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 Status
Claims 1-11 are pending for examination in the application filed 06/09/2026. Claims 1-5 and 7-8 have been amended and claims 9-11 are new.
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119
(a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent application JP2023-066295 filed on
04/14/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/12/2026 has been considered by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments and Amendments
The objection of claim 4 has been withdrawn in view of the amendments. The 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation of 1 and dependent claims 2-6 has been withdrawn in view of the amendments.
Applicant's Remarks filed 06/09/2026 regarding the nonstatutory double patenting rejection of claims 1-3 and 5-6 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Please see below for the updated nonstatutory double patenting rejection, in view of the newly added amendments to the present application and the reference application (18/633,620). Examiner notes that as of the time of this Office Action, the ‘620 application has been allowed, but the Issue Fee has not been paid and no Patent No. has yet been issued.
Applicant's Remarks filed 06/09/2026 with respect to the newly added limitation of “the determining section performining character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize one or more character strings from a same character string position in the read image as one or more candidate character strings” have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant states in reference to the newly added amendments on page 8 that clearly this arrangement is not disclosed or suggested by the Omuro publication and the Office Action acknowledges that the Omuro publication fails to disclose or suggest the limitation relating to the plurality of candidate character strings that are candidates for the recognized character string according to the scan setting. Examiner disagrees with this assertion based on the amendments to claim 1. Claim 1, as amended, explicitly describes one or more character strings and one or more candidate character strings, and does not state “plurality of candidate character strings”. The Remarks filed 06/09/2026 do not present any specific arguments as to why Omuro fails teach the amended limitation of “the determining section performining character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize one or more character strings from a same character string position in the read image as one or more candidate character strings”. As stated in MPEP § 714.02, the reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references in order to be fully responsive. However, Applicant’s reply is considered to be a bona fide attempt at a response and is being accepted as a complete response. Please see the updated 35 USC § 103 rejections in view of the newly added amendments.
Applicant’s Remarks with respect to the newly added limitation of “and the number of the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting” 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, as facilitated by the newly added amendments.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or
improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible
harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where
the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not
patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either
anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg,
140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d
2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van
Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619
(CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may
be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the
examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the
scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination
under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §
2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions
of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory
double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be
accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the
NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1.
For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action,
see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c)
may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used.
Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in
which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or
PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely
online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-
processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal
Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3 and 5-6 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double
patenting as being unpatentable over claims 5 and 9-11 of copending Application No.
18/633,620 (reference application), as facilitated by the newly added amendments. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Examiner notes that as of the time of this Office Action, the ‘620 application has been allowed, but the Issue Fee has not been paid and no Patent No. has yet been issued. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as will be described in reference to the table below. Emphasis has been added in bold to the elements which are identical; and elements which are similar but not identical have been italicized. Underlined portions correspond to newly added amendments.
Reference Application 18/633,620
Current Application 18/633,611
Claim 10: A scanning system comprising:
a scanner that performs scanning to read an image; and a processor including a receiving section that receives a specified word and a processing setting from a user
a determining section that performs character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize a character string
Claim 10: the determining section determines that a candidate character string acquired as a result of the recognition matches
Claim 10: the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution,
Claim 11: wherein the determining section acquires a larger number of candidate character strings when the scanning is performed at a first resolution than a number of candidate character strings acquired when the scanning is performed at a second resolution higher than the first resolution
Claim 1:
A scanning system comprising:
a processor that functions as a receiving section receiving a scan setting and a scan instruction and as a determining section;
and a scanner that causes an image sensor to operate and performs scanning to read an image in accordance with the scan setting in response to the reception of the scan setting and the scan instruction;
the determining section performining character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize one or more character strings from a same character string position in the read image as one or more candidate character strings, and
the number of the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting.
Claim 10: wherein the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution,
Claim 9: the determining section determines whether a candidate character string that is acquired as a result of the recognition and is accurate with a probability equal to or higher than a threshold matches the specified word, and the threshold when the scanning is performed at a first resolution is lower than the threshold when the scanning is performed at a second resolution higher than the first resolution.
