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 .
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.
The following title is suggested:
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INSPECTION SYSTEM, METHOD OF CONTROLLING INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING INSPECTION SYSTEM COMPRISING A DISPLAY CONTROLLER THAT DISPLAYS A MARGIN AREA NECESSARY FOR EXTRACTION AND IDENTIFIABLE WITH RESPECT TO A SET AREA FOR EXTRACTION PROCESSING.
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: display unit in claim 20.
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 § 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 (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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komazawa in view of Goda (US Pub 2021/0303844).
Re claim 1: Komazawa discloses an information processing apparatus comprising:
one or more controllers having one or more processors and one or more memories (e.g. the system discloses a memory storing programs that are executed by a CPU, which is taught in ¶ [32] and [33].), the one or more controllers being configured as:
[0032] The constituent elements 11 to 13, 21 and 22, 31 to 34, and 41 of the devices 10, 20, 30, and 40 discussed earlier are implemented through cooperative operation between a computer mounted in each of the devices 10, 20, 30, and 40 and a program that operates on a CPU mounted in the computer. The inspection information storage section 23 is implemented by an HDD mounted in the inspection control device 20. Alternatively, a RAM or a storage unit provided externally may be used by way of a network.
[0033] The program used in the present exemplary embodiment may be not only provided by a communication unit but also provided as stored in a computer-readable storage medium such as a Universal Serial Bus (USB) memory. The program provided from the communication unit or the storage medium is installed in a computer, and sequentially executed by a CPU of the computer to perform various processes.
an extractor configured to cause a reader to read a printed material sequentially conveyed from an image forming unit, and perform processing of extracting data from an image formed on the printed material (e.g. an image is printed on a sheet and is sequentially scanned. Image data is extracted from the scanned image data acquired from the printed material on the sheet in order to inspect the image extracted, which is taught in ¶ [52] and [53].);
[0041] While the inspection level is set to “high” and “low” in the present exemplary embodiment and set to “high”, “standard”, “low”, and “not applicable” in a second exemplary embodiment to be discussed later, the steps of the level are not necessarily limited thereto. In the present exemplary embodiment, for convenience of description, the object type is defined as “character” and “image”, and the inspection level is defined as “high” and “low”. However, the objects occasionally include a combination of characters and images. While the objects are binarized into “character” and “image” in accordance with the component ratio between characters and images and a threshold in the present exemplary embodiment, the objects may be divided into a larger number of types in accordance with the component ratio, character size, color attribute, etc., and the inspection level may be set to a larger number of steps in accordance with the object type.
[0052] When a print request is received by the reception section 31 receiving a print job in the printer 30, the print execution section 32 executes printing of print data included in the print job in accordance with attribute information (step S108). Since printed matter such as those illustrated in FIGS. 3A to 3D is output when printing is executed, the printed matter reading section 33 generates a read image of the printed matter by reading the printed matter using a scanner (step S110). The read image transmission section 34 transmits the thus generated read image of each page to the inspection device 40.
[0053] In the manner described above, the inspection device 40 acquires inspection information and a raster image corresponding to a single print job from the inspection control device 20, and acquires a read image of printed matter output on the basis of the print job from the printer 30. As discussed earlier, the inspection information includes the position and the range and the inspection level of each inspection region included in each page, and the raster image includes a correct answer image for each inspection region, and thus the inspection processing section 41 collates, for each inspection region in each page, the correct answer image for the inspection region and a read image of the inspection region included in the read image, and inspects printed matter in accordance with the corresponding inspection level (step S111). That is, inspection is performed. It may be determined that the precision of printed matter is higher as the degree of coincidence of a read image of the printed matter with the correct answer image is higher, and the specific content of an inspection performed in accordance with the inspection level may be the same as that according to the related art, and thus is not described.
a display controller configured to display a received image on a display unit (e.g. the system discloses displaying a received image that is used to prepare for the inspection of the image data once printed and scanned. This is taught in ¶ [40], [55] and [62].); and
[0039] Examples of the object type include characters and images. The object information preparation section 12 prepares, for each print job, object information including the position and the type of each object included in each page (step S104). Subsequently, the transmission section 13 transmits the raster image and the object information to the inspection control device 20, and transmits a print job including the rasterized print data to the printer 30.
