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 .
Response to filed Amendments
Applicant’s Amendments/Remarks filed on 01/28/2026 have been received and made of record.
Claims 1, 8, and 14 have been amended.
Claims 1-15 remained pending.
Please refer to the action below.
Examiner Notes
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. However, the claimed subject matter, not the specification, is the measure of the invention.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicants’ arguments of 01/28/2026 regarding the prior arts of record of Ishibashi in view of Bednarczyk, corresponding to pages 6-9 of the remarks, have been considered, however, they are moot in light of the new ground of rejection.
Claim Interpretations - 35 USC § 112(f)
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.
Claims limitations of “a scan unit”, “a storage unit”, and a communication unit” of (claims 1, and 8) have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “to” coupled with functional language “output”, “store”, or “transmit” (claims 1, and 8) without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitations invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claims 1-13 have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification, referenced by the PGPUB, for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
• “a control unit” – Specification [48]-[49]– It appears that the corresponding structure is processor 10a.
• “image processing units” – Specification [49]– It appears that the corresponding structures are processors 20a1-20a3.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 8, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding independent claims 1 and 14 (claim 1 being the representative claim):
Independent claims 1 and 14 requires “to display a menu after receiving the input of the first destination and the second destination, the menu to receive a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size; ….and a communication unit to transmit the first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on the selection received via the menu”.
In relying on the claim’s languages of claims 1 and 14, and that of the disclosure, the limitations of transmitting the first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination are unclear and further found ambiguous since the claim previously alleges, claimed and require a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size that, it further leaves the reader and/or one skill in the art in doubt as to the full scope of the invention and the meaning of the technical feature to which it refers, since it now seems that both the first destination and the second destination would receive the first and the second file. Thereby the claim languages are unclear and indefinite. For purpose of examination, the Examiner interprets the file transmission to be transmitted respectively to the first and the second destination according to the selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive the file, versus the implied transmission of both files collectively to each of the destination.
Regarding independent claim 8:
Independent claim 8 requires “to display a menu after receiving the input including the plurality of destinations, the menu to receive a selection of which of the plurality of destinations is to receive a file having a smaller size; ….and a communication unit to transmit the first file and the second file to the plurality of destinations based on the selection received via the menu”.
In relying on the claim’s languages of claim 8 and that of the disclosure, the limitations of selection of which of the plurality of destinations is to receive a file having a smaller size and then to transmit the first file and the second file to the plurality of destinations are unclear and further found ambiguous since the claim previously alleges, claimed and require a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size that, it further leaves the reader and/or one skill in the art in doubt as to the full scope of the invention and the meaning of the technical feature to which it refers. Secondly it is further unclear which set of destination or plurality would get the first file or the second file, or if the plurality are to obtain both first and second file collectively or respectively.
Thereby the claim languages are unclear and indefinite. For purpose of examination, the Examiner interprets the file transmission to be transmitted respectively to the first and the second destination according to the selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive the file, versus the implied transmission of both files collectively to each of the destination.
The inconsistency between the claims and the description leads to doubt concerning the matter for which protection is sought, thereby rendering the claims further unclear and indefinite. The inconsistency should be removed, either by amending the claims, or by deleting this subject-matter from the description by indicating in the description that the embodiments concerned do not form part of the invention but represent background art that is useful for understanding the invention. The claims as currently understood are rejected as being indefinite and unclear for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Applicant needs to positively recite the necessary elements, and novel subject matter to more effectively claim the subject matter which applicant regards as his invention.
Examiner respectfully advises applicant to review all pending claims and to positively and particularly point out the claimed subject matter which the applicant regards as the invention, in order to expedite the precaution of the application and shorten the time of examining process.
Accordingly, the claimed subject matter of this application as currently claimed is unpatentable under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Therefore, the above claim is rejected under USC 112 second, as best understood by examiner as indicated in this office action above.