Claim 2:
wherein the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution, the determining section outputs a candidate character string that is among the one or more candidate character strings obtained as a result of the recognition and is accurate with a probability equal to or higher than a threshold, and the threshold when the scanning is performed at a first resolution is lower than the threshold when the scanning is performed at a second resolution that is higher than the first resolution.
Claim 10: a receiving section that receives a specified word and a processing setting
Claim 10: the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution, the determining section determines that a candidate character string acquired as a result of the recognition matches the specified word when a number of characters that are included in the candidate character string and do not match the specified word is equal to or smaller than a predetermined number of characters, and the predetermined number of characters when the scanning is performed at a first resolution is larger than the predetermined number of characters when the scanning is performed at a second resolution higher than the first resolution.
Claim 3:
wherein the receiving section receives a setting for a specified word, the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution, the determining section outputs a candidate character string from the one or more candidate character strings such that a number of characters that are included in the one or more candidate character strings and do not match the specified word is equal to or smaller than a predetermined number of characters, and the predetermined number of characters when the scanning is performed at a first resolution is larger than the predetermined number of characters when the scanning is performed at a second resolution that is higher than the first resolution.
Claim 10: the determining section determines that a candidate character string acquired as a result of the recognition matches the specified word
Claim 10: a processor including…a processing section that performs processing on the image data with the processing setting associated with the specified word when the specified word is included in the image data
Claim 10: the determining section determines that a candidate character string acquired as a result of the recognition matches the specified word
Claim 5:
wherein the determining section determines whether the specified word matches any of the one or more candidate character strings,
and the processor further functions as a processing section that performs processing corresponding to the specified word when the specified word matches any of the one or more candidate character strings.
Claim 5: wherein the receiving section receives units in which the image data is divided into different files
Claim 6:
wherein the receiving section receives specifying of units in which the image data is divided into different files.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as
being unpatentable over claims 10 and 11 of co-pending application 18/633,620. Regarding claim 1, A scanning system comprising: a processor that functions as a receiving section receiving a scan setting and a scan instruction and as a determining section; and a scanner that causes an image sensor to operate and performs scanning to read an image in accordance with the scan setting in response to the reception of the scan setting and the scan instruction; the determining section performining character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize one or more character strings from a same character string position in the read image as one or more candidate character strings, and the number of the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting., as disclosed in the current application provides the same functionality of claims 10 and 11 of the reference application 18/633,620. Claims 10 and 11 of the reference application include the limitations: A scanning system comprising: a scanner that performs scanning to read an image; and a processor including a receiving section that receives a specified word and a processing setting from a user; a determining section that performs character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize a character string; the determining section determines that a candidate character string acquired as a result of the recognition matches; the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution, wherein the determining section acquires a larger number of candidate character strings when the scanning is performed at a first resolution than a number of candidate character strings acquired when the scanning is performed at a second resolution higher than the first resolution, as detailed in the table. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the scanning system of the current application to be the same as the scanning system of the reference application through the number of the one or more character strings being changed according to the scan setting, as claimed in the dependent claims of the reference application, via the limitations that scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution and changing the scanning resolution changes the number of the one or more character strings, to produce known results with a reasonable expectation for success.
Claim 2 is provisionally rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as
being unpatentable over claims 9 and 10 of co-pending application 18/633,620. Regarding claim 2, wherein the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution, the determining section outputs a candidate character string that is among the one or more candidate character strings obtained as a result of the recognition and is accurate with a probability equal to or higher than a threshold, and the threshold when the scanning is performed at a first resolution is lower than the threshold when the scanning is performed at a second resolution that is higher than the first resolution, as disclosed in the current application provides the same functionality of claims 9 and 10 of the reference application 18/633,620. Claims 9 and 10 of the reference application includes the limitations: wherein the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution; the determining section determines whether a candidate character string that is acquired as a result of the recognition and is accurate with a probability equal to or higher than a threshold matches the specified word, and the threshold when the scanning is performed at a first resolution is lower than the threshold when the scanning is performed at a second resolution higher than the first resolution. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the scanning system of the current application to be the same as the scanning system of the reference application.
