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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Objections
Previous claim objection(s) have been withdrawn in view of amendments made by the applicant.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments filed 06/16/2026 have been entered, however, applicant’s arguments as field have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Fukui does not disclose the claimed architecture and information flow such as a device recognition system and having the connection request, and then receives from that device recognition system connection instructions selected using a trained MFD connection algorithm as claimed in claim 1.
Applicant’s main argument it that Fukui doesn’t have a separate device recognition system with memory and processor and have machine-learning selection of connection instructions by a device recognition system and Fukui’s packets used for UWB ranging are not connection instructions selected by a trained MFD connection algorithm in response to connection request.
In reply, examiner disagrees and asserts that much of the assertions made by the applicant’s in arguments above are not positively recited in claim 1. There is no requirement for a recognition system to be separate including memory/processor in the claim. Moreover, claim is very broad as to what a trained connection algorithm is? CPU programmed to do execute pre-programmed code to select/perform connection processing reads on the trained/programmed procedure. And lastly, there is no machine learning recited in claims as seemed to be argued by the applicant.
For instance, Fukui successfully teaches all the features as positively recited in claim 1, for example, mobile terminal 101 transmits connection request to the image forming apparatus, wherein in the interface as shown in fig. 8E, where search frequency button can be toggled to auto, in that case, CPU is programmed (i.e., trained MFD connection algorithm) to automatically perform/selection/make the instructions such as buttons 810a and 810b to be displayed in a state selectable (i.e., for selecting the instructions for connecting) by the user on the device list-displaying screen appearing in FIG. 8D, and mobile terminal is connected with one of the image forming apparatus according to the search results and display-list shown within vicinity (appropriate distance as shown in meters from the mobile terminal) as desired by the user of the mobile terminal.
Furthermore, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “device recognition system 400 as a distinct system having its own processor, memory, communication interface, and storage, in communication with one or more MFDs”... “The mobile device communicates a connection request to that device recognition system, and the connection instructions are "determined, created, selected, identified, or otherwise generated by a trained MFD connection algorithm or model" of the device recognition system”…”training data, historical connection data, and storage of the trained MFD connection algorithm for future use”…”machine-learning selection of connection instructions by a device recognition system”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant further argues that Thielen is non analogous art and cannot be combined with Fukui because it doesn’t relate to or perform the claimed trained connection algorithm process.
In reply, examiner disagrees and asserts in response to applicant's argument that Thielen is non-analogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Fukui and Thielen are combinable because they both are in the same field of endeavor dealing with printing apparatuses utilizing programmed procedures in implementing and executing printing connection processes. Again, claim is very broad as to what a trained connection algorithm is? CPU programmed to do execute pre-programmed code to select/perform connection processing reads on the trained/programmed procedure. And, Thielen teaches such programmed code execution by CPU as a trained model algorithm, wherein, remote system processor analyzes the database to produce a multidimensional analytical framework for determining an estimated implementing print connection/execution success probability for a particular 3D model, even when the particular 3D model is unique or otherwise unknown and previously unprinted. The processor 104 may continuously or periodically update the multidimensional analytical framework as new data points are received, paragraph 22.
Furthermore, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “instead of relying on static if/then connection or troubleshooting methods, the system connects to an AI-supported system that learns from requests and datasets to determine the "simplest and most likely to succeed" methods for making a connection...learning system receives success/failure information from connection and troubleshooting processes and dynamically revises or updates the information provided to the end user…selecting and improving mobile-device-to-MFD connection instructions based on connection-related inputs and connection outcomes”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant further argues that there is not articulated reasoning provided for combining Thielen with Fukui, there is no motivation for the proposed combination and Fukui and Thielen cannot be combined since Thielen doesn’t relate to the claimed trained connection algorithm process.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Fukui and Thielen are combinable because they both are in the same field of endeavor dealing with printing apparatuses utilizing programmed procedures in implementing and executing printing connection processes and motivation for combining them would be knowing if an apparatus or connection existed that is suitable for estimating in advance the probability of a success (emphasis added on success probability). One with ordinary skill will take the teachings of Thielen which proposes estimating likelihood of success concerning a connection to a particular apparatus and apply same teachings to system of Fukui to make connections which will provide success. And, Thielen teaches remote system processor analyzes the database to produce a multidimensional analytical framework for determining print connection/execution success probability for a particular 3D model, even when the particular 3D model is unique or otherwise unknown and previously unprinted. The processor 104 may continuously or periodically update the multidimensional analytical framework as new data points are received, paragraph 22.