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 1, 8, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Tonegawa et al. (US 2019/0141201, A1), in view of Fry et al. (US 7120593, A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tonegawa teaches an image forming apparatus (the apparatus 100 of Figs. 1-2) comprising:
a scan unit to output digital image data of a scanned document (the scanner of at least para. 0026);
a user interface unit to receive an input of a first destination and a second destination (operation unit 133 of further Fig. 2 further configured with at least one or more user interface unit 202 to receive an input of a first destination and a second destination); and
to display a menu after receiving the input of the first destination and the second destination, the menu to receive a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file (Figs. 3-4 and para. 0034-0036 further teaches a case of designating file divide function where one first group of file may have one size and a second group of file may have a different size, the system is further configured to transmit the divided files to obviously in a case a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive the said files),
a processor (para. 0010) to:
generate a first file having a first size based on the digital image data (the printer of further Figs. 3-4 further configured based on a selection button 204 to cause the apparatus to generate a first file having a first size based on the digital image data); and
generate a second file having a second size based on the digital image data, the second size being smaller than the first size (the printer of further Figs. 3-4 further configured to generate based on a selection button 206 to cause the apparatus to generate a second file having a second size based on the digital image data, the second size being smaller than the first size);
a storage unit to store the first file and the second file (generated files including first file and the second file may be stored further in para. 0036 in a folder prior to transmittal); and
a communication unit to transmit the first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on the selection received via the menu (Figs. 3-4 and para. 0034-0036 further discloses the send function configured in the art to transmit in a case a divided first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on a selection received via the menu).
However, Tonegawa is silent regarding the above lined-out items such as citing said menu to receive said selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file specifically having a smaller size, and the said communication unit to transmit said first file and the second file to said first destination and second destination based specifically on the selection received via the menu.
Fry teaches in at least Figs. 1-2 an image processing apparatus configured to generate scan image data files and further in at least Fig. 2 comprising a file transmitting means configured to transmit substantially concurrently different file data sizes based on an implied destination selection of Fig. 2 such as to send one or more second smaller file destination, S34, to a server recipient, and further in Fig. 2, S42, sending one or more first higher size/resolution file for a second provider destination, where the second file addressed to the server is smaller than the file transmitted to the provider, and a communication means is shown at least in Fig. 2 to transmit the smaller file size to the first destination, S34 and transmit the other file to the second destination, S42 based specifically on an understood selection received via a menu or the like. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Tonegawa in view of Fry to include wherein said menu to receive said selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file specifically having a smaller size, and the said communication unit to transmit said first file and the second file to said first destination and second destination based specifically on the selection received via the menu, as discussed above, as Tonegawa in view of Fry are in the same field of generating and transmitting digitized scanned data files to selected destinations, Fry’s files selecting means of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, and the communication means to transmit a first file and the second file to said a first destination and second destination based on the selection received via an inputting means further complements the scanned files transmitting schemes of Tonegawa in the sense that the transmitting files architecture of Tonegawa when combined with the combination of files selecting means and the communication means architecture of Fry further causes the system of seamlessly provide scanned files transmittal to substantially simultaneous destinations according to a destination selection information targeted to receive the first smaller files in contrast to a second destination targeted to receive a second file different that the first file which may in a case correspond to the destination supported formats and protocols thereby promote seamless scanned files transmission which ultimately speed up processing and increased throughput according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 8, Tonegawa teaches an image forming apparatus (the apparatus 100 of Figs. 1-2) comprising:
a scan unit to output digital image data of a scanned document (the scanner of at least para. 0026);
a user interface unit to receive an input including a plurality of destinations for the scanned document (operation unit 133 of further Fig. 2 further configured with at least one or more user interface unit 202 to receive an input of a first destination and a second destination for the scanned document); and to display a menu after receiving the input including the plurality of destinations, the menu to receive a selection of which of the plurality of destinations is to receive a file (Figs. 3-4 and para. 0034-0036 further teaches a case of designating file divide function where one first group of file may have one size and a second group of file may have a different size, the system is further configured to transmit the divided files to obviously in a case a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive the said files),
a processor (para. 0010) to generate a first file and a second file based on the scanned document, the second file having at least one parameter setting different from the first file (the printer of further Figs. 3-4 further configured to a first file having a first size based on the digital image data based on a selection button 204; and likewise generate a second file based on the scanned document, and based on a selection button 206 where the second file having at least one parameter setting different from the first file);
a storage unit to store title first file and the second file (generated files including first file and the second file may be stored further in para. 0036 in a folder prior to transmittal); and
a communication unit to transmit the first file and the second file to a plurality of destinations based on the selection received via the menu (Figs. 3-4 and para. 0034-0036 further discloses the send function configured in the art to transmit in a case a divided first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on a selection received via the menu).