Claim 3 is provisionally rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as
being unpatentable over claim 10 of co-pending application 18/633,620. Regarding claim 3, wherein the receiving section receives a setting for a specified word, the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution, the determining section outputs a candidate character string from the one or more candidate character strings such that a number of characters that are included in the one or more candidate character strings and do not match the specified word is equal to or smaller than a predetermined number of characters, and the predetermined number of characters when the scanning is performed at a first resolution is larger than the predetermined number of characters when the scanning is performed at a second resolution that is higher than the first resolution, as disclosed in the current application provides the same functionality of claim 10 of the reference application 18/633,620. Claim 10 of the reference application includes the limitations: a receiving section that receives a specified word and a processing setting; the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution, the determining section determines that a candidate character string acquired as a result of the recognition matches the specified word when a number of characters that are included in the candidate character string and do not match the specified word is equal to or smaller than a predetermined number of characters, and the predetermined number of characters when the scanning is performed at a first resolution is larger than the predetermined number of characters when the scanning is performed at a second resolution higher than the first resolution. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the scanning system of the current application to be the same as the scanning system of the reference application.
Claim 5 is provisionally rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as
being unpatentable over claim 10 of co-pending application 18/633,620. Regarding claim 5, wherein the determining section determines whether the specified word matches any of the one or more candidate character strings, and the processor further functions as a processing section that performs processing corresponding to the specified word when the specified word matches any of the one or more candidate character strings, as disclosed in the current application provides the same functionality of claim 10 of the reference application 18/633,620. Claim 10 of the reference application includes the limitations: the determining section determines that a candidate character string acquired as a result of the recognition matches the specified word; a processor including…a processing section that performs processing on the image data with the processing setting associated with the specified word when the specified word is included in the image data; the determining section determines that a candidate character string acquired as a result of the recognition matches the specified word. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the scanning system of the current application to be the same as the scanning system of the reference application.
Claim 6 is provisionally rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as
being unpatentable over claim 5 of co-pending application 18/633,620. Regarding claim 6, wherein the receiving section receives specifying of units in which the image data is divided into different files, as disclosed in the current application provides the same functionality of claim 5 of the reference application 18/633,620. Claim 5 of the reference application includes the limitations: wherein the receiving section receives units in which the image data is divided into different files. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the scanning system of the current application to be the same as the scanning system of the reference application.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “performining” should be “performing”.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the the one or more candidate character strings”.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the number of the the one or more candidate character strings”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
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.
Claims 1, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omuro (US20210289086A1) in view of Tanaka (JPH11328318A).
Regarding claim 1, Omuro teaches a scanning system comprising ([0002] The present disclosure relates to a scanning system, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program, and a method for generating scan data in the scanning system):
a processor that functions as a receiving section receiving a scan setting and a scan instruction and as a determining section ([Abstract] A multi-function printer includes a generating section, an image recognition section, a speaking section, and a transmitting section. The generating section scans an original document to generate scan data. The image recognition section performs image recognition on the scan data. [0022] The CPU 11 loads various programs stored in the ROM 13 on the RAM 12 and thus controls components in the multi-function printer 1. [0025] On the basis of the control program 13a, the CPU 11 also receives various settings for reading the original document 50 aloud. Various settings for reading the original document 50 aloud will be hereinafter referred to as read aloud settings. The read aloud settings will be described later with reference to, for example, FIG. 4. [0035] The touch panel 14a presents various types of information to the user as well as receives various types of operations from the user. For example, the touch panel 14a displays a read-aloud-setting screen DA (refer to, for example, FIG. 4) described later and receives read aloud settings set by the user. [0053] In the character option group 22, any one or more among options “large character size”, “decorative character”, “colored character”, and “date”. [0064] When the first setting completion button 32 is selected, the multi-function printer 1 causes the read-aloud-setting values that have been set on the read-aloud-setting screen DA to be stored in the setting value storage area 13e, completing the read aloud settings. [0076] the multi-function printer 1 also speaks the explanation character string 72 including characters indicating a date according to a selection result of the character option group 22 on the third read-aloud-setting screen DA3 (refer to FIG. 6));
and a scanner that causes an image sensor to operate and performs scanning to read an image in accordance with the scan setting in response to the reception of the scan setting and the scan instruction ([0043] The generating section 110 generates scan data by scanning the original document 50 with the image reading mechanism 16);
the determining section performing character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize one or more character strings from a same character string position in the read image as one or more candidate character strings ([0079] In S02, the multi-function printer 1 scans the original document 50 by using the image reading mechanism 16 to generate pre-scan data, which is image data as a reading result. [0080] In S03, the multi-function printer 1 performs image recognition on the pre-scan data generated in S02. This leads to recognizing what image is included in the original document and creating a list of characters and images that meet the read aloud settings at each stage. [0024] For example, the term “image recognition” refers to causing the scan data to undergo an image matching process or an optical character recognition (OCR) process and may use artificial intelligence (AI)…The CPU 11 also causes the scan data to undergo the OCR process and thus causes a word corresponding to characters included in the scan data to be spoken).
