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 1-14 are pending for examination in the application filed 04/12/2024.
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 04/12/2024, 05/09/2025, and 10/23/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
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, 5, 9, and 10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3 and 5-6 of of copending Application No. 18/633,611 (reference application). This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. 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.
Reference Application 18/633,611
Current Application 18/633,620
Claim 1: A scanning system comprising: a receiving section that receives a scan setting and a scan instruction;
Claim 3: wherein the receiving section receives a setting for a specified word
Claim 1: 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;
Claim 1: and a determining section that performs character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize a character string
Claim 5: wherein the determining section determines whether the specified word matches any of the candidate character strings
Claim 5: and the scanning system further comprises a processing section that performs processing corresponding to the specified word when the specified word matches any of the candidate character strings.
Claim 1:
A scanning system comprising: a receiving section that receives a specified word and a processing setting from a user and stores the received specified word and the received processing setting to a nonvolatile storage medium such that the specified word is associated with the processing setting;
a scanner that performs scanning to read an image;
a determining section that performs character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize a character string and determines whether the specified word read from the storage medium is included in the recognized character string;
and 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 6: wherein the receiving section receives specifying of units in which the image data is divided into different files.
Claim 5:
wherein the receiving section receives units in which the image data is divided into different files.
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 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 5: wherein the determining section determines whether the specified word matches any of the candidate character strings
Claim 9:
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.
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 the candidate character string such that a number of characters that are included in the candidate character string 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 10:
wherein 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 1 is provisionally rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, and 5 of co-pending application 18/633,611. Regarding claim 1, A scanning system comprising: a receiving section that receives a specified word and a processing setting from a user and stores the received specified word and the received processing setting to a nonvolatile storage medium such that the specified word is associated with the processing setting; a scanner that performs scanning to read an image; a determining section that performs character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize a character string and determines whether the specified word read from the storage medium is included in the recognized character string; and 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, as disclosed in the current application provides the same functionality of claims 1, 3, and 5 of reference application 18/633,611, with the exception of explicitly stating storing the received specified word and the received processing setting to a nonvolatile storage medium such that the specified word is associated with the processing setting, however, claim 1 of the reference application indicates “performs scanning…in accordance with the scan setting in response to the reception of the scan setting and the scan instruction”. Claims 1, 3, and 5 of the reference application include the limitations: A scanning system comprising: a receiving section that receives a scan setting and a scan instruction; wherein the receiving section receives a setting for a specified word; 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; and a determining section that performs character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize a character string; wherein the determining section determines whether the specified word matches any of the candidate character strings; and the scanning system further comprises a processing section that performs processing corresponding to the specified word when the specified word matches any of the candidate character strings, 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 use of storing the received settings for a specified word, to produce known results with a reasonable expectation for success.
Claim 5 is provisionally rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6 of co-pending application 18/633,611. Regarding claim 5, wherein the receiving section receives units in which the image data is divided into different files is the same as claim 6 of reference application 18/633,611. Claim 6 of the reference application states: wherein the receiving section receives specifying of 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 9 is provisionally rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2 and 5 of co-pending application 18/633,611. Regarding claim 9, 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, as disclosed in the current application provides the same functionality of claims 2 and 5 of reference application 18/633,611. Claims 2 and 5 of the reference application include the limitations: wherein the scan setting includes a setting for a scanning resolution, the determining section outputs a candidate character string that is among the 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; wherein the determining section determines whether the specified word matches any of the candidate character strings. 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 10 is provisionally rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of co-pending application 18/633,611. Regarding claim 10, wherein 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, as disclosed in the current application provides the same functionality of claim 3 of reference application 18/633,611. Claim 3 of the reference application include the limitations: 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 the candidate character string such that a number of characters that are included in the candidate character string 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. 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 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, as explained in MPEP §2181, subsection I (note that the list of generic placeholders below is not exhaustive, and other generic placeholders may invoke 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 Generic Placeholder (A Term That Is Simply A Substitute for “Means”)