Furthermore, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “connection-instruction selection to a trained model that learns from historical mobile-device-to-MFD connection outcomes” and “training a connection-instruction selector using mobile-device-to-MFD connection outcomes, nor using post-connection status feedback to improve future connection-instruction selection” and “improving mobile-device-to-MFD connection by selecting and updating connection instructions using a trained MFD connection algorithm”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Finally and lastly, in response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukui, US 2024/0303006.
Regarding claim 1, Fukui discloses a method (control method, paragraph 44) for wirelessly connecting a mobile device to a multi-function device (MFD) (mobile terminal 101 can wirelessly connect with image forming apparatus 104 [104 is multi-functional apparatus], paragraphs 47-48, for further details paragraphs 49-52), comprising:
scanning for one or more MFDs (in the mobile terminal 101, when the user presses the button 801 on the top menu screen (see FIG. 8A), the CPU 202 starts to search for an image forming apparatus serving as a candidate of the print instruction target (data transmission destination) (step S702), paragraph 152) within a vicinity of the mobile device (mobile terminal 101 is capable of performing ranging communication for measuring a distance from each of the image forming apparatuses 104, 105, and 107 via the UWB communication section 218, paragraph 70, for example, printer search screen (see fig. 8D), for sequentially displaying image forming apparatuses found by the search and the calculated distance information in meters of each of the image forming apparatuses from the mobile terminal, paragraphs, 152, 179, 192),
wherein scanning for an MFD comprises searching for a signal transmitted by one or more MFDs within a vicinity of the mobile device (Two Way Ranging (TWR) shown in FIG. 6 as a method of ranging communication, wherein, mobile terminal 101 transmits ranging request data and receives corresponding ranging response data from each of the image forming apparatuses, paragraph 70 such as device information displayed in this step also includes the distance information calculated based on the ranging response packet received from each of the image forming apparatuses found by the search, paragraph 190, for further details see paragraphs 162, where a beacon signal is transmitted by each of image forming apparatuses, paragraph 162 and paragraphs 216-217);
communicating, by the mobile device, a connection request to a device recognition system (mobile terminal 101 transmits connection request (i.e., ranging request packet along with communication capability message 910 and UWB tag information) to the image forming apparatus, paragraphs 178, 208 to the network controller 105 with network controller 205 controls communication performed by the wireless LAN communication section 211, the mobile phone data communication section 212, the BLE communication section 213, and the UWB communication section 218. Here, the wireless LAN communication section 211 is a communication section that participates in the network of the LAN 103 via the wireless LAN terminal 102, paragraph 61), the connection request comprising at least:
(1) information about an MFD connection application utilized by the mobile device to connect to one or more MFDs (transmission of the ranging request packet is performed based on the UWB communication settings determined after exchanging the communication capability message 910, wherein the communication setting information is information for identifying a UWB tag based on the IEEE 802.15.4z standard and at least includes information of a role of the UWB, ranging request identification information, requesting source address information, request destination address information, and an IEEE 802-conformant address, paragraph 178, claim 4);
(2) one or more MFD connection protocols available to the mobile device (UWB communication settings determined after exchanging the communication capability message 910 and the communication configuration message 915 by using BLE communication such that to search for an image forming apparatus to which the mobile terminal 101 can provide a print instruction in the WPAN in which BLE transmission/reception can be performed by the BLE communication, paragraphs 178, 101); (3) a user identifier (UWB tag information includes user name indicating a user who has issued a job, paragraphs 123, 204);