However, Tonegawa is silent regarding the above lined-out items such as citing display a menu after receiving the input including the plurality of destinations, the menu to receive a selection of which of the plurality of destinations is to receive a file having a smaller size; and said communication unit to transmit the first file and the second file to a plurality of destinations based specifically on the selection received via the menu.
Fry teaches in at least Figs. 1-2 an image processing apparatus configured to generate scan image data files and further in at least Fig. 2 comprising a file transmitting means configured to transmit substantially concurrently different file data sizes based on an implied destination selection of Fig. 2 such as to send one or more second smaller file destination, S34, to a server recipient, and further in Fig. 2, S42, sending one or more first higher size/resolution file for a second provider destination, where the second file addressed to the server is smaller than the file transmitted to the provider, and a communication means is shown at least in Fig. 2 to transmit the smaller file size to the first destination, S34 and transmit the other file to the second destination, S42 based specifically on an understood selection received via a menu or the like. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Tonegawa in view of Fry to include wherein display said menu after receiving the input including the plurality of destinations, the menu to receive a selection of which of the plurality of destinations is to receive a file having a smaller size; and said communication unit to transmit the first file and the second file to a plurality of destinations based specifically on the selection received via the menu, as discussed above, as Tonegawa in view of Fry are in the same field of generating and transmitting digitized scanned data files to selected destinations, Fry’s files selecting means of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, and the communication means to transmit a first file and the second file to said a first destination and second destination based on the selection received via an inputting means further complements the scanned files transmitting schemes of Tonegawa in the sense that the transmitting files architecture of Tonegawa when combined with the combination of files selecting means and the communication means architecture of Fry further causes the system of seamlessly provide scanned files transmittal to substantially simultaneous destinations according to a destination selection information targeted to receive the first smaller files in contrast to a second destination targeted to receive a second file different that the first file which may in a case correspond to the destination supported formats and protocols thereby promote seamless scanned files transmission which ultimately speed up processing and increased throughput according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 14, Tonegawa teaches in para. 0074 a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium encoded with instructions executable by a processor, the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium comprising:
instructions to output digital image data of a scanned document (processor of further para. 0074 comprises said instructions to cause the scanner of at least para. 0026 to output digital image data of a scanned document);
instructions to receive an input of a first destination and a second destination for the scanned document (processor as further illustrates in at least Figs. 2-4 further adapted to cause the display/operation unit 133 of further Fig. 2 to provide at least one or more user interface unit 202 to receive an input of a first destination and a second destination for the scanned document);
instructions to display a menu after receiving the input of the first destination and the second destination, the menu to receive a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file (implied instructions of further Figs. 3-4 and para. 0034-0036 in a case of designating file divide function where one first group of file may have one size and a second group of file may have a different size, the system is further configured to transmit the divided files to obviously in a case a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive the said files),
instructions to generate a first file having a first size based on the digital image data (the printer of further Figs. 3-4 further configured to generate a first file having a first size based on the digital image data based on a selection button 204; and likewise generate a second file based on the scanned document);
instructions to generate a second file having a second size, the second size being smaller than the first size, based on the digital image data (the printer of further Figs. 3-4 further configured likewise generate a second file based on the scanned document, and based on a selection button 206 where the second file having at least one parameter setting different from the first file);
instructions to store the first file and the second file (generated files including first file and the second file may be stored further in para. 0036 in a folder prior to transmittal); and
instructions to transmit the first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on the selection received via the menu (Figs. 3-4 and para. 0034-0036 further discloses the send function configured in the art to transmit in a case a divided first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on a selection received via the menu).
However, Tonegawa is silent regarding the above lined-out items such as citing said instructions to display a menu after receiving the input of the first destination and the second destination, the menu to receive a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file specifically having a smaller size and said instructions to transmit said first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on the selection received via the menu.