With respect to the first prong of this analysis, a claim element that does not include the term “means” or “step” triggers a rebuttable presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, does not apply. When the claim limitation does not use the term “means,” examiners should determine whether the presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, paragraph 6 does not apply is overcome. The presumption may be overcome if the claim limitation uses a generic placeholder (a term that is simply a substitute for the term “means”). The following is a list of non-structural generic placeholders that may invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre- AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, paragraph 6: “mechanism for,” “module for,” “device for,” “unit for,” “component for,” “element for,” “member for,” “apparatus for,” “machine for,” or “system for.” Welker Bearing Co., v. PHD, Inc., 550 F.3d 1090, 1096, 89 USPQ2d 1289, 1293-94 (Fed. Cir. 2008); Massachusetts Inst. of Tech. v. Abacus Software, 462 F.3d 1344, 1354, 80 USPQ2d 1225, 1228 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Personalized Media,161 F.3d at 704, 48 USPQ2d at 1886–87; Mas- Hamilton Group v. LaGard, Inc., 156 F.3d 1206, 1214-1215, 48 USPQ2d 1010, 1017 (Fed. Cir.1998). This list is not exhaustive, and other generic placeholders may invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, paragraph 6.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are in independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-12:
A scanning system comprising ([0017] FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a configuration of a multifunction peripheral 1 as a scanning system according to an embodiment of the present disclosure):
a receiving section
a determining section
and a processing section
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 12 recites “The scanning system according to claim 11, wherein a plurality of different specified words are stored in the storage medium, the determining section acquires the candidate character strings and probabilities that the candidate character strings are accurate, when a first candidate character string that is accurate with a probability of a first value matches a first specified word, a second candidate character string that is accurate with a probability of a second value matches a second specified word, and the first value is larger than the second value, the determining section selects the first specified word as the specified word included in the image data, and when the first candidate character string that is accurate with the probability of the first value matches the first specified word, the second candidate character string that is accurate with the probability of the second value matches the second specified word, and the first value is larger than the second value, the determining section selects the second specified word as the specified word included in the image data”.
Paragraph 0045 of the specification recites: “A plurality of different specified words may be stored in the storage medium 20. For example, it is assumed that a first specified word and a second specified word are stored in the storage medium 20. When a first candidate character string that is accurate with a probability of a first value matches the first specified word, a second candidate character string that is accurate with a probability of a second value matches the second specified word, and the first value is larger than the second value, the processor 10 selects the first specified word as a specified word included in image data. When the first candidate character string that is accurate with the probability of the first value matches the first specified word, the second candidate character string that is accurate with the probability of the second value matches the second specified word, and the second value is larger than the first value, the processor 10 selects the second specified word as a specified word included in the image data.
Claim 12 first describes selecting the first specified word when the first value is larger, than contradictorily describes selecting the second specified word when the first value is larger. For the sake of compact prosecution, claim 12 is being interpreted to mean that the first specified word is selected when the first value is larger and the second specified word is selected when the second value is larger.
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 1-2, 6-7, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omuro (US20210289086A1) in view of King (US20140294302A1).
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. [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):
a receiving section that receives a specified word (for example, "date") and a processing setting from a user and stores the received specified word and the received processing setting to a nonvolatile storage medium such that the specified word is associated with the processing 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));
a scanner that performs scanning to read an image ([0043] The generating section 110 generates scan data by scanning the original document 50 with the image reading mechanism 16);
a determining section that performs character recognition on image data indicating the read image to recognize a character string and determines whether words associated with the specified word (for example, "January") read from the storage medium are included in the recognized character string ([0031] The character data storage area 13c stores character data used for an OCR process. The CPU 11 extracts characters corresponding to character data stored in the character data storage area 13c by performing the OCR process and causes the extracted characters to be spoken, as a word corresponding to an image recognition result, from the speaker circuit 17. [0062] The phrase “characters indicating a date” refer to a combination of a number and a year or a fiscal year, a combination of the era name, a number, and a year, a one-digit or two-digit number and a month, a combination of a one-digit or two-digit number and a day, or the like);
and a processing section that performs processing on the image data with the processing setting associated with the specified word when words associated with the specified word are included in the image data ([0081] In S04, according to the list of characters and images that meet the read aloud settings at each stage, the multi-function printer 1 determines whether the original document 50 includes a character or image that meets the first read aloud settings. If the multi-function printer 1 determines that the original document 50 includes a character or image that meets the first read aloud settings, the multi-function printer 1 proceeds to S05. If, however, the multi-function printer 1 determines that the original document 50 does not include a character or image that meets the first read aloud settings, the multi-function printer 1 proceeds to S21 in FIG. 10. [0082] In S05, the multi-function printer 1 speaks words corresponding to characters and images that meet the first read aloud settings. [0076] When the pre-scan button 14b is operated for the third time in the scanning process, 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). For example, the multi-function printer 1 speaks “character, The monthly numbers of printed sheets of printers in fiscal year 2019 are as follows.” The multi-function printer 1 may speak only the characters indicating a date. For example, the multi-function printer 1 may speak “character, fiscal year 2019.”).