receiving, by the mobile device from the device recognition system, connection instructions comprising instructions for connecting to one or more MFDs in the vicinity of the mobile device (image forming apparatus 104 having received this ranging request packet along with other messages transmits a ranging response packet to the network controller with communication interfaces, which then transmit the response to the mobile terminal 101. The mobile terminal 101 having received the ranging response packet calculates a distance based on the TWR ranging method shown in fig. 6, paragraph 179 and based on that user of mobile terminal can select the image forming apparatus 104 from the image forming apparatuses displayed on the printer search screen including the distance information calculated based on the ranging response packet received from each of the image forming apparatuses found by the search (fig. 8D), paragraphs 138 190),
the connection instructions selected by the device recognition system based at least in part on the connection request communicated by the mobile device (user of mobile terminal can select the image forming apparatus 104 from the image forming apparatuses displayed on the printer search screen (fig. 8D), paragraph 138, furthermore, CPU can be trained (using button 831, fig. 8E) to select instructions to display apparatuses for selection by wireless communication standard supported by an apparatus to be searched for as a condition of displaying a narrow search result on the device list-displaying screen, additionally, in the interface as shown in fig. 8E, where search frequency button can be toggled to auto, in that case, CPU is programmed to provide instructions to automatically make the buttons 810a and 810b to be displayed in a state selectable (i.e., for selecting the instructions for connecting) by the user on the device list-displaying screen appearing in FIG. 8D, paragraphs 195-197),
wherein the instructions for connecting to the one or more MFDs are selected by the device recognition system using a trained MFD connection algorithm (in the interface as shown in fig. 8E, where search frequency button can be toggled to auto, in that case, CPU is programmed (i.e., trained MFD connection algorithm) to automatically make the instructions such as buttons 810a and 810b to be displayed in a state selectable (i.e., for selecting the instructions for connecting) by the user on the device list-displaying screen appearing in FIG. 8D, paragraph 197); and connecting, by the mobile device utilizing the connection instructions, to one of the one or more MFDs in the vicinity of the mobile device (see figs. 8D-8E, mobile terminal is connected with one of the image forming apparatus according to the search results and display-list shown within vicinity (appropriate distance as shown in meters from the mobile terminal) as desired by the user of the mobile terminal, paragraphs 138, 152, 190-192).
Regarding claim 2, Fukui further discloses wherein scanning for one or more MFDs comprises obtaining, by the mobile device, an MFD code of the one or more MFDs (Fukui, UWB tag information unique to each of the image forming apparatus and is transmitted from the image forming apparatus 104 to the mobile terminal, paragraphs 155, 174, 178).
Regarding claim 3, Fukui further discloses wherein the signal transmitted by one or more MFDs comprises one or more of a Bluetooth signal (Fukui, signals 108 to 112 are radio signals using Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) (first wireless communication) transmitted and received by the mobile terminal 101 and the image forming apparatuses 104 to 107, paragraph 51), an NFC signal, a Wi-Fi signal (Fukui, signals 121 to 124 are radio signals using UWB (second wireless communication) transmitted and received by the mobile terminal 101 and the image forming apparatuses 104, 105, and 107, paragraph 52), a cellular signal, and an RFID signal.
Regarding claim 4, Fukui further discloses steps of identifying, based on said scanning, one or more MFDs within the vicinity of the mobile device (Fukui, as clearly shown in fig. 8D, image forming apparatuses with distances in meters is shown based on printer search, paragraph 192).
Regarding claim 5, Fukui further discloses step of receiving, from a user of the mobile device, a selection of one of the one or more identified MFDs (Fukui, user of mobile terminal can select the image forming apparatus 104 from the image forming apparatuses displayed on the printer search screen (fig. 8D), paragraph 138), wherein the connection request further comprises: (4) an identification of the selected one of the one or more identified MFDs (Fukui, ranging request packet includes at least ranging request identification information, requesting source address information, request destination address information, and an IEEE 802-conformant address, paragraph 178, for example, selected apparatus shows “C iR-3300-01” as the model name, “192.168.0.25” as the IP address, fig, 8D).