Fry teaches in at least Figs. 1-2 an image processing apparatus configured to generate scan image data files and further in at least Fig. 2 comprising a file transmitting means configured to transmit substantially concurrently different file data sizes based on an implied destination selection of Fig. 2 such as to send one or more second smaller file destination, S34, to a server recipient, and further in Fig. 2, S42, sending one or more first higher size/resolution file for a second provider destination, where the second file addressed to the server is smaller than the file transmitted to the provider, and a communication means is shown at least in Fig. 2 to transmit the smaller file size to the first destination, S34 and transmit the other file to the second destination, S42 based specifically on an understood selection received via a menu or the like. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Tonegawa in view of Fry to include wherein said instructions to display a menu after receiving the input of the first destination and the second destination, the menu to receive a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file specifically having a smaller size and said instructions to transmit said first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on the selection received via the menu, as discussed above, as Tonegawa in view of Fry are in the same field of generating and transmitting digitized scanned data files to selected destinations, Fry’s files selecting means of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, and the communication means to transmit a first file and the second file to said a first destination and second destination based on the selection received via an inputting means further complements the scanned files transmitting schemes of Tonegawa in the sense that the transmitting files architecture of Tonegawa when combined with the combination of files selecting means and the communication means architecture of Fry further causes the system of seamlessly provide scanned files transmittal to substantially simultaneous destinations according to a destination selection information targeted to receive the first smaller files in contrast to a second destination targeted to receive a second file different that the first file which may in a case correspond to the destination supported formats and protocols thereby promote seamless scanned files transmission which ultimately speed up processing and increased throughput according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Claims 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ishibashi et al. (US 2016/0255223, A1), in view of Fry.
Regarding claim 1, Ishibashi teaches an image forming apparatus (Ishibashi teaches at least in para. 0039 and Fig. 2A an MFP 10 serving as the image forming apparatus) comprising:
a scan unit to output digital image data of a scanned document (the MFP 10 of further para. 0039 and Fig. 2A comprises a scanner 12 comprising said scan unit to output digital image data of a scanned document);
a user interface unit to receive an input of a first destination and a second destination (at least an operation interface 24 further configured for at least receiving further in at least Figs 11-13, a scan upload input instruction illustrated at least in Fig. 13A and para. 0164-0168, and 0171-0173 is of a coordinated first destination and a second destination); and
to display a menu after receiving the input of the first destination and the second destination, the menu to receive a selection of (display menu of Fig. 12B after in a case receiving the input of Fig. 11A including the plurality of destinations, the menu to receive a selection of Fig. 12B configured in the art to display a destination to receive a file of Fig. 12A having a smaller size);
a processor (image processor 11 or 12 of further para. 0039 and Fig. 2A) to:
generate a first file having a first size based on the digital image data, and generate a second file having a second size based on the digital image data, the second size being smaller than the first size (the at least scan upload plurality instruction inputs of at least Fig. 13A and 5A and that of further Figs. 6-7 are configured for generating at least first PDF files having a first parameter resolution setting of at least Fig. 6 and generate further in at least Fig. 6 one or more files based on the digital image data and parameter setting, a case exists where the setting parameter of Fig. 7 generates second generated file which may in a case be smaller than the middle/high resolution setting file parameter of Fig. 6 and para. 0084-0086);
a storage unit
a communication unit to transmit the first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination (a communication means as implied in at least Fig. 13A and para. 0154 is further configured to transmit the first scan of at least Fig. 12-13 to cloud file to the first destination and the second scan to FTP file to the second destination).
However, Ishibashi is silent regarding the above lined-out items such as specifically citing said menu to receive a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, to store the first file and the second file; and transmit said first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on the selection received via the menu.