Omuro does not explicitly teach determines whether the specified word read from the storage medium is included in the recognized character string; 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.
King, in the same field of endeavor of word scanning systems, teaches determines whether the specified word read from the storage medium is included in the recognized character string; 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 ([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).
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 determine whether the specific word is included and perform processing based on the processing setting associated with the specific word so that "certain items of text or other symbols may, when scanned, cause standard actions to occur, and the OS may provide a selection of these. An example might be that scanning the text "[print]" in any document would cause the OS to retrieve and print a copy of that document" [King 0274].
Regarding claim 2, Omuro and King teach the system of claim 1. King teaches wherein the processing by the processing section includes printing with a print setting associated with the specified word ([0513] Standard actions can include, among others: [0515] translate this to another language (and speak, display, or print)…[0539] print this document)).
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 print with a print setting associated with the specific word so that "Row 703 indicates that, if the keyword "litmus" is captured anywhere in the character range 600-1700, the following action may be performed: printing on a printer located near the user, such as a printer connected to the user computer system 212, a brochure retrieved from "http://www.hansen.com/testkit.pdf".
Regarding claim 6, Omuro and King teach the system of claim 1. Omuro further teaches wherein the determining section stores a result of the determination to the storage medium ([0049] The transmitting section 140 transmits the main scan data generated by the generating section 110 to a specific destination when the main scan button 14c is operated within a certain period of time after completion of speaking performed by the speaking section 130. The transmitting section 140 transmits the main scan data to a destination stored in the destination storage area 13d).
Omuro does not teach when the image data that is unprocessed data when the scanning system is started is present, the processing section processes the unprocessed image data based on the result of the determination read from the storage medium.
King teaches when the image data that is unprocessed data when the scanning system is started is present, the processing section processes the unprocessed image data based on the result of the determination read from the storage medium ([0144] Lastly, in situations where the user captures some text and the system cannot immediately act upon the capture (for example, because an electronic version of the document is not yet available) the capture can be stored in the library and can be processed later, either automatically or in response to a user request. A user can also subscribe to new markup services and apply them to previously captured scans).
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 process unprocessed data as a result of the determination because "For performance reasons, multiple queries may be launched in response to a single capture, either in sequence or in parallel. Several queries may be sent in response to a single capture, for example as new words are added to the capture, or to query multiple search engines in parallel" and "The response to a given query may indicate that other pending queries are superfluous; these may be cancelled before completion" [King 0075 and 0078].