[0040] When the inspection control device 20 acquires the raster image and the object information from the rasterizer 10, the inspection level setting section 211 of the inspection information setting section 21 sets the inspection level for each inspection region included in each page (step S105). The inspection level is set in accordance with the object type, and the inspection level setting section 211 according to the present exemplary embodiment automatically sets, to an inspection region including an object, the inspection level initially set for the type of the object. For example, the inspection level for characters is set to “high”, since the characters would be meaningless if not readable. On the other hand, the inspection level for images is set to “low”, since the content of the objects may be discriminable even if the images are not so clear as the characters.
[0055] The print system 2 according to the present exemplary embodiment is slightly different from that according to the first exemplary embodiment in the configuration of the inspection control device 20. Specifically, the inspection control device 20 additionally includes an inspection information setting processing section 24. In addition, the inspection information setting section 21 includes an inspection information selection section 213 in place of the inspection information preparation section 212. The inspection information setting processing section 24 prepares inspection information on the basis of item data set by a user via a user interface, and registers the inspection information in the inspection information storage section 23. That is, while inspection information is automatically prepared from pages included in a print job in the first exemplary embodiment described above, the user is caused to prepare inspection information in the present exemplary embodiment.
[0062] The region 60 allows setting of items for each inspection region to be included in an inspection pattern. A name 61 indicates a name that identifies the inspection region. A display region 62 indicates the positions of inspection regions on the page, and indicates the page layout of the inspection regions. Position information 63 indicates information that indicates the position and the range of the inspection regions on the page. The position information 63 is specified by the coordinate data on the upper left corner of the inspection region with the upper left corner of a page, that is, the display region 62 that displays the page, to serve as the reference position defined as the origin, and the width (in the right-left direction of the drawing in FIG. 6) and the height (in the up-down direction of the drawing in FIG. 6) from the upper left corner of the inspection region. The position and the size of the inspection region may be specified by the user specifying the range of the inspection region through a mouse operation performed in the display region 62, for example. In this case, the values of the position information 63 are automatically set in accordance with the display position and the range in the display region 62. Conversely, the positions and the ranges of the inspection region may be automatically displayed in the display region 62 when the values of the position information 63 are set by the user. The values of the position information 63 and the specification of the inspection region in the display region 62 may be coordinated with each other in this manner.
[0063] An inspection level 64 indicates the inspection level set to the inspection region. The inspection information setting processing section 24 may allow display of a list of inspection levels that may be set in accordance with a user operation and allow the user to select one of the inspection levels from among the list to be set. An object type 65 indicates the type of an object to be set to the inspection region.
[0064] As discussed earlier, the position and the size of an inspection region are set using the display region 62 or the position information 63. There is a possibility that an object included in the actual page slightly protrudes from the range of an inspection region set in inspection information. Thus, an allowable error 66 may be used to set the allowable range of protrusion of a region that includes the object from the inspection region.
a setting unit configured to set, on the image displayed on the display unit, an area in which the extraction processing is performed (e.g. as seen in figure 6, the display allows a user to set, on the image displayed on the display and received from memory, areas to extract on the image in figure 6, which is taught in ¶ [62]-[64] above.), wherein
the display controller displays a margin necessary for the extraction processing and identifiable with respect to the area set by the setting unit (e.g. the system discloses a margin that is set around an area that is necessary and allowable for extraction on the right side of the screen. This area is identifiable with respect to the area set above for the inspection regions, which is taught in ¶ [64] above and [68].).
