DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to communication(s) filed on September 21, 2026.
Claims 1 and 4-11 have been amended.
Claims 1-11 are currently pending.
The objection to “TITILE” is withdrawn in view of amendment with a new title.
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) 1-3 and 6- 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakutani (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0183973 A1), and further in view of Kim (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0127035 A1).
With regard to claim 1, the claim is drawn to an image output apparatus (see Kakutani, i.e. fig. 1-3 and etc., disclose the multifunction peripheral 101), comprising:
a controller that controls a display of a first screen including setting items of a system to be used for restricting a use of functions, and a second screen including setting items for setting contents of a job (see Kakutani, i.e. in Fig. 2, disclose the CPU 202 and in para. 28, 37 and etc., disclose that “[0028] The CPU 202 integrally controls access to the various devices connected to the system bus 206 based on control programs stored in the ROM 203 or the HDD 205…”, including the “panel operation I/F 208”, and further in para. 33, discloses that “[0033] The panel operation I/F 208 performs control of display in an operation panel 212, such as a touch panel, and control of input of various setting information based on operations performed through the operation panel 212”, and in para. 60, discloses that “[0060] The panel UI function unit 304 accepts input through the operation panel 212 using the panel operation I/F 208”; in addition, in para. 62, discloses that “…The examples of the remote assistance operation further include an operation of updating setting information of the multifunction peripheral 101 to an appropriate value. By this, in a case where the user mistakenly changes setting information of the multifunction peripheral 101 or the like, the assistance system may set an appropriate value to the setting information of the multifunction peripheral 101. [or as “a setting of operation of the image output apparatus”]; further in fig. 8A, discloses the settings, such as “sheet setting”, “print setting” and further in para. 119, discloses that “[0119] In step S1303, the CPU 202 receives an operation instruction externally input through the remote UI screen. FIG. 8A is a diagram illustrating a remote UI screen 7001 provided by the CPU 202. When receiving a request for an operation through the remote UI from an external PC, an external mobile terminal, of the like, the CPU 202 transmits information on the remote UI screen 7001 to the request source. The request source, such as the external PC or the external mobile terminal, displays the remote UI screen 7001 corresponding to the transmitted information in a display unit. The request source, such as the external PC or the external mobile terminal, receives an instruction for operating the multifunction peripheral 101 based on a user operation input through the displayed remote UI screen 7001 and transmits the received operation instruction to the multifunction peripheral 101. The CPU 202 performs an operation in accordance with the transmitted operation instruction. By the process described above, the operation of the multifunction peripheral 101 through the remote UI screen is realized. The remote UI screen 7001 is an example of an operation screen used for the operation of the multifunction peripheral 101. The process in step S1303 is an example of an acceptance process of accepting an operation performed on the multifunction peripheral 101” [or as “a second setting screen including setting items of a job to be used in a setting of operation in job execution”], and Fig. 8A and 8B, for examples, illustrates two different setting screens; also see the teachings of Kim supplemented below); and
an image outputter that outputs an image by executing the job based on a setting of an operation in the execution of the job (see Fig. 2 and in para. 32, disclose that “[0032] The printer I/F 207 controls image output to a printer 216”; also see the teachings of Kim supplemented below, i.e. in fig. 1, para. 19-21 and etc., disclose image forming apparatus 10), wherein
when a user of a specific function used in the execution of the job is restricted on the first screen, the controller restricts, on the second screen, selection of one or more setting items of the job associated with the specific function (see Kim, i.e. illustrations of Fig. 7, screens, 720, 740, Fig, 8, screens 820, 840 and etc.), and
displays a third screen, different from the first screen and the second screen, when a setting item selected on the second screen is one of the one or more setting items, the selections of which are restricted (see Fig. 8A, 8B, Fig. 9, and in para. 124, discloses that “… In the example of FIG. 8B, the remote UI screen 7001 includes a message indicating that operations performed through the remote UI screen are prohibited since the remote assistance operation is being performed. The CPU 202 displays the screen illustrated in FIG. 8B in the display unit of the request source, such as the PC or the mobile terminal, so as to notify the user of prohibition of operations performed through the remote UI screen”; also see in Fig. 11, step S1506, para. 147 and etc.; also see the teachings of Kim supplemented below, specifically, see Kim, i.e. in Fig. 7, screens 721, 741; fig. 8, screens 821, 841; fig. 9, screens 921, 941 and etc.).
The teachings of Kakutani do not explicitly disclose the teachings relating to “… setting items of a system to be used for restricting a use of functions…”.
