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 .
In amendments dated 06/18/2026, applicant amended claims 1 – 10 and added new claims 11 – 12. Claims 1 – 12 are now pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 - 12 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.
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 - 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara (U.S PreGrant Publication No. 2015/0278658 A1, hereinafter ‘Hara’) in view of Kanazawa (U.S PreGrant Publication No. 2020/0380069 A1, hereinafter ‘Kanazawa’).
With respect to claim 1, Hara teaches a printer (e.g., an image forming apparatus 1, Fig. 2) comprising: a memory (e.g., a storage unit 19, Fig. 2); a print engine (e.g., an image forming unit 17, Fig. 2); and a controller (e.g., a control unit 10, Fig. 2) configured to perform: acquiring print data specifying a character (e.g., acquiring drawing data that includes a character, ¶0082 with ¶0089); acquiring specific information from the print data, the specific information specifying a font (e.g., extracting/recognizing font (or attribute data) from the drawing data, ¶0004, ¶0087, ¶0155 - ¶0159, Fig. 10); identifying a target font file, using a piece of allocation information stored in the memory, from among a plurality of font files stored in the memory, the piece of allocation information being for associating the specific information with the target font file (e.g., selecting a font, where the degree of similarity is the highest. When the selected font and character size have the degree of similarity greater than or equal to a specified threshold value, the font matching unit 120 determines as corresponding to the font and the character size and establishing matching. In addition, when the degree of similarity is lower than the specified threshold value, the font matching unit 120 determines that there are no corresponding font and no corresponding character size and matching is not established, ¶0082, Claim 5); and drawing an image of the character using the target font file to generate image to be used in printing by the print engine (e.g., drawing an image of the character using the selected font to generate ¶0043 with ¶0096, ¶0129, ¶0159); but fails to teaches: that said piece of allocation information is separated from said print data; and identifying said allocation information is referenced to identify said target font file associated with the specific information acquired.
However, in the same field of endeavor of font for print data, Kanazawa teaches: a piece of allocation information being information separate from print data (e.g., alternate font(s) is/are information separated from printable data; said alternate font(s) are found/stored in a table, ¶0008 - ¶0021, ¶0056 - ¶0059, Figs. 4 & 5), identifying the piece of allocation information that is referenced to identify a target font file associated with specific information acquired (e.g., specifying the alternate font that is referenced to identify the font to be used associated with font specifying information, ¶0056 - ¶0059, ¶0063).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the printer of Hara as taught by Kanazawa since Kanazawa suggested within ¶0008 - ¶0021, ¶0056 - ¶0059 and Figs. 4 & 5 that such modification of having alternative font(s) for unsupported character code from table(s) would define more substitute/alternate methods for an unsupported character code in order to resolve the unsupported character code.
With respect to claim 2, Hara in view of Kanazawa teaches the printer according to claim 1, wherein Kanazawa teaches the controller is configured to perform identification process performs: searching the piece of allocation information for the specific information, and wherein when the specific information is found in the piece of allocation information as a result of the searching the piece of allocation information for the specific information, in the identifying, the controller is configured to identify, as the target font file, a font file associated with the specific information found as the result of the searching the piece of allocation information for the specific information (e.g., when it’s determined that there is a unsupported font, then ‘search’ an alternative font, abstract, ¶0027).
With respect to claim 3, Hara in view of Kanazawa teaches the printer according to claim 1, wherein Kanazawa teaches, in the acquiring the specific information from the print data, the controller is configured to acquire, as the specific information, a specific font name included in the print data, the specific font name being a name of the font (e.g., acquiring font specifying information from printable data, ¶0027, ¶0056), wherein the piece of allocation information is for associating the specific font name with the target font file, wherein, in the identifying, the controller is configured to identify, as the target font file, a font file associated with the specific font name by referencing the piece of allocation information (e.g., said alternative font(s) is/are referenced to the table from the font specifying information when it’s unsupported, Fig. 4).
With respect to claim 4, Hara in view of Kanazawa teaches the printer according to claim 3, wherein Kanazawa teaches the piece of allocation information is for associating each of a first font name and a second font name with the target font file, wherein, in the identifying, the controller is configured to:e.g., refer to multiple alternative fonts, in which a priority is given by highest frequency, ¶0068, ¶0071).
With respect to claim 5, Hara in view of Tabushi teaches the printer according to claim 1, wherein Tabushi teaches the second acquisition process acquires, as the specific information, a specific font identifier included in the print data, the specific font identifier identifying the font (e.g. acquiring font name (identifier) that is within a PDF (print data), ¶0031 - ¶0035), wherein the piece of allocation information is for associating the specific font identifier with the target font file, wherein the identification process identifies the target font file associated with the specific font identifier acquired in the second acquisition process by referencing the piece of allocation information (e.g., and the operators refer to attributes/specification within the font, ¶028, ¶0032, ¶0039).
With respect to claim 5, Hara in view of Kanazawa teaches the printer according to claim 1, wherein, in the acquiring of the specific information from the print data, the controller is configured to acquire, as the specific information, a specific font identifier included in the print data, the specific font identifier identifying the font (e.g., font specifying information from printable data, ¶0014), wherein the piece of allocation information is for associating the specific font identifier with the target font file, wherein, in the identifying, the identification process controller is configured to identify, as the target font file, a font file associated with the specific font identifier by referencing the piece of allocation information (e.g., said alternative font(s) is/are associated with the font specifying information when it’s not supported, and there are referenced from the table, ¶0014 - ¶0023 & ¶0061).