[0068] It is assumed that the work of registering inspection information is performed by one or more specific users. In this case, it is considered that the users generally make similar settings. For example, a certain user may set equal error values for the allowable error 66, irrespective of the size of the inspection region. In the case where the object type is character, a user may always set the inspection level 64 to “high”. That is, the inspection information setting processing section 24 is able to specify a user that logs in to prepare inspection information, and thus learns item data set by each specified user and calculates initial values of items for the user. With initial values calculated for each user in this manner, the initial values obtained through learning are displayed for the relevant items when the user has the inspection information setting screen 4 to be displayed. In this case, it is necessary that the inspection information should include identification information on the user that has registered the inspection information.
However, Komazawa fails to specifically teach the features of the display controller displays a margin area necessary for the extraction processing.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Goda. Similar to the primary reference, Goda discloses a margin area around an image that is extracted (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Goda discloses the display controller displays a margin area necessary for the extraction processing (e.g. the system discloses displaying a margin area that is outside of an image. This is used to perform extraction of the image in order to inspect the quality of the image. The margin areas are shown in figures 7B, 9A and 9B, which is taught in ¶ [74]-[79].).
[0074] The button 812 is used to set whether to use all the candidates as feature points. The buttons 813 to 816 are used to individually set whether to use each of the feature points 821 to 824 as a feature point. That is, it is possible to set one or more feature points. For example, if only the feature point 823 or 824 close to the half-cut 401 is set to be used as a feature point, the accuracy of determination as a half-cut area may be improved. The button 817 is used to register, as a feature point of a reference image to finally be used at the time of verification, the feature point set to be used by one of the buttons 812 to 816. When the button 817 is operated, the display returns to the screen 720 of FIG. 7B. If any of the feature points is not selected by the buttons 812 to 816, all the feature points are set to be used, similar to the button 812. The set feature point may be emphasized, for example, highlighted in the display portion 801 to be visible by the user.
[0075] FIGS. 9A and 9B show examples of a screen displayed on the display unit 241 of the verification apparatus 109 when setting an area to be registered as a half-cut area. A screen 900 is displayed when the button 711 of FIGS. 7A and 7B is operated. Two patterns will be described as examples of setting an area (reference region) for which it is determined whether a half-cut is in the area, with reference to the screen 900 and a screen 950.
[0076] The screen 900 will be described first. The screen 900 includes display of components 901 to 903, 912 to 916, and 941. In the display portion 901, a reference region set to indicate an area for which it is determined whether a half-cut is in the area is displayed. In this example, two half-cut areas are set, and reference regions for the areas are represented by half-cut areas 923 and 933, respectively. The half-cut area 923 is an area between a half-cut internal area 921 and a half-cut external area 922 which are set in accordance with a user input. In the portion 941, the distances of the half-cut external area 922 from the half-cut internal area 921 of the half-cut area 923 are displayed. Similarly, the half-cut area 933 is an area between a half-cut internal area 931 and a half-cut external area 932 which are set. When the button 914 (to be described later) for setting another half-cut area is operated, setting values concerning the half-cut area 933 are displayed.
[0077] A method of setting the half-cut areas 923 and 933 will be described next. In the position setting portion 902 and the area size setting portion 903, the positions and sizes of the half-cut internal area and the half-cut external area can be changed. Each of the position setting portion 902 and the area size setting portion 903 includes upper, lower, left, and right directional keys, and the position and size of the area can be adjusted when each directional key is selected. As a setting example, a region serving as a half-cut internal area is set in the position setting portion 902 and the area size setting portion 903. Then, when the button 912 is operated, the half-cut internal area 921 is set. Next, a region serving as a half-cut external area is set in the position setting portion 902 and the area size setting portion 903. Then, when the button 913 is operated, the half-cut external area 922 is set. If both the half-cut internal area and the half-cut external area are set, an area between them is automatically set as the half-cut area 923.
