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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 4/22/2024 & 7/14/2025, were filed before the first office action. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejection Notes
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9, 12, 13, and 18-21, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Hull (US 20050005115 A1, published: 1/6/2005).
Claim 1. (Currently Amended): Hull teaches a method for processing a document task, comprising: determining a first device in a master device and a slave device, wherein the master device initiates flowing for a target document, the slave device receives the flowing for the target document, and the first device is used to perform an operation on the target document (the portable device sends a URL to a printer, which accesses the document from a document database using the URL, in order to print the document [Hull, 0006]. The wireless transceiver receives, via wireless communication, a document being unconsciously captured by a first device and to transmit the document to a second device [Hull, 0008]; Examiner's Note: wherein the master is the first device, and the slave is the second device); allocating an operating-type task for the target document to the first device, to enable the first device to process the operating-type task for the target document; and allocating a presenting-type task for the target document to a second device in the master device and the slave device, to enable the second device to process the presenting-type task for the target document (the portable device sends a URL to a printer, which accesses the document from a document database using the URL, in order to print the document [Hull, 0006]. The wireless transceiver receives, via wireless communication, a document being unconsciously captured by a first device and to transmit the document to a second device, such that communication of the document occurs between the first and second devices. The memory is coupled to the transceiver and stores the document. The processor is coupled to the transceiver and the memory, and controls the transceiver to cause the transceiver to receive the document unconsciously from the first device and to transfer the document as part of being downloaded to the second device [Hull, 0008]; Examiner's Note: wherein the first device transfers a file to a second device, which then processes and prints said document).
Claims 18 and 19, having similar deficiencies to claim 1, are likewise rejected.
Claim 2: Hull teaches the method according to claim 1. Hull further teaches wherein determining the first device in the master device and the slave device comprises: determining the slave device in one or more devices that have communication connection capabilities with the master device; and determining the first device in the master device and the slave device (the SMA has a mechanism for wireless communication and data transfer, a buffer memory (e.g., flash, disk, etc.), and a processor. The SMA is carried by users of SMA-capable unconscious capture devices, such as, for example, photocopiers, facsimile machines, multifunction machines, etc. In the case of the photocopier, when the users make copies on the photocopier, the scanned electronic versions of the copied documents are transferred unconsciously to the SMA. When the user returns to their personal computer (PC), the data on the SMA is unconsciously downloaded to a memory in the PC [Hull, 0019]).
Claim 20, having similar deficiencies to claim 2, is likewise rejected.
Claim 3: Hull teaches the method according to claim 2. Hull further teaches wherein determining the slave device in the one or more devices that have communication connection capabilities with the master device comprises: determining, according to a target input instruction, the slave device in the one or more devices that have communication connection capabilities with the master device (An SMA system could be used to synchronize data between PC's, exclusive of any office appliances. This would allow users to seemlessly maintain the same data on their office PC and their PC at home. FIG. 3 is a block diagram of an alternative embodiment of the SMA that synchronizes files between two or more PC's. This is useful for ensuring that the same data is present on the PCs [Hull, 0038]).
Claim 21, having similar deficiencies to claim 3, is likewise rejected.
Claim 4: Hull teaches the method according to claim 2. Hull further teaches wherein determining the slave device in the one or more devices that have communication connection capabilities with the master device comprises at least one of: calculating a distance between the master device and a third device, wherein the third device is any one of the one or more devices that have communication connection capabilities with the master device; and in response to determining that the distance is less than or equal to a distance threshold, determining the third device as the slave device; or calculating a signal intensity between the master device and a third device, wherein the third device is any one of the one or more devices that have communication connection capabilities with the master device; and in response to determining that the signal intensity is greater than or equal to a signal intensity threshold, determining the third device as the slave device (every time PC 301 is in proximity to SMA 302, files are transferred to PC 303 via SMA 302 over a wireless communication link using wireless transceiver 301B (e.g., wireless transceiver PCI bus card) of PC 301 and wireless transceiver 302A of SMA 302. At this time, files on SMA 302 that had been uploaded to it by PC 303 (and stored in buffer memory 302C) for transfer to PC 301 are sent to PC 301 over a wireless communication link using wireless transceiver 301B and wireless transceiver 302A. The analogous operations are performed when SMA 302 is in proximity to PC 303 [Hull, 0038]).
Claim 5: Hull teaches the method according to claim 2. Hull further teaches wherein determining the first device in the master device and the slave device comprises: according to pre-set designating information, determining the master device as the first device (the original devices (copier, fax, printer, PC) may contain a user interface that is used to confirm data should be transferred to the SMA before the transfer occurs [Hull, 0020]; Examiner's Note: other paragraphs also teach other methods the SMA may connect to devices. The SMA is pre-set by being programmed to gather information for devices).