Regarding claim 7, Omuro and King teach the system of claim 1. Omuro further teaches wherein the determining section performs character recognition in a language corresponding to the specified word ([0110] The language in which to perform reading aloud is a language set as the system language. However, when it is determined as a result of analyzing the characters in the original document 50 that the original document 50 is a document in another language, reading aloud may be performed in the determined language. For example, an image may be read aloud in the system language, and subsequently an image may be read aloud in the determined language. Similarly, for the case of reading characters aloud, the characters may be translated into the system language and be read aloud, and subsequently the characters may be read aloud in the determined language)
Regarding claim 13, Omuro teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a scanning program for causing a computer to function as ([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):
a receiving section that receives a specified word (for example, "date") and a processing setting from a user and stores the received specified word and the received processing setting to a nonvolatile storage medium such that the specified word is associated with the processing 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));
an acquiring section that acquires image data indicating an image read by scanning ([0043] The generating section 110 generates scan data by scanning the original document 50 with the image reading mechanism 16);
a determining section that performs character recognition on the image data to recognize a character string and determines whether words associated with the specified word (for example, "January") read from the storage medium are included in the recognized character string ([0031] The character data storage area 13c stores character data used for an OCR process. The CPU 11 extracts characters corresponding to character data stored in the character data storage area 13c by performing the OCR process and causes the extracted characters to be spoken, as a word corresponding to an image recognition result, from the speaker circuit 17. [0062] The phrase “characters indicating a date” refer to a combination of a number and a year or a fiscal year, a combination of the era name, a number, and a year, a one-digit or two-digit number and a month, a combination of a one-digit or two-digit number and a day, or the like);
and a processing section that performs processing on the image data with the processing setting associated with the specified word when words associated with the specified word are included in the image data ([0081] In S04, according to the list of characters and images that meet the read aloud settings at each stage, the multi-function printer 1 determines whether the original document 50 includes a character or image that meets the first read aloud settings. If the multi-function printer 1 determines that the original document 50 includes a character or image that meets the first read aloud settings, the multi-function printer 1 proceeds to S05. If, however, the multi-function printer 1 determines that the original document 50 does not include a character or image that meets the first read aloud settings, the multi-function printer 1 proceeds to S21 in FIG. 10. [0082] In S05, the multi-function printer 1 speaks words corresponding to characters and images that meet the first read aloud settings. [0076] When the pre-scan button 14b is operated for the third time in the scanning process, 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). For example, the multi-function printer 1 speaks “character, The monthly numbers of printed sheets of printers in fiscal year 2019 are as follows.” The multi-function printer 1 may speak only the characters indicating a date. For example, the multi-function printer 1 may speak “character, fiscal year 2019.”).
Omuro does not explicitly teach determines whether the specified word read from the storage medium is included in the recognized character string; 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.
King, in the same field of endeavor of word scanning systems, teaches determines whether the specified word read from the storage medium is included in the recognized character string; 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 ([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).
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 King to determine whether the specific word is included and perform processing based on the processing setting associated with the specific word so that "certain items of text or other symbols may, when scanned, cause standard actions to occur, and the OS may provide a selection of these. An example might be that scanning the text "[print]" in any document would cause the OS to retrieve and print a copy of that document" [King 0274].
Regarding claim 14, 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):
reading association of a specified word (for example, "date") with an output setting from a storage medium ([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));
acquiring image data indicating an image read by scanning ([0043] The generating section 110 generates scan data by scanning the original document 50 with the image reading mechanism 16);
performing character recognition on the image data to recognize a character string and determining whether words associated with the specified word (for example, "January") read from the storage medium are included in the recognized character string ([0031] The character data storage area 13c stores character data used for an OCR process. The CPU 11 extracts characters corresponding to character data stored in the character data storage area 13c by performing the OCR process and causes the extracted characters to be spoken, as a word corresponding to an image recognition result, from the speaker circuit 17. [0062] The phrase “characters indicating a date” refer to a combination of a number and a year or a fiscal year, a combination of the era name, a number, and a year, a one-digit or two-digit number and a month, a combination of a one-digit or two-digit number and a day, or the like);
and producing output matter based on the image data and the output setting associated with the specified word when words associated with the specified word are included in the image data ([0081] In S04, according to the list of characters and images that meet the read aloud settings at each stage, the multi-function printer 1 determines whether the original document 50 includes a character or image that meets the first read aloud settings. If the multi-function printer 1 determines that the original document 50 includes a character or image that meets the first read aloud settings, the multi-function printer 1 proceeds to S05. If, however, the multi-function printer 1 determines that the original document 50 does not include a character or image that meets the first read aloud settings, the multi-function printer 1 proceeds to S21 in FIG. 10. [0082] In S05, the multi-function printer 1 speaks words corresponding to characters and images that meet the first read aloud settings. [0076] When the pre-scan button 14b is operated for the third time in the scanning process, 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). For example, the multi-function printer 1 speaks “character, The monthly numbers of printed sheets of printers in fiscal year 2019 are as follows.” The multi-function printer 1 may speak only the characters indicating a date. For example, the multi-function printer 1 may speak “character, fiscal year 2019.”).
Omuro does not explicitly teach determining whether the specified word read from the storage medium is included in the recognized character string; producing output matter based on the image data and the output setting associated with the specified word when the specified word is included in the image data.
King, in the same field of endeavor of word scanning systems, teaches determining whether the specified word read from the storage medium is included in the recognized character string; producing output matter based on the image data and the output setting associated with the specified word when the specified word is included in the image data ([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).