[0078] To set another half-cut area 933, the button 914 for setting another half-cut area is operated to set the half-cut area 933 by the same setting method as that of the half-cut area 923. The button 915 is used to register the set half-cut area. When the button 915 is operated, the display returns to, for example, the screen 720. The button 916 is used to cancel the registration of the half-cut area. When the button 916 is operated, the display returns to, for example, the screen 700 without registering the half-cut area. The set half-cut areas 923 and 933 can be emphasized, for example, highlighted in the display portion 901 to be visible (identifiable) by the user.
[0079] With respect to the screen 950, the difference from the screen 900 will be described. The screen 950 includes display of a setting portion 917 instead of the display of the button 913 of the screen 900. More specifically, in the screen 900, the half-cut external area is set by the button 913. However, the screen 950 includes the setting portion 917 for setting a distance (mm) of a position (predetermined position) from the half-cut internal area, to which the half-cut external area is set. When the half-cut internal area is set by the button 912, the half-cut external area is set in accordance with the width set in the setting portion 917. This example shows an example of commonly applying 3 mm to the upper, lower, left, and right sides. It is also possible to individually set a value to each of the upper, lower, left, and right sides, as a matter of course. Note that after setting the half-cut internal area, the setting portion 917 may be displayed to be settable.
[0118] According to the present invention, it is possible to preferably inspect the positions of a half-cut and a preprint image while ensuring the quality of a print image by image inspection.
Therefore, in view of Goda, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of the display controller displays a margin area necessary for the extraction processing, incorporated in the device of Komazawa, in order to display margin areas outside of an image that is used to inspect an image that is extracted, which ensures the quality of a print image that is inspected (as stated in Goda ¶ [118]).
Re claim 2: However, Komazawa fails to specifically teach the features of the information processing apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the margin area necessary for the extractor and identifiable is displayed by the display controller using one or more of display methods including displaying an inspection frame such that a width of the inspection frame is increased, displaying the inspection frame in a transparent or translucent color, displaying a pattern, displaying a double frame, and displaying the inspection frame such that a position of the inspection frame is changed.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Goda. Similar to the primary reference, Goda discloses a margin area around an image that is extracted (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Goda discloses wherein the margin area necessary for the extractor and identifiable is displayed by the display controller using one or more of display methods including displaying an inspection frame such that a width of the inspection frame is increased, displaying the inspection frame in a transparent or translucent color, displaying a pattern, displaying a double frame, and displaying the inspection frame such that a position of the inspection frame is changed (e.g. as shown in figure 9B, the margin around the image can be a double frame, the width of the area can be increased or decreased, the area creating the frame is transparent with the frame creating a pattern and with the size and position of the frame shifted or changed, the position of the overall frame can change. This is explained in ¶ [76] and [77].).
[0076] The screen 900 will be described first. The screen 900 includes display of components 901 to 903, 912 to 916, and 941. In the display portion 901, a reference region set to indicate an area for which it is determined whether a half-cut is in the area is displayed. In this example, two half-cut areas are set, and reference regions for the areas are represented by half-cut areas 923 and 933, respectively. The half-cut area 923 is an area between a half-cut internal area 921 and a half-cut external area 922 which are set in accordance with a user input. In the portion 941, the distances of the half-cut external area 922 from the half-cut internal area 921 of the half-cut area 923 are displayed. Similarly, the half-cut area 933 is an area between a half-cut internal area 931 and a half-cut external area 932 which are set. When the button 914 (to be described later) for setting another half-cut area is operated, setting values concerning the half-cut area 933 are displayed.
[0077] A method of setting the half-cut areas 923 and 933 will be described next. In the position setting portion 902 and the area size setting portion 903, the positions and sizes of the half-cut internal area and the half-cut external area can be changed. Each of the position setting portion 902 and the area size setting portion 903 includes upper, lower, left, and right directional keys, and the position and size of the area can be adjusted when each directional key is selected. As a setting example, a region serving as a half-cut internal area is set in the position setting portion 902 and the area size setting portion 903. Then, when the button 912 is operated, the half-cut internal area 921 is set. Next, a region serving as a half-cut external area is set in the position setting portion 902 and the area size setting portion 903. Then, when the button 913 is operated, the half-cut external area 922 is set. If both the half-cut internal area and the half-cut external area are set, an area between them is automatically set as the half-cut area 923.