Omuro does not explicitly teach the number of the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting.
Tanaka, in the same field of endeavor of scanning analysis, teaches the number of the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting ([pg. 18 para. 5] The image input unit 31 takes in document image data from the scanner 47 or the image file 48 and stores it in the image memory 49. The cutout unit 32 is an area cutout unit 33 that cuts out an area for character recognition based on the image data of one document stored in the image memory 49. [pg. 8 para. 15] According to a twelfth aspect of the present invention, there is provided a cut-out unit for cutting out individual language elements from an input language element sequence, and matching between a feature pattern of the cut-out language elements and a standard pattern to generate a plurality of recognition patterns. A matching unit that obtains a candidate, and a candidate character string generation unit that performs a stochastic language process on a plurality of candidate character strings obtained by combining the plurality of recognition candidates and generates a predetermined number of candidate character strings. [pg. 20 para. 13] In the present embodiment, “100” candidate character strings are selected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was made to modify the system of Omuro with the teachings of Tanaka for the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting because "a predetermined number of candidate character strings generated by the candidate character string generation unit are subjected to word matching method language processing to recognize an optimal candidate character string in the input language element sequence" [pg. 9 para. 9] and "an optimal candidate is selected from among the 100 candidate character strings for one line stored in the candidate character string buffer 57 based on the score and the number of words existing in the word matching language dictionary 59" [pg. 21 para. 2].
Regarding claim 7, Omuro teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a scanning program for causing a computer to ([0002] The present disclosure relates to a scanning system, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program, and a method for generating scan data in the scanning system. [0023] The control program 13a is firmware for the multi-function printer 1 to execute various processes. The CPU 11 executes a scanning process described later (refer to FIGS. 8 and 9) and a copying process, a printing process, and the like on the basis of the control program 13a):
instruct a scanner to perform scanning to read an image in accordance with a scan setting ([0035] The touch panel 14a presents various types of information to the user as well as receives various types of operations from the user. For example, the touch panel 14a displays a read-aloud-setting screen DA (refer to, for example, FIG. 4) described later and receives read aloud settings set by the user. [0053] In the character option group 22, any one or more among options “large character size”, “decorative character”, “colored character”, and “date”. [0064] When the first setting completion button 32 is selected, the multi-function printer 1 causes the read-aloud-setting values that have been set on the read-aloud-setting screen DA to be stored in the setting value storage area 13e, completing the read aloud settings. [0076] the multi-function printer 1 also speaks the explanation character string 72 including characters indicating a date according to a selection result of the character option group 22 on the third read-aloud-setting screen DA3 (refer to FIG. 6). [0043] The generating section 110 generates scan data by scanning the original document 50 with the image reading mechanism 16);
perform character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize one or more character strings from a same character string position in the read image as one or more candidate character strings ([0079] In S02, the multi-function printer 1 scans the original document 50 by using the image reading mechanism 16 to generate pre-scan data, which is image data as a reading result. [0080] In S03, the multi-function printer 1 performs image recognition on the pre-scan data generated in S02. This leads to recognizing what image is included in the original document and creating a list of characters and images that meet the read aloud settings at each stage. [0024] For example, the term “image recognition” refers to causing the scan data to undergo an image matching process or an optical character recognition (OCR) process and may use artificial intelligence (AI)…The CPU 11 also causes the scan data to undergo the OCR process and thus causes a word corresponding to characters included in the scan data to be spoken).