Fry teaches in at least Figs. 1-2 an image processing apparatus configured to generate scan image data files and further in at least Fig. 2 comprising a file transmitting means configured to transmit substantially concurrently different file data sizes based on an implied predetermined selection input means of Fig. 2 such as to receive one or more second smaller file destination, S34, to a server recipient, and receiving further in Fig. 2, S42, one or more first higher size/resolution file for a second provider destination, where the second file addressed to the server is smaller than the file transmitted to the provider, and a communication means is shown at least in Fig. 2 to transmit the smaller file size to the first destination, S34 and transmit the other file to the second destination, S42 based specifically on an understood selection received via a menu or the like. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Ishibashi in view of Fry to include wherein said menu to receive a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, to store the first file and the second file; and transmit said first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on the selection received via the menu, as discussed above, as Ishibashi in view of Fry are in the same field of sharing generated digitized scanned data files to selected destinations, Fry’s combination of files selecting means of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, and the communication means to transmit a first file and the second file to said a first destination and second destination based on the selection received via an inputting means further complements the scanned files transmitting schemes of Ishibashi in the sense that the transmitting files architecture of Ishibashi when combined with the combination of files selecting means and the communication means architecture of Fry further causes the system of seamlessly provide scanned files transmittal to substantially simultaneous destinations according to a destination selection information targeted to receive the first smaller files in contrast to a second destination targeted to receive a second file different that the first file which may in a case correspond to the destination supported formats and protocols thereby promote seamless scanned files transmission which ultimately speed up processing and increased throughput according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 2 (according to claim 1), Ishibashi further teaches wherein the user interface unit is further to receive an input to generate the second file having the smaller second size (a case exists where the command of Figs 6-7 may comprise an instruction input to generate the second file with a low/medium resolution having the smaller second size than a file with a high resolution).
Regarding claim 3 (according to claim 1), Ishibashi further teaches wherein the size of the first file and the size of the second file is determined based on a parameter of the respective file, the parameter including a file type, a resolution, an image quality, a compression density, a compression factor, or a color scheme (Ishibashi further transmitted upload image files of at least Fig. 12-13 further comprises received image parameters of at least Figs. 6-7 and para. 0084 comprising size of the first file and the size of the second file determined based on a parameter of the respective file, the parameter including a file type, a resolution, an image quality, a compression density, a compression factor, or a color scheme).
Regarding claim 4 (according to claim 3), Ishibashi further teaches wherein the user interface unit is further to receive an input of at least one parameter for each of the first file and the second file (data shown further in at least Figs. 12-13 and 6-7 and para. 0084 further include received input of at least one parameter for each of the first file and the second file).
Regarding claim 5 (according to claim 1), Ishibashi further teaches wherein each of the first destination and the second destination comprises an email server, a network storage device, a cloud-based storage device, or a portable storage device (destination data of further Figs. 12-13 and para. 0084 further comprises a first destination and the second destination comprises an email server, a network storage device, a cloud-based storage device, or a portable storage device).
Regarding claim 6 (according to claim 1), Ishibashi further teaches wherein the processor is further to generate a third file for a third destination based on the digital image data, the third file having a third size different from the first size and the second size (embodiments of further Figs. 5A, and 6-7 and para. 0084 further comprises at least selected file destinations including storage, cloud, and FTP which may include as implied in a case generate third file for one of the three destination based on the digital image data, the third file may have obviously a third size different from the first size and the second size).
Regarding claim 7 (according to claim 1), Ishibashi further teaches wherein the processor is to generate a preprocessed file using the digital image data, and wherein each of the first file and the second file is generated using the preprocessed file (para. 0084-0086 and Fig. 6 and 12A further discloses at least preprocessing of the image data including at least changing of the format, resolution of the data generate inherently said preprocessed file using the digital image data, and wherein each of the first file and the second file is generated in a case using the preprocessed file).
Regarding claim 8, Ishibashi teaches an image forming apparatus (Ishibashi teaches at least in para. 0039 and Fig. 2A an MFP 10 serving as the image forming apparatus) comprising:
a scan unit to output digital image data of a scanned document (the MFP 10 of further para. 0039 and Fig. 2A comprises a scanner 12 comprising said scan unit to output digital image data of a scanned document);
a user interface unit to receive an input including a plurality of destinations for the scanned document (at least an operation interface 24 further configured for at least receiving further in at least Figs 11-13 at least one or more plurality of scan upload instruction inputs of at least Fig. 13A and 5A including said plurality of destinations for the scanned document); and
to display a menu after receiving the input including the plurality of destinations, the menu to receive a selection of (display menu of Fig. 12B after in a case receiving the input of Fig. 11A including the plurality of destinations, the menu to receive a selection of Fig. 12B configured in the art to display a destination to receive a file of Fig. 12A having a smaller size);
a processor to generate a first file and a second file based on the scanned document, the second file having at least one parameter setting different from the first file (system is further adapted in at least Fig. 7 to generate and upload at least a second PDF file based on the digital image data and a first parameter resolution setting of at least Fig. 6 and to generate further in at least Fig. 6 one or more files based on the digital image data and a parameter setting, a case exists where the setting parameter of Fig. 7 may be in a case be smaller than the middle/high resolution setting parameter of Fig. 6 and para. 0084-0086);
a storage unit
a communication unit to transmit the first file and the second file to the plurality of destinations (a communication means as implied in at least Fig. 13A and para. 0154 is further configured to respectively and/or sequentially transmit scanned files to the plurality of destinations based on a selection received via the menu).