Therefore, in view of Goda, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the margin area necessary for the extractor and identifiable is displayed by the display controller using one or more of display methods including displaying an inspection frame such that a width of the inspection frame is increased, displaying the inspection frame in a transparent or translucent color, displaying a pattern, displaying a double frame, and displaying the inspection frame such that a position of the inspection frame is changed, incorporated in the device of Komazawa, in order to display margin areas outside of an image that is used to inspect an image that is extracted, which ensures the quality of a print image that is inspected (as stated in Goda ¶ [118]).
Re claim 3: However, Komazawa fails to specifically teach the features of the information processing apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the margin area necessary for the extractor and identifiable is displayed by the display controller using one or more of display methods including displaying an area surrounding an inspection frame such that a color of the area surrounding the inspection frame is different from a color of the inspection frame, displaying, in a transparent or translucent color, the area surrounding the inspection frame, and displaying a pattern in the area surrounding the inspection frame.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Goda. Similar to the primary reference, Goda discloses a margin area around an image that is extracted (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Goda discloses wherein the margin area necessary for the extractor and identifiable is displayed by the display controller using one or more of display methods including displaying an area surrounding an inspection frame such that a color of the area surrounding the inspection frame is different from a color of the inspection frame, displaying, in a transparent or translucent color, the area surrounding the inspection frame, and displaying a pattern in the area surrounding the inspection frame (e.g. as shown in figure 9B, the margin around the image can be a double frame, the width of the area can be increased or decreased, the area creating the frame is transparent with the frame creating a pattern and with the size and position of the frame shifted or changed, the position of the overall frame can change. This is explained in ¶ [76] and [77] above. The screen can also display an area around the inspection frame in white that is different than the frame around the image itself, which is seen in figure 7B and figure 7B is discussed in ¶ [74].).
[0074] The button 812 is used to set whether to use all the candidates as feature points. The buttons 813 to 816 are used to individually set whether to use each of the feature points 821 to 824 as a feature point. That is, it is possible to set one or more feature points. For example, if only the feature point 823 or 824 close to the half-cut 401 is set to be used as a feature point, the accuracy of determination as a half-cut area may be improved. The button 817 is used to register, as a feature point of a reference image to finally be used at the time of verification, the feature point set to be used by one of the buttons 812 to 816. When the button 817 is operated, the display returns to the screen 720 of FIG. 7B. If any of the feature points is not selected by the buttons 812 to 816, all the feature points are set to be used, similar to the button 812. The set feature point may be emphasized, for example, highlighted in the display portion 801 to be visible by the user.
Therefore, in view of Goda, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the margin area necessary for the extractor and identifiable is displayed by the display controller using one or more of display methods including displaying an area surrounding an inspection frame such that a color of the area surrounding the inspection frame is different from a color of the inspection frame, displaying, in a transparent or translucent color, the area surrounding the inspection frame, and displaying a pattern in the area surrounding the inspection frame, incorporated in the device of Komazawa, in order to display margin areas outside of an image that is used to inspect an image that is extracted, which ensures the quality of a print image that is inspected (as stated in Goda ¶ [118]).
Re claim 4: Komazawa discloses the information processing apparatus according to Claim 1, the one or more controllers further being configured as: an inspecting unit configured to inspect the printed material based on comparison of the data extracted by the extraction processing with correct data prepared in advance (e.g. for inspection, the system compares correct image data stored with data that is captured, which is taught in ¶ [28] and [51]-[53].).
