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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 05/16/2024 and 06/21/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
image obtaining part in claims 1, 8 and 15;
format obtaining part in claim 8;
character string recognizing part in claim 8;
character string obtaining part in claim 8;
notifying part in claim 8;
configuring part in claims 9, 10, 12, and 13; and
character recognition condition setting part in claim 14.
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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The independent claims each recite(s) steps of obtaining formats, recognizing a first character string and obtaining a second character string. These steps fall into the mental processes grouping of the abstract ideas because they correspond to concepts performed in the human mind, i.e., an observation and evaluation. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements, i.e., the steps of obtaining a first image and notifying a possible misread, provide insignificant extra-solution activity, a pre-solution activity of data gathering and a post-solution activity of reporting. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements are well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field (see, e.g., FIG. 3 of us pat. pub. No. 2015/0193646, FIG. 10 of us pat. pub. No. 2025/0140010 and FIG. 2 of us pat. pub. No. 2018/0150956 to Kao for the data gathering and par. 67 and FIG. 7 of us pat. pub. no. 2022/0180091 and par. 87 of us pat. pub. no. 2014/0093172). For these reasons, claims 1, 8 and 15 are patent ineligible.
For claims 2-6 and 8-13, each recite(s) specifying data being obtained and/or configuring/setting conditions/thresholds for performing the abstract idea and insignificant activities. None of the claims appear to explain or reflect any improvement provided by the claimed invention, use a particular machine or apply the abstract idea in some meaningful way beyond using a generic image processing device. For these reasons, claims 2-7 and 9-14 are also patent ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-10 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(1) as being anticipated by Us patent application publication no. 2015/0310270 to Nomi et al. (hereinafter Nomi).
For claims 1 and 8, Nomi as applied discloses a character string reading method, comprising:
obtaining a first image of a read object by an image obtaining part (see, e.g., pars. 74, 78, 86, and 110 and FIGS. 2, 4 and 13, which teach obtaining an image of a reading target by an imaging unit);
obtaining one or more formats of a character string to be read from the first image and to be output (see, e.g., pars. 87-89 and 93-101 and FIG. 4-6, which teach searching for first and second reading formats that match with the character string);
recognizing a first character string in the first image (see, e.g., pars. 80, 87-93, 112-113, and 117-120 and FIGS. 3, 4 and 13, which teach recognizing a character string based on the captured image);
obtaining, for output, a second character string at a portion matching a first format, the first format being one of the obtained one or more formats, among the first character string (see, e.g., pars. 94-101, 117-120 and 131-138 and FIGS. 4 and 14-16, which teach obtaining a portion of the recognized character string that matches with the second reading format);
notifying a possibility of misreading in a case where the second character string having characters less than a notification threshold number is obtained (see, e.g., pars. 94, 97-106, 118-120, 123-124, and 131-140 and FIGS. 4 and 13-16, which teach notifying a possibility of digit drop in a case where the matching portion has less characters than the digit size of the second reading format).
For claims 2 and 9, Nomi as applied discloses:
configuring the notification threshold number based on a maximum number of characters in the character string defined by the obtained one or more formats (see, e.g., pars. 94, 97-106, 118-120, 123-124, and 131-140 and FIGS. 4 and 13-16, which teach that a digit number/size of the second reading format defines the maximum number of characters in the matching portion; the examiner interprets the digit number of the second reading format as the claimed notification threshold number).
For claims 3 and 10, Nomi as applied discloses:
configuring the notification threshold number to a maximum number of characters in the character string defined by the obtained one or more formats (see, e.g., pars. 94, 97-106, 118-120, 123-124, and 131-140 and FIGS. 4 and 13-16, which teach that a digit number/size of the second reading format defines the maximum number of characters in the matching portion; the examiner interprets the digit number of the second reading format as the claimed notification threshold number).
For claims 7 and 14, Nomi as applied discloses that the method is capable of being executed by a character string reading device (see, e.g., pars. 68-73 and FIG. 1, which teach using a hand terminal with a built-in CPU as a portal optical reader), the method further comprising:
setting, as a first character recognition condition, that only a first group of characters including all characters defined by at least one format of the obtained one or more formats are to be identified, among characters which the character string reading device can identify (see, e.g., pars. 87-93, 112-113, 117-120, and 128-130 and FIGS. 4, 13, 14, and 15A-B which teach setting a reading format that matches with the character string as the first reading format, wherein each reading format includes only a subset of characters, such certain number/digit of English letter and/or numerals), and
wherein the recognizing of the first character string is recognizing the first character string in the first image according to the first character recognition condition (see, e.g., pars. 87-93, 112-113, 117-120, and 128-130 and FIGS. 4, 13, 14, and 15A-B, which teach setting a reading format that matches with the character string as the first reading format).