Regarding claim 6, Fukui further discloses wherein scanning comprises GPS coordinates or visual object recognition to identify the one or more MFDs within the vicinity of the mobile device (Fukui, wherein the mobile communication device includes a sensor for detecting a specific motion of the user, and wherein the type of data to which the information of the ranging target is added is data including a notification indicating that the sensor has detected the specific motion of the user, wherein the sensor is at least one of a GPS sensor and a touch sensor, claims 9-10).
Regarding claim 7, Fukui further discloses wherein the connection instructions comprise user interface instructions to adapt a user interface of the MFD connection application utilized by the mobile device, wherein the instructions to adapt the user interface are selected to simplify connection of the mobile device to the one of the one or more MFDs (Fukui, as clearly shown in fig. 8E, it shows a user interface on screen of mobile terminal for connection application and toggling various buttons 831 and 832 for customizing the selection and connection of the mobile device to the one of the image forming apparatuses, paragraphs 193-198).
Regarding claim 9, Fukui further discloses step of communicating, after the mobile device connects to the one of the one or more MFDs, connection status information to the device recognition system, wherein the connection status information is utilized to further train the device recognition system (Fukui, the printer search screen has an update button 812 as shown in FIG. 8D, and in a case where the update button 812 is pressed, the CPU 202 executes the steps S703 to S707 again. With this, the user can confirm a change in the status of the image forming apparatuses found by the search. Further, the mobile terminal 101 has buttons 810a and 810b as a user interface for setting the search frequency for periodically performing the update, and a device list-displaying screen on which the device list 811 is displayed can also be automatically updated. Specifically, the user can increase the search frequency by pressing the button 810a formed as a triangular mark and reduce the search frequency by pressing the button 810b formed as an inverted triangular mark, paragraph 190).
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 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.
Claims 11-13, 15-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui, US 2024/0303006 in view of Thielen, US 2017/0220946.
Regarding claim 11, Fukui discloses a device recognition system (network controller 105 with network controller 205 controls communication performed by the wireless LAN communication section 211, the mobile phone data communication section 212, the BLE communication section 213, and the UWB communication section 218. Here, the wireless LAN communication section 211 is a communication section that participates in the network of the LAN 103 via the wireless LAN terminal 102, paragraph 61) configured to facilitate a wireless connection between a mobile device and a multi-function device (MFD) (mobile terminal 101 can wirelessly connect with image forming apparatus 104 [104 is multi-functional apparatus], paragraphs 47-48, for further details paragraphs 49-52),
wherein the mobile device is scanning for one or more MFDs (in the mobile terminal 101, when the user presses the button 801 on the top menu screen (see FIG. 8A), the CPU 202 starts to search for an image forming apparatus serving as a candidate of the print instruction target (data transmission destination) (step S702), paragraph 152) within a vicinity of the mobile device (mobile terminal 101 is capable of performing ranging communication for measuring a distance from each of the image forming apparatuses 104, 105, and 107 via the UWB communication section 218, paragraph 70, for example, printer search screen (see fig. 8D), for sequentially displaying image forming apparatuses found by the search and the calculated distance information in meters of each of the image forming apparatuses from the mobile terminal, paragraphs, 152, 179, 192),
wherein scanning for an MFD comprises searching for a signal transmitted by one or more MFDs within a vicinity of the mobile device (Two Way Ranging (TWR) shown in FIG. 6 as a method of ranging communication, wherein, mobile terminal 101 transmits ranging request data and receives corresponding ranging response data from each of the image forming apparatuses, paragraph 70 such as device information displayed in this step also includes the distance information calculated based on the ranging response packet received from each of the image forming apparatuses found by the search, paragraph 190, for further details see paragraphs 162, where a beacon signal is transmitted by each of image forming apparatuses, paragraph 162 and paragraphs 216-217),
a trained MFD connection algorithm (CPU is programmed (i.e., trained MFD connection algorithm) configured to select, for a mobile device, instructions for connecting to one or more MFDs, wherein the instructions for connecting are selected by the trained MFD connection algorithm (user of mobile terminal can select the image forming apparatus 104 from the image forming apparatuses displayed on the printer search screen (fig. 8D), paragraph 138, furthermore, CPU can be trained (using button 831, fig. 8E) to select instructions to display apparatuses for selection by wireless communication standard supported by an apparatus to be searched for as a condition of displaying a narrow search result on the device list-displaying screen, additionally, in the interface as shown in fig. 8E, where search frequency button can be toggled to auto, in that case, CPU is programmed (i.e., trained MFD connection algorithm) to provide instructions to automatically make the buttons 810a and 810b to be displayed in a state selectable (i.e., for selecting the instructions for connecting) by the user on the device list-displaying screen appearing in FIG. 8D, paragraphs 195-197);