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 King to determine whether the specific word is included and produce output matter based on the output setting associated with the specific word so that "certain items of text or other symbols may, when scanned, cause standard actions to occur, and the OS may provide a selection of these. An example might be that scanning the text "[print]" in any document would cause the OS to retrieve and print a copy of that document" [King 0274].
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omuro in view of King and Yoshidome (US10701232B1).
Regarding claim 3, Omuro and King teach the method of claim 2. Yoshidome, in the same field of endeavor of scanning systems, teaches wherein the processing setting includes a setting for a number of sheets to be printed ([col. 11 ln. 55-57] In a given example, if the keyword string is “make 2 copies B/W,” the corresponding command might be “generate 2 black and white photocopies". [col. 5 ln. 3-9] the scanning unit 118 is configured to automatically detach a note sheet from a document, and separately scan the detached note sheet as well as the document; the copying unit 122 is configured to generate one or more copies of a given document; and the printing unit 124 is configured to generate one or more print copies of a digital file).
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 Yoshidome to include a number of sheets to be printed because "There are any number of document-processing situations where copying, storage, distribution, and similar operations carried out on single-page and multipage printed documents, individually and in sets, are handled according to specific document-targeted instructions written on sticky notes. New-hire and payroll processing, invoice processing, hospital records processing, processing of certain bank documents, legal discovery, and bibliographical data-based archiving of documents, for example, may involve review of the documents by specialists who prepare and append to given documents sticky notes containing specific, handwritten instructions for processing operations pertaining to the given documents, to be carried out by personnel other than the specialists" [col. 1 ln. 43-56].
Regarding claim 4, Omuro and King teach the method of claim 1. Omuro does not teach wherein the processing section outputs the image data and stores the image data to a folder generated with the specified word as a folder name.
King teaches wherein the processing section outputs the image data and stores the image data to a folder ([0294] An OS often maintains certain categories of folders or files that have particular significance. A user's documents may, by convention or design, be found in a "My Documents" folder, for example).
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 output the image data and store the image data to a folder because "On an OS optimized for use with the described system, such categories may be enhanced or augmented in ways that take into account a user's interaction with paper versions of the stored files" [King 0295].
Yoshidome teaches wherein the processing section outputs the image data and stores the image data generated with the specified word as a name ([col. 11 ln. 35-48] In certain embodiments of the presently disclosed technology, the text recognition module 602 is configured to receive a scanned-copy, data version of the note (“scanned note”) 203, and recognize text in the scanned note 203 using optical character recognition (OCR) technology, wherein the scanned note may be in a document format such as PDF or an image format such as JPEG. In certain embodiments of the presently disclosed technology, the text recognition module 602 is configured to recognize one or more keyword strings from the scanned note 203. The command extraction module 604 is configured to extract one or more commands from the preconfigured database engine 605 based on the OCR-recognized keyword strings. [col. 11 ln. 57-61] Likewise, if the keyword string is “PDF format,” the corresponding command might be “save the scanned file in a PDF format.” If the keyword string is “PDF=Farmer's Report,” the corresponding command might be “name the PDF file <Farmer's Report>”).
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 Yoshidome to store the image data with the specific word as the name by "effectuat[ing] the CPU 112 automatically saving the document 202 in a PDF format with file name Farmer's Report, either in the memory 110, or in a memory of the computing device 114, and then emailing the scanned file. Thus, instead of a user manually removing the sticky note 104 to read the instructions for the job so as to input the corresponding operations, the note processing unit 126 is enabled to read commands on a sticky note after recognizing its command-containing text, and instruct the carrying out of corresponding job processes, without manual intervention by a user. This greatly saves time when processing large batch jobs" [Yoshidome col. 12 ln. 7-18].
Regarding claim 5, Omuro, King, and Yoshidome teach the system of claim 4. King further 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].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omuro in view of King and Dunning (US20200084485A1).