Claim 6: Hull teaches the method according to claim 2. Hull further teaches wherein determining the first device in the master device and the slave device comprises: obtaining device information of the master device and device information of the slave device; comparing the device information of the master device with the device information of the slave device; and according to a result of the comparing, determining the first device (prior to document transfer, SMA 202 transmits information to appliance 201 for identification. In one embodiment, this information is used by appliance 201 to select an encryption scheme which the user desires to use or is able to determine its use. In one embodiment, the identification information allows appliance 201 to identify which public key to use to encrypt the document prior to transfer to SMA 202 [Hull, 0030]).
Claim 7: Hull teaches the method according to claim 2. Hull further teaches wherein determining the first device in the master device and the slave device comprises: according to sequence information for executing operating-type tasks for the target document, determining a device corresponding to a current number in the master device and the slave device as the first device, wherein the sequence information comprises numbers for executing the operating-type tasks (an algorithm is here, and generally, conceived to be a self-consistent sequence of steps leading to a desired result [Hull, 0014]. Prior to document transfer, SMA 202 transmits information to appliance 201 for identification. In one embodiment, this information is used by appliance 201 to select an encryption scheme which the user desires to use or is able to determine its use. In one embodiment, the identification information allows appliance 201 to identify which public key to use to encrypt the document prior to transfer to SMA 202 [Hull, 0030]).
Claim 8: Hull teaches the method according to claim 1. Hull further teaches wherein allocating the operating-type task for the target document to the first device, to enable the first device to process the operating-type task for the target document comprises: allocating the operating-type task to the first device, to enable the first device to generate an interactive interface for the operating-type task; receiving execution information for the operating-type task transmitted by the first device; and processing the target document according to the execution information, wherein the execution information is generated according to operation information received by the interactive interface for the operating-type task (the SMA is carried by users of SMA-capable unconscious capture devices, such as, for example, photocopiers, facsimile machines, multifunction machines, etc. In the case of the photocopier, when the users make copies on the photocopier, the scanned electronic versions of the copied documents are transferred unconsciously to the SMA. When the user returns to their personal computer (PC), the data on the SMA is unconsciously downloaded to a memory in the PC [Hull, 0019]. The transfer is conscious; the original devices (copier, fax, printer, PC) may contain a user interface that is used to confirm data should be transferred to the SMA before the transfer occurs. For example, the user walks up to the copier, it detects there is an SMA present, and indicates this on the console. The user has the opportunity to confirm transfer to the SMA before it occurs [Hull, 0020]).
Claim 9: Hull teaches the method according to claim 8. Hull further teaches wherein receiving the execution information for the operating-type task transmitted by the first device, and processing the target document according to the execution information comprises: in response to determining that more than one piece of execution information transmitted by the first device is received at a same time, determining whether the more than one piece of execution information is associated with a same element in the target document; and in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, determining a first execution information and processing the target document according to the first execution information, wherein the first execution information is one of the more than one piece of execution information associated with the same element in the target document (after receiving a document from appliance 201, the SMA 202 may be used to specify an operation to be performed on the document. The operation may include printing the document, e-mailing the document, faxing the document, encrypting the document, storing the document, or any other type of operation, such as transferring the document to a third device or multiple devices. The user may specify the operation using an input device (e.g., keypad, styles, etc.) on SMA 202 [Hull, 0034]. [Hull, 0038]. Determining whether the second device is capable of processing the document [Hull, Claim 55]).
Claim 12: Hull teaches the method according to claim 9. Hull further teaches wherein in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, determining the first execution information and processing the target document according to the first execution information comprises: in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, processing the target document according to a received instruction (the portable device sends a URL to a printer, which accesses the document from a document database using the URL, in order to print the document [Hull, 0006]. After receiving a document from appliance 201, the SMA 202 may be used to specify an operation to be performed on the document. The operation may include printing the document, e-mailing the document, faxing the document, encrypting the document, storing the document, or any other type of operation, such as transferring the document to a third device or multiple devices [Hull, 0034]).
Claim 13: Hull teaches the method according to claim 9. Hull further teaches wherein receiving the execution information for the operating-type task transmitted by the first device, and processing the target document according to the execution information comprises: in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with different elements of the target document, processing the target document respectively according to the more than one piece of execution information (determining whether the second device is capable of processing the document [Hull, Claim 55]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hull (US 20050005115 A1, published: 1/6/2005), in view of Bailey et al. (US 20130094047 A1, published: 4/18/2013).
Claim 10: Hull teaches the method according to claim 9. Hull does not teach wherein in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, determining the first execution information and processing the target document according to the first execution information comprises: in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, determining an occurrence time of an operation corresponding to each of the more than one piece of execution information; and determining execution information corresponding to an operation with an occurrence time that is ranked first in a sequence of the occurrence times as the first execution information, and processing the target document according to the first execution information.