wherein the device recognition system comprises: a communication interface (communication performed by the wireless communication interfaces 211, 212, 213, and 218) configured to:
receive a connection request from the mobile device (mobile terminal 101 transmits connection request (i.e., ranging request packet along with communication capability message 910 and UWB tag information) to the image forming apparatus, paragraphs 178, 208),
the connection request comprising at least: (1) information about an MFD connection application utilized by the mobile device to connect to one or more MFDs (transmission of the ranging request packet is performed based on the UWB communication settings determined after exchanging the communication capability message 910, wherein the communication setting information is information for identifying a UWB tag based on the IEEE 802.15.4z standard and at least includes information of a role of the UWB, ranging request identification information, requesting source address information, request destination address information, and an IEEE 802-conformant address, paragraph 178, claim 4); (2) one or more MFD connection protocols available to the mobile device (UWB communication settings determined after exchanging the communication capability message 910 and the communication configuration message 915 by using BLE communication such that to search for an image forming apparatus to which the mobile terminal 101 can provide a print instruction in the WPAN in which BLE transmission/reception can be performed by the BLE communication, paragraphs 178, 101); (3) a user identifier (UWB tag information includes user name indicating a user who has issued a job, paragraphs 123, 204),
and transmit, to the mobile device, connection instructions comprising instructions for connecting to one or more MFDs in the vicinity of the mobile device (image forming apparatus 104 having received this ranging request packet along with other messages transmits a ranging response packet to the network controller with communication interfaces, which then transmit the response to the mobile terminal 101. The mobile terminal 101 having received the ranging response packet calculates a distance based on the TWR ranging method shown in fig. 6, paragraph 179 and based on that user of mobile terminal can select the image forming apparatus 104 from the image forming apparatuses displayed on the printer search screen including the distance information calculated based on the ranging response packet received from each of the image forming apparatuses found by the search (fig. 8D), paragraphs 138 190), the connection instructions selected by the trained MFD connection algorithm (in the interface as shown in fig. 8E, where search frequency button can be toggled to auto, in that case, CPU is programmed (i.e., trained MFD connection algorithm) to automatically make the instructions such as buttons 810a and 810b to be displayed in a state selectable (i.e., for selecting the instructions for connecting) by the user on the device list-displaying screen appearing in FIG. 8D, paragraph 197).
Fukui fails to explicitly teach wherein device recognition system comprises: a trained model algorithm configured to select, instructions for implementing/connecting to one or more models, wherein the instructions for connecting are selected by the trained model algorithm to have a highest likelihood of successfully implementing/connecting mobile device to the one or more models.
However, Thielen teaches wherein device recognition system (remote computer system 100) comprises: a trained model algorithm (processor executable code) configured to select, instructions for implementing/connecting to one or more models, wherein the instructions for connecting are selected by the trained model algorithm to have a highest likelihood of successfully implementing/connecting mobile device to the one or more models (3D models including features of various print media, properties of a 3D printer, and properties of a connecting to particular printer and executing particular printing process. The remote system processor 104 analyzes the database to produce a multidimensional analytical framework for determining an estimated implementing print connection/execution success probability for a particular 3D model, even when the particular 3D model is unique or otherwise unknown and previously unprinted. The processor 104 may continuously or periodically update the multidimensional analytical framework as new data points are received, paragraph 22).
Fukui and Thielen are combinable because they both are in the same field of endeavor dealing with printing apparatuses utilizing programmed procedures in implementing and executing printing connection processes.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukui to incorporate the teachings of Thielen for the benefit of knowing if an apparatus existed that is suitable for estimating the probability of a print success in advance of actual printing as taught by Thielen at paragraph 3.