[0028] The inspection control device 20 includes an inspection information setting section 21, an inspection requesting section 22, and an inspection information storage section 23. The inspection information setting section 21 prepares inspection information that is necessary for an inspection by the inspection device 40, and sets the inspection information to print data. The inspection information setting section 21 includes an inspection level setting section 211 and an inspection information preparation section 212. The inspection level setting section 211 sets the precision level (hereinafter simply referred to as an “inspection level”) of an inspection to be performed for a region including each object included in print data on the basis of the raster image of the print data and the object information received from the rasterizer 10. The inspection information preparation section 212 prepares inspection information for the print data, and registers the inspection information in the inspection information storage section 23. The inspection requesting section 22 requests the inspection device 40 for an inspection by transmitting the prepared inspection information and the raster image to be used as a correct answer image in the inspection. The inspection information storage section 23 stores the inspection information. The data configuration of the inspection information will be discussed later.
[0051] As described above, when inspection information is prepared in the inspection control device 20, the inspection requesting section 22 requests inspection of each page, by transmitting inspection information corresponding to each page included in a print job and a raster image acquired from the rasterizer 10 to the inspection device 40 as a correct answer image for inspection. The inspection requesting section 22 may transmit the raster image acquired from the rasterizer 10, or may transmit a correct answer image cut out from the raster image and having a position and a size corresponding to those of each inspection pattern. In this event, it is necessary to take into consideration sharing of the inspection pattern and an allowable error. The allowable error will be described in relation to the second exemplary embodiment.
[0052] When a print request is received by the reception section 31 receiving a print job in the printer 30, the print execution section 32 executes printing of print data included in the print job in accordance with attribute information (step S108). Since printed matter such as those illustrated in FIGS. 3A to 3D is output when printing is executed, the printed matter reading section 33 generates a read image of the printed matter by reading the printed matter using a scanner (step S110). The read image transmission section 34 transmits the thus generated read image of each page to the inspection device 40.
[0053] In the manner described above, the inspection device 40 acquires inspection information and a raster image corresponding to a single print job from the inspection control device 20, and acquires a read image of printed matter output on the basis of the print job from the printer 30. As discussed earlier, the inspection information includes the position and the range and the inspection level of each inspection region included in each page, and the raster image includes a correct answer image for each inspection region, and thus the inspection processing section 41 collates, for each inspection region in each page, the correct answer image for the inspection region and a read image of the inspection region included in the read image, and inspects printed matter in accordance with the corresponding inspection level (step S111). That is, inspection is performed. It may be determined that the precision of printed matter is higher as the degree of coincidence of a read image of the printed matter with the correct answer image is higher, and the specific content of an inspection performed in accordance with the inspection level may be the same as that according to the related art, and thus is not described.
Re claim 5: Komazawa discloses the information processing apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the extraction processing by the extractor includes at least a first processing method and a second processing method, and the setting unit selects any one of the first processing method and the second processing method and sets the area (e.g. the system performs extraction using the method for the characters or images. The user can select in figure 6 whether to process characters or images for extraction, which is taught in ¶ [39]-[41].).
[0039] Examples of the object type include characters and images. The object information preparation section 12 prepares, for each print job, object information including the position and the type of each object included in each page (step S104). Subsequently, the transmission section 13 transmits the raster image and the object information to the inspection control device 20, and transmits a print job including the rasterized print data to the printer 30.
[0040] When the inspection control device 20 acquires the raster image and the object information from the rasterizer 10, the inspection level setting section 211 of the inspection information setting section 21 sets the inspection level for each inspection region included in each page (step S105). The inspection level is set in accordance with the object type, and the inspection level setting section 211 according to the present exemplary embodiment automatically sets, to an inspection region including an object, the inspection level initially set for the type of the object. For example, the inspection level for characters is set to “high”, since the characters would be meaningless if not readable. On the other hand, the inspection level for images is set to “low”, since the content of the objects may be discriminable even if the images are not so clear as the characters.