Regarding claim 8, Omuro and King teach the system of claim 1. Dunning, in the same field of endeavor of word scanning systems, teaches wherein the determining section determines that the image data includes the specified word under a condition that is more relaxed when the scanning is performed with a scan setting in which accuracy of the character recognition is set to a first level (newest resolution OCR, 80%) than a condition under which the determining section determines that the image data includes the specified word when the scanning is performed with a scan setting in which the accuracy of the character recognition is set to a second level (original resolution OCR) higher than the first level ([0025] In one embodiment, the pre-processing component may screen (e.g., via natural language processing) the descriptions of the uploaded videos for specific tags or words (e.g., education, programming, tutorial, guide) which may indicate significant on-screen textual content… In at least one embodiment, the quality detection program may include a pre-processing operation. [0035] The quality detection program 110a, 110b may perform the OCR at the original resolution of the uploaded video file and may set the OCR data for the original resolution as a baseline for comparing against the OCR data for lower resolutions of the video file. In one embodiment, the OCR component of the quality detection program 110a, 110b may measure and return a number of texts (e.g., words) detected in each frame of the selected key frames at the original resolution. In one embodiment, the quality detection program 110a, 110b may record the OCR data of the original resolution as the number of words detected in each frame of the selected key frames. [0039] Then, at 212, an OCR of the selected key frames is performed at the newest resolution…Accordingly, the OCR component of the quality detection program 110a, 110b may measure and return a number of texts (e.g., words) detected in each frame of the selected key frames at the newest resolution. In one embodiment, the quality detection program 110a, 110b may record the OCR data of the newest resolution as the number of words detected in each frame of the selected key frames. [0041] Then, at 216, the quality detection program 110a, 110b determines if the newest resolution meets a threshold quality. The quality detection program 110a, 110b may compare the OCR data for the newest resolution of the uploaded video file (e.g., aggregate detected words recorded in the database 214) against the OCR data for the original resolution of the uploaded video file (e.g., aggregate detected words recorded in the database 208) to determine if the newest resolution meets the threshold quality. In one embodiment, the quality detection program 110a, 110b may implement a pre-defined threshold quality. In at least one embodiment, the pre-defined threshold quality may require that the aggregate detected words across the selected key frames in the newest resolution includes more than 80% of the aggregate detected words across the selected key frames in the original resolution).
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 Dunning to determine that the image data includes a specific word more relaxedly when the scanning is performed at a first level of lower accuracy because "The media streaming service will typically deliver a lower resolution version of the video content in order to preserve a fluid streaming experience (e.g., not pausing to buffer) for viewers without sufficient network bandwidth. However, for some video content, viewers may deem the lower resolution versions to be insufficient for the intended purpose of the media" [Dunning 0002] and "The threshold for significant on-screen textual content (e.g., 80% on-screen textual content) may be customizable by the media streaming service using the quality detection program 110a, 110b. If the pre-processing component determines (e.g., by identifying specific tags or words in the description of the video file) that the uploaded video file does not have significant on-screen text, the quality detection program 110a, 110b may abandon the viable resolution detection process 200 for the uploaded video file" [Dunning 0031].
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omuro in view of King and Wang (US20180101726A1).
Regarding claim 11, Omuro and King teach the system of claim 1. Wang, in the same field of endeavor of scanning analysis, teaches 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 ([0006] Current OCR systems do not perform well with low resolution documents, such as 150 dots per inch (“DPI”) or 72 DPI. For example, document OCR can follow a hierarchical schema, taking a top-down approach. For one page, the locations of text columns, blocks, paragraphs, lines, and characters are identified by page structure analysis. Due to the nature of touching and broken characters commonly seen in the machine printed text, segmenting characters can be more difficult than previous levels of page layout analysis. OCR systems requiring character segmentation often suffer from inaccuracies in segmentation. [0008] Systems and methods for optical character resolution (OCR) at low resolutions are provided. A dataset is received and document images are extracted from the dataset. The system segments and extracts a plurality of text lines from the document images. The plurality of text lines are processed by a Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) with Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) modules to perform line OCR. Finally, a plurality of text strings are generated corresponding to the plurality of text lines. [0031] Results of experimentation are now explained in greater detail. The test set can include 1020 text line images with total number of characters 48445. The labeling error rate was noted above. To evaluate the impact of scan resolutions, the test and training datasets can be created at 5 scan resolutions—72 DPI, 100 DPI, 150 DPI, 200 DPI and 300 DPI. The LSTM module can be trained on each of these resolutions).