Omuro does not explicitly teach the number of the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting.
Tanaka, in the same field of endeavor of scanning analysis, teaches the number of the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting ([pg. 18 para. 5] The image input unit 31 takes in document image data from the scanner 47 or the image file 48 and stores it in the image memory 49. The cutout unit 32 is an area cutout unit 33 that cuts out an area for character recognition based on the image data of one document stored in the image memory 49. [pg. 8 para. 15] According to a twelfth aspect of the present invention, there is provided a cut-out unit for cutting out individual language elements from an input language element sequence, and matching between a feature pattern of the cut-out language elements and a standard pattern to generate a plurality of recognition patterns. A matching unit that obtains a candidate, and a candidate character string generation unit that performs a stochastic language process on a plurality of candidate character strings obtained by combining the plurality of recognition candidates and generates a predetermined number of candidate character strings. [pg. 20 para. 13] In the present embodiment, “100” candidate character strings are selected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was made to modify the medium of Omuro with the teachings of Tanaka for the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting because "a predetermined number of candidate character strings generated by the candidate character string generation unit are subjected to word matching method language processing to recognize an optimal candidate character string in the input language element sequence" [pg. 9 para. 9] and "an optimal candidate is selected from among the 100 candidate character strings for one line stored in the candidate character string buffer 57 based on the score and the number of words existing in the word matching language dictionary 59" [pg. 21 para. 2]
Regarding claim 8, Omuro teaches a method for producing output matter, the method comprising ([0002] The present disclosure relates to a scanning system, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program, and a method for generating scan data in the scanning system. [0023] The control program 13a is firmware for the multi-function printer 1 to execute various processes. The CPU 11 executes a scanning process described later (refer to FIGS. 8 and 9) and a copying process, a printing process, and the like on the basis of the control program 13a):
causing a scanner to perform scanning to read an image in accordance with a scan setting ([0035] The touch panel 14a presents various types of information to the user as well as receives various types of operations from the user. For example, the touch panel 14a displays a read-aloud-setting screen DA (refer to, for example, FIG. 4) described later and receives read aloud settings set by the user. [0053] In the character option group 22, any one or more among options “large character size”, “decorative character”, “colored character”, and “date”. [0064] When the first setting completion button 32 is selected, the multi-function printer 1 causes the read-aloud-setting values that have been set on the read-aloud-setting screen DA to be stored in the setting value storage area 13e, completing the read aloud settings. [0076] the multi-function printer 1 also speaks the explanation character string 72 including characters indicating a date according to a selection result of the character option group 22 on the third read-aloud-setting screen DA3 (refer to FIG. 6). [0043] The generating section 110 generates scan data by scanning the original document 50 with the image reading mechanism 16);
performing character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize one or more character strings from a same character string position in the read image as one or more candidate character strings ([0079] In S02, the multi-function printer 1 scans the original document 50 by using the image reading mechanism 16 to generate pre-scan data, which is image data as a reading result. [0080] In S03, the multi-function printer 1 performs image recognition on the pre-scan data generated in S02. This leads to recognizing what image is included in the original document and creating a list of characters and images that meet the read aloud settings at each stage. [0024] For example, the term “image recognition” refers to causing the scan data to undergo an image matching process or an optical character recognition (OCR) process and may use artificial intelligence (AI)…The CPU 11 also causes the scan data to undergo the OCR process and thus causes a word corresponding to characters included in the scan data to be spoken).
Omuro does not explicitly teach the number of the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting.