[0041] While the inspection level is set to “high” and “low” in the present exemplary embodiment and set to “high”, “standard”, “low”, and “not applicable” in a second exemplary embodiment to be discussed later, the steps of the level are not necessarily limited thereto. In the present exemplary embodiment, for convenience of description, the object type is defined as “character” and “image”, and the inspection level is defined as “high” and “low”. However, the objects occasionally include a combination of characters and images. While the objects are binarized into “character” and “image” in accordance with the component ratio between characters and images and a threshold in the present exemplary embodiment, the objects may be divided into a larger number of types in accordance with the component ratio, character size, color attribute, etc., and the inspection level may be set to a larger number of steps in accordance with the object type.
Re claim 6: However, Komazawa fails to specifically teach the features of the information processing apparatus according to Claim 5, wherein a margin area that is displayed by the display controller and is necessary for the extractor in the first processing method is different from a margin area that is displayed by the display controller and is necessary for the extractor in the second processing method.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Goda. Similar to the primary reference, Goda discloses a margin area around an image that is extracted (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Goda discloses wherein a margin area that is displayed by the display controller and is necessary for the extractor in the first processing method is different from a margin area that is displayed by the display controller and is necessary for the extractor in the second processing method (e.g. as seen in figure 7B and 12B, the margin area around the characters is different than the margin area around the image area that will be inspected from the image, which the figures are explained in ¶ [62], [71] and [72].).
[0062] Display screens in the verification apparatus 109 according to this embodiment will be described below with reference to FIGS. 5 to 12. Each of these display screens is displayed based on an instruction of the CPU 238 of the verification apparatus 109. The verification apparatus 109 inspects the sent final sheet in accordance with preset inspection items. The final sheet is inspected by comparing a sent sheet image with a preset reference image. Examples of a comparison method of the final sheet are a method of comparing pixel values for each image position, a method of comparing the positions of objects by edge detection, and a method of extracting character data by OCR (Optical Character Recognition). The inspection items include a shift of a print position, the tint of the image, the density of the image, a streak or thin spot, and a lack of printing.
[0071] A screen 720 of FIG. 7B shows an example of a case in which the verification area is set in FIGS. 8 to 10 (to be described later). The screen 720 is different from the screen 700 in terms of only the state of the display portion 701. The screen 720 will be described after describing FIGS. 8 to 10.
[0072] FIG. 8 shows an example of a screen displayed on the display unit 241 of the verification apparatus 109 when setting, as a feature point, a specific position in the reference image. A screen 800 is displayed when the button 710 of FIGS. 7A and 7B is operated. The screen 800 includes display of components 801 and 812 to 817.
Therefore, in view of Goda, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein a margin area that is displayed by the display controller and is necessary for the extractor in the first processing method is different from a margin area that is displayed by the display controller and is necessary for the extractor in the second processing method, incorporated in the device of Komazawa, in order to display margin areas outside of an image that is used to inspect an image that is extracted, which ensures the quality of a print image that is inspected (as stated in Goda ¶ [118]).
Re claim 8: However, Komazawa fails to specifically teach the features of the information processing apparatus according to Claim 5, wherein the second processing method is OCR to be performed on a character area.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Goda. Similar to the primary reference, Goda discloses a margin area around an image that is extracted (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Goda discloses wherein the second processing method is OCR to be performed on a character area (e.g. the system discloses performing an OCR on characters in an area, which is taught in ¶ 62] above.).
Therefore, in view of Goda, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the second processing method is OCR to be performed on a character area, incorporated in the device of Komazawa, in order to display margin areas outside of an image that is used to inspect an image that is extracted, which ensures the quality of a print image that is inspected (as stated in Goda ¶ [118]).