However, Bailey teaches wherein in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, determining the first execution information and processing the target document according to the first execution information comprises: in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, determining an occurrence time of an operation corresponding to each of the more than one piece of execution information; and determining execution information corresponding to an operation with an occurrence time that is ranked first in a sequence of the occurrence times as the first execution information, and processing the target document according to the first execution information (the printer queries an access control system over a wired or wireless network, to obtain details of functions that the user or mobile device is allowed to use on that device, the times of day at which they are allowed to print, the maximum number of pages per day (or other period) that they may print, and the like. Alternatively, the printer may optionally have been pre-programmed with access control data [Bailey, 0030]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the document transfer, processing, and presentation invention of Hull to include the occurrence time feature of Bailey.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to account for the timing of transferring content from one device to another. Such will keep accurate records of document processing.
Claim 11: Hull teaches the method according to claim 9. Hull does not teach wherein in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, determining the first execution information and processing the target document according to the first execution information comprises: in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, determining an occurrence time of an operation corresponding to each of the more than one piece of execution information; and storing the more than one piece of execution information in sequence according to an order of the occurrence times, and processing the target document according to the stored execution information.
However, Bailey teaches wherein in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, determining the first execution information and processing the target document according to the first execution information comprises: in response to determining that the more than one piece of execution information is associated with the same element in the target document, determining an occurrence time of an operation corresponding to each of the more than one piece of execution information; and storing the more than one piece of execution information in sequence according to an order of the occurrence times, and processing the target document according to the stored execution information (the printer queries an access control system over a wired or wireless network, to obtain details of functions that the user or mobile device is allowed to use on that device, the times of day at which they are allowed to print, the maximum number of pages per day (or other period) that they may print, and the like. Alternatively, the printer may optionally have been pre-programmed with access control data [Bailey, 0030]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the document transfer, processing, and presentation invention of Hull to include the occurrence time feature of Bailey.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to account for the timing of transferring content from one device to another. Such will keep accurate records of document processing.
Claim(s) 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hull (US 20050005115 A1, published: 1/6/2005), in view of Boerries et al. (US 20090307370 A1, published: 12/10/2009).
Claim 14: Hull teaches the method according to claim 1. Hull does not teach wherein allocating the presenting-type task for the target document to the second device in the master device and the slave device, to enable the second device to process the presenting-type task for the target document comprises: allocating the presenting-type task for the target document to the second device, to enable the second device to generate a displaying interface for the presenting-type task and to display the target document in the displaying interface.
However, Boerries teaches wherein allocating the presenting-type task for the target document to the second device in the master device and the slave device, to enable the second device to process the presenting-type task for the target document comprises: allocating the presenting-type task for the target document to the second device, to enable the second device to generate a displaying interface for the presenting-type task and to display the target document in the displaying interface (a device includes logic operable to display an email message received from a remote location, the email message having associated data (e.g., an attachment) located remotely to the device (e.g., with a server or the like) [Boerries, 0011]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the document transfer, processing, and presentation invention of Hull to include the document display feature of Boerries.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to process a document such that it can be displayed to a user. Such will allow the user to work with said documents in real time.
Claim 15: The combination of Hull and Boerries, teaches the method according to claim 14. Boerries further teaches wherein allocating the presenting-type task for the target document to the second device in the master device and the slave device, to enable the second device to process the presenting-type task for the target document comprises: in response to determining that a processed target document needs to be displayed by the presenting-type task, transmitting the processed target document to the second device, to display the processed target document on the displaying interface for the presenting-type task of the second device; wherein the processed target document is obtained by processing the target document according to the execution information of the operating-type task (the method includes displaying at least a portion of an email message on a device, the email message having data associated therewith located remote from the device, receiving a request for the data, and initiating a fetch of the data from the remote location, wherein the data is fetched in the background of the device[Boerries, 0015]).
Claim 16: The combination of Hull and Boerries, teaches the method according to claim 14, wherein allocating the presenting-type task for the target document to the second device in the master device and the slave device, to enable the second device to process the presenting-type task for the target document comprises: in response to determining that a processed target document does not need to be displayed by the presenting-type task, not transmitting the processed target document to the second device; wherein the processed target document is obtained by processing the target document according to the execution information of the operating-type task (Examiner's Note: if there is no content to be displayed, nothing is displayed).
Additional References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references transfer documents from one device to another, such that they can be received and presented:
Fujiwara (US 7436538 B2, published: 10/14/2008)
Hirano (US 20150268835 A1, published: 9/24/2015)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH A SILVERMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9783. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur, 8AM-4PM MST.
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, Adam Queler can be reached at (571)272-4140. 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.
/Seth A Silverman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172