Regarding claim 12, Combination of Fukui with Thielen further teaches wherein the connection request further comprises: (4) a selection, by a user of the mobile device, of one of the one or more identified MFDs identified by the mobile device via said scanning (Fukui, user of mobile terminal can select the image forming apparatus 104 from the image forming apparatuses displayed on the printer search screen (fig. 8D), paragraph 138, wherein, ranging request packet includes at least ranging request identification information, requesting source address information, request destination address information, and an IEEE 802-conformant address, paragraph 178, for example, selected apparatus shows “C iR-3300-01” as the model name, “192.168.0.25” as the IP address, fig, 8D).
Fukui and Thielen are combinable because they both are in the same field of endeavor dealing with printing apparatuses utilizing programmed procedures in implementing and executing printing connection processes.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukui to incorporate the teachings of Thielen for the benefit of knowing if an apparatus existed that is suitable for estimating the probability of a print success in advance of actual printing as taught by Thielen at paragraph 3.
Regarding claim 13, Combination of Fukui with Thielen further teaches wherein the communication interface is further configured to receive, after the mobile device connects to the one of the one or more MFDs, connection status information, wherein the connection status information is utilized to further train the MFD connection algorithm (Fukui, the printer search screen has an update button 812 as shown in FIG. 8D, and in a case where the update button 812 is pressed, the CPU 202 executes the steps S703 to S707 again. With this, the user can confirm a change in the status of the image forming apparatuses found by the search. Further, the mobile terminal 101 has buttons 810a and 810b as a user interface for setting the search frequency for periodically performing the update, and a device list-displaying screen on which the device list 811 is displayed can also be automatically updated. Specifically, the user can increase the search frequency by pressing the button 810a formed as a triangular mark and reduce the search frequency by pressing the button 810b formed as an inverted triangular mark, paragraph 190).
Fukui and Thielen are combinable because they both are in the same field of endeavor dealing with printing apparatuses utilizing programmed procedures in implementing and executing printing connection processes.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukui to incorporate the teachings of Thielen for the benefit of knowing if an apparatus existed that is suitable for estimating the probability of a print success in advance of actual printing as taught by Thielen at paragraph 3.
Regarding claim 15, Combination of Fukui with Thielen further teaches wherein the device recognition system is a cloud-hosted implementation (Thielen, remote computer system 100 is external over the network implementation (i.e., cloud) and not local, paragraph 21).
Fukui and Thielen are combinable because they both are in the same field of endeavor dealing with printing apparatuses utilizing programmed procedures in implementing and executing printing connection processes.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukui to incorporate the teachings of Thielen for the benefit of knowing if an apparatus existed that is suitable for estimating the probability of a print success in advance of actual printing as taught by Thielen at paragraph 3.
Regarding claim 16, Fukui further discloses multi-function device (MFD) system (fig, 1) configured to wirelessly connect to a mobile device (mobile terminal 101 can wirelessly connect with image forming apparatus 104 [104 is multi-functional apparatus], paragraphs 47-48, for further details paragraphs 49-52), comprising: one or more MFDs (MFP 104-107, fig. 1) and a device recognition system remote from the one or more MFDs (network controller 105 with network controller 205 controls communication performed by the wireless LAN communication section 211, the mobile phone data communication section 212, the BLE communication section 213, and the UWB communication section 218. Here, the wireless LAN communication section 211 is a communication section that participates in the network of the LAN 103 via the wireless LAN terminal 102, which is remote from MFP’s, paragraph 61). Rest of the claim recites similar features as claim 11 and thus is rejected on the same rationale.
Regarding claim 17, it recites similar features as claim 12 and thus is rejected on the same rationale.
Regarding claim 18, it recites similar features as claim 13 and thus is rejected on the same rationale.
Regarding claim 20, it recites similar features as claim 15 and thus is rejected on the same rationale.
Claims 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui, US 2024/0303006 in view of Urakawa et al., US 2014/0240763.