Tanaka, in the same field of endeavor of scanning analysis, teaches the number of the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting ([pg. 18 para. 5] The image input unit 31 takes in document image data from the scanner 47 or the image file 48 and stores it in the image memory 49. The cutout unit 32 is an area cutout unit 33 that cuts out an area for character recognition based on the image data of one document stored in the image memory 49. [pg. 8 para. 15] According to a twelfth aspect of the present invention, there is provided a cut-out unit for cutting out individual language elements from an input language element sequence, and matching between a feature pattern of the cut-out language elements and a standard pattern to generate a plurality of recognition patterns. A matching unit that obtains a candidate, and a candidate character string generation unit that performs a stochastic language process on a plurality of candidate character strings obtained by combining the plurality of recognition candidates and generates a predetermined number of candidate character strings. [pg. 20 para. 13] In the present embodiment, “100” candidate character strings are selected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was made to modify the method of Omuro with the teachings of Tanaka for the one or more candidate character strings being changed according to the scan setting because "a predetermined number of candidate character strings generated by the candidate character string generation unit are subjected to word matching method language processing to recognize an optimal candidate character string in the input language element sequence" [pg. 9 para. 9] and "an optimal candidate is selected from among the 100 candidate character strings for one line stored in the candidate character string buffer 57 based on the score and the number of words existing in the word matching language dictionary 59" [pg. 21 para. 2]
Regarding claim 9, Omuro and Tanaka teach the system of claim 1. Omuro does not explicitly teach wherein the determining section performs the character recognition on the image data to recognize two or more character strings from the same character string position in the read image.
Tanaka, in the same field of endeavor of scanning analysis, teaches wherein the determining section performs the character recognition on the image data to recognize two or more character strings from the same character string position in the read image ([pg. 18 para. 5] The image input unit 31 takes in document image data from the scanner 47 or the image file 48 and stores it in the image memory 49. The cutout unit 32 is an area cutout unit 33 that cuts out an area for character recognition based on the image data of one document stored in the image memory 49. [pg. 8 para. 15] According to a twelfth aspect of the present invention, there is provided a cut-out unit for cutting out individual language elements from an input language element sequence, and matching between a feature pattern of the cut-out language elements and a standard pattern to generate a plurality of recognition patterns. A matching unit that obtains a candidate, and a candidate character string generation unit that performs a stochastic language process on a plurality of candidate character strings obtained by combining the plurality of recognition candidates and generates a predetermined number of candidate character strings).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was made to modify the system of Omuro with the teachings of Tanaka to perform character recognition on the image data to recognize two or more character strings from the same character string position because "a predetermined number of candidate character strings generated by the candidate character string generation unit are subjected to word matching method language processing to recognize an optimal candidate character string in the input language element sequence" [pg. 9 para. 9].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omuro in view of Tanaka and Thukkaram (US12424009B1).
Regarding claim 4, Omuro and Tanaka teach the system of claim 1. Thukkaram, in the same field of endeavor of OCR scan analysis, teaches wherein the scan setting includes a color setting for the scanning, and the determining section outputs a larger number of the one or more candidate character strings that are candidates for the recognized character string when the scanning is performed with a color setting in which accuracy of the character recognition is set to a first level than a number of the one or more candidate character strings that are candidates for the recognized character string and are output when the scanning is performed with a color setting in which the accuracy of the character recognition is set to a second level that is higher than the first level ([pg. 4 ln. 24-30] The page identification engine 106 uses optical character recognition (OCR) to identify page information. In one implementation, to improve the accuracy of the OCR, an OCR pre-processing module 112 is included to perform one or more operations to improve the accuracy of OCR. Additionally, in one implementation an OCR post-processing module 116 is included to improve the accuracy of the OCR. [col. 8 ln. 16-29] The pre-processing prior to OCR may include performing pre-processing to make it easier for the OCR to distinguish text from its background. There are examples of applications in which the text is written as white text on a black background. This can make OCR less accurate. Black text on a white background is better for OCR accuracy. There are similar issues with colored text of a first color on a background of a different color. In one implementation, the pre-processing converts the image to grayscale, and then performs thresholding and binarization. The thresholding is selected to achieve a clear differentiation between the foreground and the background, where the foreground is the portion of the image containing text and the background is the non-text region. [col. 8l n. 31-51] OCR typically generates a single big sentence with all the found words separated by spaces and tabs to match the actual positions of the words in the image. This big sentence contains misspelled words, unwanted special characters, and connected adjacent letters. This can be cleaned up and converted into an array of words. The array of words can be used for page identification system).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was made to modify the system of Omuro with the teachings of Thukkaram to include a color setting in which the accuracy of the character recognition varies based on the color because "Optical Character Recognition (OCR) [identifies] words on the page and use the identified words to determine the page… pre-processing before OCR is performed to improve the accuracy of the OCR. In some implementations, this may include resizing to increase a font size and performing an operation to distinguish text from its background" [Thukkaram col. 2 ln. 2-11].