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 Wang for a larger number of character strings to be acquired at the lower resolution because "In such systems, distortions (e.g. skewed documents or low resolution faxes) can challenge both character segmentation and recognition accuracy. In fact, touching and broken characters often account for most recognition errors in these segmentation-based OCR systems" [Wang 0006].
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omuro in view of King, Wang, and Singh (US20220237373A1).
Regarding claim 12, Omuro, King, and Wang teach the system of claim 11. Omuro further teaches wherein a plurality of different specified words are stored in the storage medium ([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] When the pre-scan button 14b is operated for the third time in the scanning process, 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). For example, the multi-function printer 1 speaks “character, The monthly numbers of printed sheets of printers in fiscal year 2019 are as follows.” The multi-function printer 1 may speak only the characters indicating a date. For example, the multi-function printer 1 may speak “character, fiscal year 2019”);
Omuro does not teach the determining section acquires the candidate character strings and probabilities that the candidate character strings are accurate, when a first candidate character string that is accurate with a probability of a first value matches a first specified word, a second candidate character string that is accurate with a probability of a second value matches a second specified word, and the first value is larger than the second value, the determining section selects the first specified word as the specified word included in the image data, and when the first candidate character string that is accurate with the probability of the first value matches the first specified word, the second candidate character string that is accurate with the probability of the second value matches the second specified word, and the first value is larger than the second value, the determining section selects the second specified word as the specified word included in the image data.
Singh, in the same field of endeavor of scanning analysis, teaches the determining section acquires the candidate character strings and probabilities that the candidate character strings are accurate, when a first candidate character string that is accurate with a probability of a first value matches a first specified word, a second candidate character string that is accurate with a probability of a second value matches a second specified word, and the first value is larger than the second value, the determining section selects the first specified word as the specified word included in the image data, and when the first candidate character string that is accurate with the probability of the first value matches the first specified word, the second candidate character string that is accurate with the probability of the second value matches the second specified word, and the second value is larger than the first value (see 35 USC 112(a) rejection above), the determining section selects the second specified word as the specified word included in the image data ([0043] In some implementations, the second ML models 134 may be configured to output probability scores that indicate likelihoods that various extractions (e.g., particular words or phrases in the input document) correspond to each of category-specific entities. To illustrate, the second ML models 134 may output at least some of the probability scores 114, and the probability scores 114 may include, for each extraction from the input document, probability scores indicating likelihoods that the extraction corresponds to each of the category-specific entities and, optionally, that the extraction does not correspond to any entity, as further described herein with reference to FIG. 6. As an illustrative example, if the document category 120 includes leases and the category-specific entities include Party_A, Party_B, Lease Date, Duration, and Lease Value, the probability scores 114 may include a first probability score indicating a likelihood that extraction is the name of Party_A in the input document, a second probability score indicating a likelihood that the extraction is the name of Party_B in the input document. [0096] For example, the probability scores 660 may include a first probability score 662 that indicates a probability that the particular word or phrase corresponds to a first entity associated with the first category, a second probability score 664 that indicates a probability that the particular word or phrase corresponds to a second entity associated with the first category…The first annotator 306 may tag the word or phrase of the new document 650 as an entity value of the particular entity associated with the highest probability score of the probability scores 660…Other extractions (e.g., word(s) or phrase(s)) from the new document 650 may be tagged in a similar manner as respective entity values of the j category-specific entities. [0089] The categorizer 128 may assign the new document 550 to the category associated with the highest probability score. For example, if the first probability score 562 is 0.2 and corresponds to marketing documents, the second probability score 564 is 0.9 and corresponds to legal documents, and the remaining scores of the probability scores 560 are less than 0.9, the categorizer 214 may assign a label corresponding to legal documents (e.g., Label 2) to the new document 550).
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 Singh to select the word corresponding to the higher accuracy probability to "use ML models that can be trained with significantly fewer training documents as compared to the large volume of reference documents some conventional systems analyze to improve semantic understanding of documents. These improvements to document summarization enable generation of document summaries that enable fast and accurate document indexing and searching for a variety of different document categories" [Singh 0006] because "conventional document summarization methods do not provide an efficient, scalable approach for accurately evaluating semantic relationships of words, phrases, and sentences across entire documents of multiple different categories" [Singh 0003].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-10 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 9-10, 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).
The following limitations are not found to be taught in the art: 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 9); and 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 10).
Conclusion
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