For claim 15, Nomi as applied discloses a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium containing program instructions executable by a computer, and when executed, causing one computer or a plurality of computers in cooperation to execute a character string reading method (see, e.g., pars. 24 and 74-76 and FIG. 2), the character string reading method comprising:
obtaining a first image of a read object by an image obtaining part (see, e.g., pars. 74, 78, 86, and 110 and FIGS. 2, 4 and 13, which teach obtaining an image of a reading target by an imaging unit);
obtaining one or more formats of a character string to be read from the first image and to be output (see, e.g., pars. 87-89 and 93-101 and FIG. 4-6, which teach searching for first and second reading formats that match with the character string);
recognizing a first character string in the first image (see, e.g., pars. 80, 87-93, 112-113, and 117-120 and FIGS. 3, 4 and 13, which teach recognizing a character string based on the captured image);
obtaining, for output, a second character string at a portion matching a first format, the first format being one of the obtained one or more formats, among the first character string (see, e.g., pars. 94-101, 117-120 and 131-138 and FIGS. 4 and 14-16, which teach obtaining a portion of the recognized character string that matches with the second reading format);
notifying a possibility of misreading in a case where the second character string having characters less than a notification threshold number is obtained (see, e.g., pars. 94, 97-106, 118-120, 123-124, and 131-140 and FIGS. 4 and 13-16, which teach notifying a possibility of digit drop in a case where the matching portion has less characters than the digit size of the second reading format).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 4-6 and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nomi in view of us patent application publication no. 2015/0146220 to Oki.
For claims 4 and 11, Nomi as applied teaches that the notification threshold number is configured for each of the plurality of sections (see, e.g., pars. 94-101, 117-120, and 131-138 and FIGS. 4, 14-16, which teach determining a matching second reading format for each character string), and
the notifying of the possibility of misreading is performed such that the possibility of misreading is notified in a case where the second character string having a first section among the plurality of sections, number of characters in the first section being less than the notification threshold number for the first section, is obtained (see, e.g., pars. 94, 97-106, 118-120, 123-124, and 131-140 and FIGS. 4, 13-16, which teach notifying a possibility of digit drop in a case where the matching portion has less characters than the digit size of the second reading format).
While Nomi as applied teaches processing each character string repeatedly (see, e.g., pars. 115, 122 and 125 and FIG. 13), it does not teach that each character string being processed is one of multiple strings partitioned from a same character string. In other words, it does not explicitly teach “at least one of the obtained one or more formats defines a character string partitioned into a plurality of sections.”
Oki in the analogous art teaches splitting a character string into a plurality of short character strings in accordance with a predefined format rule for processing (see, e.g., pars. 65 and 84-96 and FIGS. 6A-C and 7 of Oki). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nomi to split a character string into substring/sections before processing as taught by Oki because doing so would prevent a large error in position adjustment (see par. 10 of Oki).
For claims 5 and 12, Nomi in view of Oki teaches configuring the notification threshold number for each of the plurality of sections based on a maximum number of characters in the section of the character string defined by the obtained one or more formats (see, e.g., pars. 94, 97-106, 118-120, 123-124, and 131-140 and FIGS. 4 and 13-16 of Nomi, which teach that a digit number/size of the second reading format defines the maximum number of characters in the matching portion; the examiner interprets the digit number of the second reading format as the claimed notification threshold number).
For claims 6 and 13, Nomi in view of Oki teaches configuring the notification threshold number for each of the plurality of sections to a maximum number of characters in the section of the character string defined by the obtained one or more formats (see, e.g., pars. 94, 97-106, 118-120, 123-124, and 131-140 and FIGS. 4 and 13-16 of Nomi, which teach that a digit number/size of the second reading format defines the maximum number of characters in the matching portion; the examiner interprets the digit number of the second reading format as the claimed notification threshold number).
Additional Citations
The following table lists several references that are relevant to the subject matter claimed and disclosed in this Application. The references are not relied on by the Examiner, but are provided to assist the Applicant in responding to this Office action.
Citation
Relevance
Chae et al. (us pat. pub. 2025/0140010)
Describes an image processing system, an image processing method, and a program. In one embodiment, an image processing system, comprising at least one processor configured to: detect a character string region including any character string from a target object image relating to a target object including a standard character string; apply character recognition to the character string region to calculate a score relating to a result of the character recognition for each character included in the character string region; and determine whether the character string region is a standard region including the standard character string based on the score calculated for the each character.
Kazami et al. (us pat. pub. 2025/0046103)
Describes a character recognition device, a character recognition method, and a character recognition system. For example, a character recognition device includes a recognizer that recognizes at least one character string from a plurality of character strings in an image including a trailer captured by an imaging device, and a selector. The selectors selects one of the at least one character string as the trailer ID/container ID based on the at least one character string having a similarity to a master data of a previously held trailer ID/container ID equal to or larger than a predetermined threshold value.
Tatsumi et al. (us pat. pub. 2022/0180091)
Describes an information processing apparatus and a non-transitory computer readable medium. In one embodiment, an information processing apparatus includes a processor configured to: acquire an image corresponding to a key character string from a target image in response to the key character string that serves as a character string specified beforehand as a key and is acquired from results of character recognition performed on the target image including character strings; extract, by using results of acquiring the image corresponding to the key character string, from the results of the character recognition a value character string that serves as a character string indicating a value corresponding to the key character string; and output the key character string and the value character string corresponding to the key character string.
Table 1
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See table 1 and form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WOO RHIM whose telephone number is (571)272-6560. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 am - 6:00 pm et.
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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at 571-272-4637. 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.
/WOO C RHIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2676