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omuro in view of Tanaka and King (US20140294302A1).
Regarding claim 6, Omuro and Tanaka teach the system of claim 1. King, in the same field of endeavor of word scanning systems, teaches wherein the receiving section receives units in which the image data is divided into different files ([0256] New and upcoming file systems and their associated databases often have the ability to store a variety of metadata associated with each file. Traditionally, this metadata has included such things as the ID of the user who created the file, the dates of creation, last modification, and last use. Newer file systems allow such extra information as keywords, image characteristics, document sources and user comments to be stored, and in some systems this metadata can be arbitrarily extended. File systems can therefore be used to store information that would be useful in implementing the current system. For example, the date when a given document was last printed can be stored by the file system, as can details about which text from it has been captured from paper using the described system, and when and by whom. [0095] Indices may be maintained on several machines on a corporate network. Partial indices may be downloaded to the capture device, or to a machine close to the capture device. Separate indices may be created for users or groups of users with particular interests, habits or permissions. An index may exist for each filesystem, each directory, even each file on a user's hard disk. Indexes are published and subscribed to by users and by systems. It will be important, then, to construct indices that can be distributed, updated, merged and separated efficiently).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was made to modify the system of Omuro with the teachings of King to have the image data divided into different files because "Operating systems are also starting to incorporate search engine facilities that allow users to find local files more easily. These facilities can be advantageously used by the system. It means that many of the search-related concepts discussed in Sections 3 and 4 apply not just to today's Internet-based and similar search engines, but also to every personal computer" [King 0257].
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omuro in view of Tanaka and Ito (US20220201146A1).
Regarding claim 10, Omuro and Tanaka teach the system of claim 9. Omuro does not explicitly teach wherein each of the two or more candidate character strings contains a character having a shape similar to that of a character contained in a different candidate character string.
Ito, in the same field of endeavor of OCR scan analysis, teaches wherein each of the two or more candidate character strings contains a character having a shape similar to that of a character contained in a different candidate character string ([0074] In S1103, the image processing unit 432 creates a replacement candidate character for a character whose degree of certainty in the character recognition result is determined to be low. For example, in the case where the recognized character is the number “1” and the degree of certainty in the character recognition result is low, other characters with similar shapes such as the lower case alphabet “l” and the upper case alphabet “I” are set as the replacement candidate characters. In this case, characters with character shapes similar to that of the characters recognized in the character recognition process are assumed to be learned by using a publicly known machine learning function. [0076] In S1104, the image processing unit 432 uses the replacement candidate character created in S1103 to create a correction candidate character string of the character string obtained from the character region. [0077] In S1105, the image processing unit 432 calculates a score for each correction candidate character string created in S1104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was made to modify the system of Omuro with the teachings of Ito for the candidate character strings to contain a characters with a similar shape because "in the case where the initially obtained character sting is “Sales invoice” including the number “1”, the image processing unit 432 creates a correction candidate character string such as “Sales Invoice” in which the number “1” is changed to the upper case alphabet “I”. Moreover, the image processing unit 432 may create a correction candidate character string such as “Sales invoice” in which the number portion is changed to the lower case alphabet “l” in some cases" [0076].
Regarding claim 11, Omuro and Tanaka teach the system of claim 9. Omuro does not explicitly teach wherein each of the two or more candidate character strings contains one or more characters in common.