Re claim 20: Komazawa discloses a method of controlling an information processing apparatus, the information processing apparatus including
a display unit (interpretation: a display unit displays a screen, which is taught in ¶ [49]. This interpretation and its equivalents are utilized for this claim term hereinafter in the Office Action.) configured to display a received image on a screen (e.g. the system discloses displaying a received image that is used to prepare for the inspection of the image data once printed and scanned. This is taught in ¶ [40], [55] and [62] above.); and
a controller configured to cause a reader to read a printed material sequentially conveyed from an image forming unit, and perform processing of extracting data from an image formed on the printed material (e.g. an image is printed on a sheet and is sequentially scanned. Image data is extracted from the scanned image data acquired from the printed material on the sheet in order to inspect the image extracted, which is taught in ¶ [52] and [53] above.),
the method comprising:
setting, on the image displayed on the display unit, an area in which the extraction processing is performed (e.g. as seen in figure 6, the display allows a user to set, on the image displayed on the display and received from memory, areas to extract on the image in figure 6, which is taught in ¶ [62]-[64] above.); and
causing the display unit to display a margin necessary for the extraction processing and identifiable with respect to the area set in the setting (e.g. the system discloses a margin that is set around an area that is necessary and allowable for extraction on the right side of the screen. This area is identifiable with respect to the area set above for the inspection regions, which is taught in ¶ [64] and [68] above.).
However, Komazawa fails to specifically teach the features of causing the display unit to display a margin area necessary for the extraction processing.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Goda. Similar to the primary reference, Goda discloses a margin area around an image that is extracted (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Goda discloses causing the display unit to display a margin area necessary for the extraction processing (e.g. the system discloses displaying a margin area that is outside of an image. This is used to perform extraction of the image in order to inspect the quality of the image. The margin areas are shown in figures 7B, 9A and 9B, which is taught in ¶ [74]-[79] above.).
Therefore, in view of Goda, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of causing the display unit to display a margin area necessary for the extraction processing, incorporated in the device of Komazawa, in order to display margin areas outside of an image that is used to inspect an image that is extracted, which ensures the quality of a print image that is inspected (as stated in Goda ¶ [118]).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komazawa, as modified by Goda, as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Kazumi (US Pub 2023/0062675).
Re claim 7: However, Komazawa fails to specifically teach the features of the information processing apparatus according to Claim 5, wherein the first processing method is decoding of a barcode and a QR code.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Kazumi. Similar to the primary reference, Kazumi discloses page inspections (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Kazumi discloses wherein the first processing method is decoding of a barcode and a QR code (e.g. the system discloses decoding a barcode or a QR code, which is taught in ¶ [45]-[47].).
[0045] A frame 0502 indicates an inspection area on the preview. The inspection area is placed using an inspection area placement button 0503. For example, after pressing the inspection area placement button 0503, the user selects a type of inspection area from a displayed pull-down menu, and then selects an area that the user wants to designate as the inspection area in the preview display area 0501 by dragging a mouse, so that an operation of placing the inspection area is accepted. An operation of selecting the inspection area can be accepted by a user's operation of clicking the mouse, and the size and the position can be changed by the user's operation of dragging the mouse. The frame 0502 indicates an example in which an inspection area for inspecting a QR Code (registered trademark) is placed.
[0046] A setting item 0504 is provided to select data for collation inspection by a file selection method.
[0047] The data for collation inspection is a reference CSV file in which correct data to be used in data collation inspection is stored. The reference CSV file is a file to be prepared beforehand by the user, in a case where the collation inspection is to be performed. The reference CSV file is a file in which a correct character string for character string inspection and a correct character string in decoding for two-dimensional code (or barcode) inspection are listed. When data inspection is executed, an OCR result of a character string image and a decoding result of a code image (a two-dimensional code or barcode) are collated with the correct character strings listed in the reference CSV file.
Therefore, in view of Kazumi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the first processing method is decoding of a barcode and a QR code, incorporated in the device of Komazawa, in order to decode two-dimensional codes, which can improve the determination of an inspection result (as stated in Kazumi ¶ [74]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Murakami discloses inspecting a sheet.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAD S DICKERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1351. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM 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, Abderrahim Merouan can be reached at 571-270-5254. 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.
/CHAD DICKERSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
Prosecution Insights