Regarding claim 8, Fukui further teaches wherein scanning for one or more MFDs within a vicinity of the mobile device (Fukui, filter settings to find nearby printers as shown in fig. 8E) but fails to explicitly teach a failure to identify an MFD (although it is highly implied that if none of the filter conditions are met than search will result in no printer found in Fukui).
Urakawa teaches fails to identify an MFD within a vicinity of mobile device (when the CPU 11 determines that the mobile terminal 100 is no longer detected in a situation where a distance between the mobile terminal 100 and the MFP 10 exceeds the effective range of Wi-Fi. communication, data transfer via Wi-Fi. communication may fail and the print function of the MFP 10 might not completely finish, the second operation guide screen 52 comprising the message 52 ("Please bring the mobile terminal close to the MFP again and touch the screen of the mobile terminal") may be displayed, so that the necessity of bringing the mobile terminal 100 into close proximity to the MFP 10 again may be notified, paragraphs 36, 39, 71).
Fukui is combinable with Urakawa because they both are in the same field of endeavor dealing with making connection between printing apparatuses and remote apparatuses.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukui to incorporate the teachings of Urakawa for the benefit of efficiently performing execution in which its functions may be executed readily using a short-range wireless communication protocol as taught by Urakawa at paragraph 5.
Regarding claim 10, Combination of Fukui and Urakawa further teaches wherein the mobile device is unable to connect to the one of the one or more MFDs in the vicinity of the mobile device utilizing the received connection instructions (Urakawa, when the CPU 11 determines that the mobile terminal 100 is no longer detected in a situation where a distance between the mobile terminal 100 and the MFP 10 exceeds the effective range of Wi-Fi. communication, data transfer via Wi-Fi. communication may fail and the print function of the MFP 10 might not completely finish, paragraph 39), and further comprising the steps of: communicating, by the mobile device to the device recognition system, connection failure information indicating a failure of the mobile device to connect to the one of the one or more MFDs in the vicinity of the mobile device (Urakawa, when the CPU 11 determines that the mobile terminal 100 is no longer detected in a situation where a distance between the mobile terminal 100 and the MFP 10 exceeds the effective range of Wi-Fi. communication, data transfer via Wi-Fi. communication may fail and the print function of the MFP 10 might not completely finish, the second operation guide screen 52 comprising the message 52 ("Please bring the mobile terminal close to the MFP again and touch the screen of the mobile terminal") may be displayed, paragraphs 36, 39, 71); and receiving, by the mobile device from the device recognition system, connection troubleshooting instructions, wherein the connection troubleshooting instructions are selected by the device recognition system using the trained MFD connection algorithm (Urakawa, the message 52 ("Please bring the mobile terminal close to the MFP again and touch the screen of the mobile terminal") may be displayed, so that the necessity of bringing the mobile terminal 100 into close proximity to the MFP 10 again may be notified, paragraphs 36, 39, 71).
Fukui is combinable with Urakawa because they both are in the same field of endeavor dealing with making connection between printing apparatuses and remote apparatuses.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukui to incorporate the teachings of Urakawa for the benefit of efficiently performing execution in which its functions may be executed readily using a short-range wireless communication protocol as taught by Urakawa at paragraph 5.
Claims 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui, US 2024/0303006 in view of Thielen, US 2017/0220946 as applied in claim 11 above and further in view of Urakawa et al., US 2014/02407
Regarding claim 14, it recites similar features as claim 10 and thus is rejected on the same rationale.
Regarding claim 19, it recites similar features as claim 14 and thus is rejected on the same rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Okuno, US 11,729,338 – Cloud implementation
Tachiwa, US 2019/0306337
Hasegawa, US 2019/0246257
Utsumi, US 2018/0213114
Mihira, US 2018/0035480
Cho et al., US 2017/0048416
Rhodus et al., US 2015/0193180
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAWANDEEP DHINGRA whose telephone number is (571) 270-1231. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abderrahim Merouan can be reached at (571) 270-5254. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAWAN DHINGRA/Examiner, Art Unit 2683
/ABDERRAHIM MEROUAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2683
Prosecution Insights