However, Ishibashi is silent regarding the above lined-out items such as specifically citing the said menu to receive a selection of which of the plurality of destinations is to receive a file having a smaller size, to store the first file and the second file; and transmit said first file and the second file to the plurality of destinations based on the selection received via the menu.
Fry teaches in at least Figs. 1-2 an image processing apparatus configured to generate scan image data files and further in at least Fig. 2 comprising a file transmitting means configured to transmit substantially concurrently different file data sizes based on an implied predetermined selection input means of Fig. 2 such as to receive one or more second smaller file destination, S34, to a server recipient, and receiving further in Fig. 2, S42, one or more first higher size/resolution file for a second provider destination, where the second file addressed to the server is smaller than the file transmitted to the provider, and a communication means is shown at least in Fig. 2 to transmit the smaller file size to the first destination, S34 and transmit the other file to the second destination, S42 based specifically on an understood selection received via a menu or the like. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Ishibashi in view of Fry to include wherein said menu to receive a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, to store the first file and the second file; and transmit said first file and the second file to the plurality of destinations based on the selection received via the menu, as discussed above, as Ishibashi in view of Fry are in the same field of sharing generated digitized scanned data files to selected destinations, Fry’s combination of files selecting means of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, and the communication means to transmit a first file and the second file to said a first destination and second destination based on the selection received via an inputting means further complements the scanned files transmitting schemes of Ishibashi in the sense that the transmitting files architecture of Ishibashi when combined with the combination of files selecting means and the communication means architecture of Fry further causes the system of seamlessly provide scanned files transmittal to substantially simultaneous destinations according to a destination selection information targeted to receive the first smaller files in contrast to a second destination targeted to receive a second file different that the first file which may in a case correspond to the destination supported formats and protocols thereby promote seamless scanned files transmission which ultimately speed up processing and increased throughput according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 9 (according to claim 8), Ishibashi further teaches wherein the parameters of each of the first file and the second file include a file type, a resolution, an image quality, a compression density, a compression factor, or a color scheme (the scan upload file commands of further Figs. 5-7 comprises said settings parameters of each of the first file and the second file include one of a cited file type, a cited resolution, or a preset color scheme).
Regarding claim 10 (according to claim 9), Ishibashi further teaches wherein the processor is to: generate the first file based on the digital image data and a first parameter setting, and generate the second file based on the digital image data and a second parameter setting, wherein the second file has a smaller file size than the first file (the system is further adapted in at least Fig. 7 to generate and upload at least a second PDF file based on the digital image data and a first parameter resolution setting, and to generate further in at least Fig. 6 one or more files based on the digital image data and a parameter setting of Fig. 6, a case exists where the setting parameter of Fig. 7 may be in a case obviously smaller than the middle/high resolution setting parameter of Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 11 (according to claim 8), Ishibashi further teaches wherein each of the plurality of destinations comprises an email server, a network storage device, a cloud-based storage device, or a portable storage device (destination data of further Figs. 12-13 and para. 0084 further comprises a first destination and the second destination comprises an email server, a network storage device, a cloud-based storage device, or a portable storage device).
Regarding claim 12 (according to claim 8), Ishibashi further teaches wherein the user interface unit is further to receive a selection to create files having different parameters (Figs. 5-7, and 12A further teaches said received selection to create files having different parameters).
