the server 10 is issued in accordance with an operation performed on the display screen via the input device 25). With regard to claim 15, the method claim corresponds to the device claim 8, respectively, and is rejected with the same rationale. With regard to claim 16, the medium claim corresponds to the device claim 1, respectively, and is rejected with the same rationale. With regard to claim 18, the medium claim corresponds to the device claim 5, respectively, and is rejected with the same rationale. With regard to claim 19, the limitations are addressed above and Inoue teaches wherein the program further causes the computer to execute the step of: transferring corresponding object information including the first object, the second object, and the information indicating that the first object and the second object are in the correspondence relationship from a first device communicatively connected to the information processing device to a second device communicatively connected to the information processing device ([0024] The terminal 20 may be an electronic device such as a personal computer (PC), a tablet terminal, or a smartphone. In addition, the terminal 20 may be a scientific calculator or the like having a communication function; [0028] the user designates the address of the server 10 on a web browser that operates on the terminal 20. At this time, a display screen for a web application stored in the server 10 is displayed on the web browser in the terminal 20. A request to the server 10 is issued in accordance with an operation performed on the display screen via the input device 25). With regard to claim 20, the medium claim corresponds to the device claim 8, respectively, and is rejected with the same rationale. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 2-19-2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the Inoue reference fails to teach that the information is “not including the second information”. After careful thought and consideration, Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant. The Inoue reference teaches educational web service which provides input of an answer to a particular question and a process until the answer is derived, according to the abstract. In other words, Inoue displays questions such as those shown in Figures 1, 5, 9 and 12 (displayed by mathematical questions). While there is an answer portion displayed, such as in Fig. 5, there is no answer inputted by the user. In other words, only the ‘Answer’ heading is displayed, with no answer inserted by the user. There is no second information included, if the answer is not displayed in the answer section. Applicant’s amendments with respect to claims 2, 12 and 17, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Therefore, claims 2, 12 and 17 are deemed as allowable subject matter. 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 ANDREA C. LEGGETT whose telephone number is (571)270-7700. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Kieu Vu can be reached at 571-272-4057. 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. /ANDREA C LEGGETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 27, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Feb 12, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 12, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 19, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 03, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12681634
METHOD FOR PROVIDING CORRECTED STROKE INPUT AND DISPLAY DEVICE THEREOF
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12668145
MULTIPLE VEHICLES TO PROVIDE ENERGY TO A LOCATION
4y 2m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12668248
Mobile Device And System For Automated Trip Familiarity Recognition And Corresponding Method Thereof
3y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12669969
REAL MACHINE DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEM, REAL MACHINE DIAGNOSTIC COMPOSITE SYSTEM, AND REAL MACHINE DIAGNOSTIC METHOD
2y 6m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12663290
MAP HEALTH MONITORING FOR AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS
4y 2m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+20.7%)
3y 2m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 649 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month