Ito, in the same field of endeavor of OCR scan analysis, teaches wherein each of the two or more candidate character strings contains one or more characters in common ([0076] In S1104, the image processing unit 432 uses the replacement candidate character created in S1103 to create a correction candidate character string of the character string obtained from the character region. For example, in the case where the initially obtained character sting is “Sales invoice” including the number “1”, the image processing unit 432 creates a correction candidate character string such as “Sales Invoice” in which the number “1” is changed to the upper case alphabet “I”. Moreover, the image processing unit 432 may create a correction candidate character string such as “Sales invoice” in which the number portion is changed to the lower case alphabet “l” in some cases).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was made to modify the system of Omuro with the teachings of Ito for the character strings to have one or more characters in common because "the image processing unit 432 creates a replacement candidate character for a character whose degree of certainty in the character recognition result is determined to be low" [0074].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 and 5 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 and if all withstanding rejections and objections were overcome.
Regarding claims 2-3, Omuro teaches wherein the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution ([0085] In S13, the multi-function printer 1 performs a main scan of the original document 50 by using the image reading mechanism 16 to generate main scan data. The main scan data is scan data with a higher resolution than the pre-scan data generated in S02 in FIG. 8. When various settings, such as a read resolution setting, are set before the main scan button 14c is operated). Further regarding claim 3, Omuro teaches wherein the receiving section receives a setting for a specified word ([0035] The touch panel 14a presents various types of information to the user as well as receives various types of operations from the user. For example, the touch panel 14a displays a read-aloud-setting screen DA (refer to, for example, FIG. 4) described later and receives read aloud settings set by the user. [0053] In the character option group 22, any one or more among options “large character size”, “decorative character”, “colored character”, and “date”. [0064] When the first setting completion button 32 is selected, the multi-function printer 1 causes the read-aloud-setting values that have been set on the read-aloud-setting screen DA to be stored in the setting value storage area 13e, completing the read aloud settings. [0076] the multi-function printer 1 also speaks the explanation character string 72 including characters indicating a date according to a selection result of the character option group 22 on the third read-aloud-setting screen DA3 (refer to FIG. 6)).
The following limitations were not found to be taught in the art: the determining section outputs a candidate character string that is among the one or more candidate character strings obtained as a result of the recognition and is accurate with a probability equal to or higher than a threshold, and the threshold when the scanning is performed at a first resolution is lower than the threshold when the scanning is performed at a second resolution that is higher than the first resolution (claim 2); and the determining section outputs a candidate character string from the one or more candidate character strings such that a number of characters that are included in the one or more candidate character strings output by the determining section and do not match the specified word is equal to or smaller than a predetermined number of characters, and the predetermined number of characters when the scanning is performed at a first resolution is larger than the predetermined number of characters when the scanning is performed at a second resolution that is higher than the first resolution (claim 3).
Regarding claim 5, which depends from claim 3, King teaches wherein the determining section determines whether the specified word matches any of the one or more candidate character strings, and processor further functions as a processing section that performs processing corresponding to the specified word when the specified word matches any of the the one or more candidate character strings ([Abstract] A system for processing text captured from rendered documents is described. The system receives a sequence of one or more words optically or acoustically captured from a rendered document by a user. The system identifies among words of the sequence a word with which an action has been associated. The system then performs the associated action with respect to the user. [0029] Text from a rendered document is captured 100, typically in optical form by an optical scanner or audio form by a voice recorder, and this image or sound data is then processed 102, for example to remove artifacts of the capture process or to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. A recognition process 104 such as OCR, speech recognition, or autocorrelation then converts the data into a signature, comprised in some embodiments of text, text offsets, or other symbols. [0564] In various embodiments, information associating words or phrases with actions (e.g., markup information) can be stored in the capture device 302).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Jacqueline R Zak whose telephone number is (571)272-4077. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Emily Terrell can be reached at (571) 270-3717. 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.
/JACQUELINE R ZAK/Examiner, Art Unit 2666
/EMILY C TERRELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2666
Prosecution Insights