Regarding claim 13 (according to claim 12), Ishibashi further teaches wherein the processor is to generate a plurality of files respectively for the plurality of destinations and each of the plurality of files has a different set of parameters than the other files (received input parameters selection of further Figs. 5-7, and 12A by the processor further result understoodly in a plurality of files respectively for the plurality of destinations of Fig. 13A and 5A and each of the plurality of files such as shown in at least Fig. 7 having different set of parameters than the other files).
Regarding claim 14, Ishibashi teaches in at least para 0196 a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium encoded with instructions executable by a processor, the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium comprising:
instructions to output digital image data of a scanned document (instructions of at least Figs. 6-7);
instructions to receive an input of a first destination and a second destination for the scanned document (communication destinations of further Figs. 6-7 and 13A);
instructions to generate a first file having a first size based on the digital image data (file setting parameters of at least Fig. 6 having in a case a first middle/high setting size based on the predetermined digital image data);
instructions to display a menu after receiving the input of the first destination and the second destination, the menu to receive a selection of (display menu of Fig. 12B after in a case receiving the input of Fig. 11A including the plurality of destinations, the menu to receive a selection of Fig. 12B configured in the art to display a destination to receive a file of Fig. 12A having a smaller size);
instructions to generate a second file having a second size, the second size being smaller than the first size, based on the digital image data (Figs. 7 and 11-12 further teaches a configuration to generate a file with a low resolution as the second file being in a case smaller than the first size of medium or large resolution, based on the digital image data);
instructions to generate a first file having a first size based on the digital image data (Figs. 7 and 11-12 further teaches likewise a configuration to generate a first file with a medium or high resolution as the first being in a case of medium or large resolution, based on the digital image data);
instructions to transmit the first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination (instructions of further Figs. 11-13 further configured and capable to transmit the first scan of at least Fig. 12-13 to cloud file to the first destination and the second scan to FTP file to the second destination).
However, Ishibashi is silent regarding the above lined-out items such as specifically citing the menu to receive a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, to store the first file and the second file; and transmit said first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on the selection received via the menu.
Fry teaches in at least Figs. 1-2 an image processing apparatus configured to generate scan image data files and further in at least Fig. 2 comprising a file transmitting means configured to transmit substantially concurrently different file data sizes based on an implied predetermined selection input means of Fig. 2 such as to receive one or more second smaller file destination, S34, to a server recipient, and receiving further in Fig. 2, S42, one or more first higher size/resolution file for a second provider destination, where the second file addressed to the server is smaller than the file transmitted to the provider, and a communication means is shown at least in Fig. 2 to transmit the smaller file size to the first destination, S34 and transmit the other file to the second destination, S42 based specifically on an understood selection received via a menu or the like. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Ishibashi in view of Fry to include wherein said menu to receive a selection of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, to store the first file and the second file; and transmit said first file and the second file to the first destination and the second destination based on the selection received via the menu, as discussed above, as Ishibashi in view of Fry are in the same field of sharing generated digitized scanned data files to selected destinations, Fry’s combination of files selecting means of which of the first destination and the second destination is to receive a file having a smaller size, and the communication means to transmit a first file and the second file to said a first destination and second destination based on the selection received via an inputting means further complements the scanned files transmitting schemes of Ishibashi in the sense that the transmitting files architecture of Ishibashi when combined with the combination of files selecting means and the communication means architecture of Fry further causes the system of seamlessly provide scanned files transmittal to substantially simultaneous destinations according to a destination selection information targeted to receive the first smaller files in contrast to a second destination targeted to receive a second file different that the first file which may in a case correspond to the destination supported formats and protocols thereby promote seamless scanned files transmission which ultimately speed up processing and increased throughput according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 15 (according to claim 14), Ishibashi further teaches wherein the size of the first file and the size of the second file is determined based on a parameter of the respective file, the parameter including a file type, a resolution, an image quality, a compression density, a compression factor, or a color scheme (the system teaches a low-resolution setting size of at least Fig. 7 is set for a file and in Fig. 6 setting size of the first file determined based on a parameter of the respective file, said parameter including a file type, a resolution, or a preset color scheme).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCELLUS AUGUSTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3384. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM- 5 PM.
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 TIEU can be reached on 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.
/MARCELLUS J AUGUSTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682 06/03/2026
Prosecution Insights