With respect to claim 6, Hara in view of Kanazawa teaches the printer according to claim 1, wherein Kanazawa teaches, in the acquiring of the specific information from the print data, the controller is configured to acquire, the specific information, one of a specific font name included in the print data and a specific font identifier included in the print data, the specific font name being a name of the font, the specific font identifier identifying the font (e.g., font specifying information from printable data, ¶0014),, wherein the piece of allocation information is for associating each of the specific font name and the specific font identifier with the target font file, wherein, in the identifying, the controller is configured to identify, as the target font file, a font file associated with the one of the specific font name and the specific font identifier by referencing the piece of allocation information (e.g., said alternative font(s) is/are associated with the font specifying information when it’s not supported, and there are referenced from the table, ¶0014 - ¶0023 & ¶0061).
With respect to claim 7, Hara in view of Kanazawa teaches the printer according to claim 1, wherein Kanazawa teaches, in the identifying, the controller is configured to identify identification process identifies the target font file by searching a plurality of pieces of allocation information stored in the memory for the specific information, each of the plurality of pieces of allocation information being for associating specific information, which specifies a respective one of a plurality of fonts, with a respective one of the plurality of font files, the plurality of pieces of allocation information including the piece of allocation information (e.g., when it’s determined that there is a unsupported font, then ‘search’ for multiple alternative fonts, abstract, ¶0027, ¶0061).
With respect to claim 8, Hara in view of Kanazawa teaches the printer according to claim 1, Kanazawa generally teaches the controller is configured to further perform, before acquiring of the print data: Storing, in the memory, the target font file including font-name information on indicating a font name; reading the font-name information from the target font file; setting a font identifier for the target font file stored in the memory; generating the piece of allocation information, the piece of allocation information being for associating the font name of the font-name indicated by the font-name information with the target font file and further being for associating the font identifier set in the setting with the target font file; and saving the piece of allocation information generated by the generating in the memory (e.g., before receiving the printable data with font specifying information, alternative fonts should be previously set and stored in the table in order to determine that there is at least an alternative font associated with the font specifying information; abstract, ¶0046 & ¶0053).
With respect to claim 9, Hara in view of Kanazawa teaches the printer according to claim 8, wherein Kanazawa, in general, teaches, in the storing, the controller is configured to receive the target font file and store the target font file in the memory, wherein the reading, the setting, the generating, and the saving are performed in response to the target font file being received in the storing. (e.g., before receiving the printable data with font specifying information, alternative fonts should be previously set and stored/saved in the table in order to further determine that there is at least an alternative font associated with the font specifying information; abstract, ¶0046 & ¶0053).
With respect to claims 11 and 12, these are rejected for the similar reasons as those described in connection with claim 1, the addition of a memory configured to store a plurality or piece of allocation information corresponds to the alternative font(s) stored in the tables as indicated in ¶0046 and ¶0053, in order to render a character specified by an unsupported data by using the alternative font.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara in view of Kanazawa and further in view of Gonzalez et al. (U.S PreGrant Publication No. 2008/0306916 A1, hereinafter ‘Gonzalez’).
With respect to claim 10, Hara in view of Kanazawa teaches the printer according to claim 1, but neither of them teaches wherein the controller is configured to further perform, before the acquiring of the print data: receiving a selection operation to select a font file, as a selected font file, from among the plurality of font files in the memory; reading font-name information from the selected font file, the font-name information indicating a font name; setting a font identifier for the selected font file; generating a piece of allocation information, a piece of allocation information, the piece of allocation information being for associating the font name indicated in the font-name information read in the reading with the selected font file; and further being for associating the font identifier set in the setting with the selected font file; and saving, in the memory, the piece of allocation information generated in the generating.
However, Gonzalez teaches wherein the controller is configured to further perform, before the acquiring of the print data: receiving a selection operation to select a font file, as a selected font file, from among the plurality of font files in the memory; reading font-name information from the selected font file, the font-name information indicating a font name; setting a font identifier for the selected font file; generating a piece of allocation information, a piece of allocation information, the piece of allocation information being for associating the font name indicated in the font-name information read in the reading with the selected font file; and further being for associating the font identifier set in the setting with the selected font file; and saving, in the memory, the piece of allocation information generated in the generating (Gonzalez: e.g., under interpretation, while performing a font management, the user selects a font among registered fonts, determine if the font is found; if not then sets for a new or replacement font in order to be registered as new font, ¶0018, ¶0021, ¶0024, ¶0030, Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the printer of Hara in view of Kanazawa as taught by Gonzalez since Gonzalez suggested within ¶0003, ¶0021, ¶0024 - ¶0030 that such modification of having a font management would allow the user to retrieve from a system so that the user can edit, re-create or install font/glyph in order to make it convenient for the user to collect a printed document along with the alternate font.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Bell et al. (U.S PG Publication No. 2013/0063734 A1)1
1This reference teaches facilitating printing necessary to perform font substitution when an electronic document is sent to a printer with a PDL requirement for a particular font which has not been loaded into the target printer or its spooler or server. So another font is automatically substituted in some cases before printing. Fonts may include a set of glyphs, each of which may represent the shape of various characters (e.g., graphemes, numerals, symbols, and/or punctuation marks). Fonts may have different styles, which may be reflected in the shape of each font's constituent glyphs. The style of a particular glyph is typically similar to the style of another glyph of the same font.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN M GUILLERMETY whose telephone number is (571)270-3481. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Benny Q TIEU can be reached at 571-272-7490. 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.
/JUAN M GUILLERMETY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682
Prosecution Insights