However, Kim discloses an analogous invention relates to “an image forming apparatus described herein may be any type of apparatus capable of performing an image forming operation, such as a printer, a copier, a scanner, a fax machine, a multi-function printer (MFP), or a display apparatus” (see Kim, i.e. para. 16 and etc.). More specifically, in Kim, i.e. in fig. 5, para. 71 and etc., disclose that “[0071] That is, the user interface apparatus may display the at least one application to which the personal information protection policy is to be applied, based on the personal information protection policy obtained from the server. For example, the personal information protection policy may include a policy of restricting a function of transferring or storing the file including the personal information to a predetermined transfer destination. On the screen for setting an application with respect to the personal information protection policy, the user interface apparatus may display an icon 521 of a scan to FTP application performing a FTP function after scanning a file, among the applications installed in the image forming apparatus 10, an icon 522 of a scan to cloud application performing a function of storing the file in the cloud after scanning the file, and an icon 523 of a scan to OCR application performing an OCR function after scanning the file. Here, the user interface apparatus 1130 may receive an input to select each of the scan to FTP application, the scan to cloud application, and the scan to OCR application” [i.e. when the box of Scan to OCR 523 (also 521, 522 and etc.) is unchecked, as claimed limitation(s) of “… a display of a first screen including setting items of a system to be used for restricting a use of functions”]. In addition, in Kim, i.e. Fig. 7, screen 720 and para. 86, Fig. 9, screen 920 and para. 94, disclose that “[0086] For example, when the user interface apparatus 1130 receives an input to select the FTP 712, the image forming apparatus 10 may determine whether execution of the application performing the scan to FTP function is restricted according to the personal information protection policy based on the personal information protection policy set in the image forming apparatus 10. When the execution of the application performing the scan to FTP function is restricted according to the personal information protection policy, as shown in screen 720, the user interface apparatus may display a message 721 indicating that “the use of the FTP function is restricted according to the personal information protection policy”. [0094] For example, when the user interface apparatus receives a command to perform the scan to OCR function, the image forming apparatus 10 may determine whether the application performing the scan to OCR function is an application whose execution is restricted according to the personal information protection policy based on the personal information protection policy set in the image forming apparatus 10. When the application performing the scan to OCR function is the application whose execution is restricted according to the personal information protection policy, the user interface apparatus may display a screen 920 including a message 921 indicating that “the use of the scan to OCR function is restricted according to the personal information protection policy” [as claimed limitation(s) of “a second screen including setting items for setting contents of a job…”].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kakutani to include the limitation(s) discussed and also taught by Kim, with the aspect(s) discussed above, as the cited prior arts are at least considered to be analogous arts if not also in the same field of endeavor relating to image forming and processing arts. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kakutani by the teachings of Kim, and to incorporate the limitation(s) discussed and also taught by Kim, thereby having “… a technology for protecting personal information is applied to apparatuses and systems in which the management of personal information may be improved” (see Kim, i.e. para. 2 and etc.).
With regard to claim 2, the claim is drawn to the image output apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the third screen is an input screen that inputs user information (see Kakutani, i.e.in fig. 10, para. 135-139, disclose the login processing, display login screen in step S1401, receive input of user information and user password in step S1402 and etc.; also see Kim, illustrations in Fig. 9, 10 and etc.).
With regard to claim 3, the claim is drawn to the image output apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the user information includes a login name and a password (see Kakutani, i.e. in fig. 10, step S1401-S1403, and in para. 137, discloses that “[0137] In step S1402, the CPU 202 receives input of user information and a password of the user through the login screen displayed in the operation panel 212 in step S1401. The CPU 202 stores the input user information and the input password information in a RAM 204. Although the CPU 202 uses the RAM 204 for temporarily storing the user information and the password in this embodiment, other storage devices, such as a HDD 205, may be used.”).
With regard to claim 6, the claim is drawn to the image output apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the controller executes a user authentication based on the user information, and releases the restriction of the selection of the setting item on the second screen when a user is confirmed to have an authority to use the specific function based on the user authentication (see Kakutani, i.e. in fig. 10, steps S1401-S1403, and further in fig. 9, para. 121 and etc., disclose that “[0121] When the exclusive setting information indicates prohibition of other operations during the remote assistance operation and the multifunction peripheral 101 is being subjected to the remote assistance operation, the CPU 202 prohibits operations through the remote UI screen. The CPU 202 may prohibit only operations which may interfere with the remote assistance operation among operations performed through the remote UI screen. In the example of FIG. 9, the check box 8002 is checked.”; in addition, in Kim, i.e. Fig. 3, step 301, and corresponding in para. 44 and etc., disclose that “… [0044] In operation 301, the policy module 1141 may request an execution file of a personal information protection policy to be set in the image forming apparatus 10 from a server 20 managing the personal information protection policy through the communication apparatus 1110.”).
With regard to claim 7, the claim is drawn to the image output apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller displays the one or more setting item, the selection of which are restricted, on the second screen by changing a display manner of the one or more setting items (see Kakutani, i.e. in fig. 8A, fig. 8B and etc., illustrates the changes of UI screens; also in Kim, i.e. in fig. 10, screen 1010, and in para. 98, discloses that “[0098] The user interface apparatus may restrict the display of the user interface such that a country to which the transfer of the file including the personal information is restricted may not be selected from the window to select the country to which the scan file is to be transferred based on the country information. The user interface apparatus 1130 may deactivate 1011 an icon to select each of France, Italy, Norway, Poland, and Portugal such that France, Italy, Norway, Poland, and Portugal may not be selected as countries to which the scan file is to be transferred…”).
With regard to claim 8, the claim is drawn to the image output apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the specific function is a function of recognizing a character (see Kim, i.e. in para. 12, 33, 92, 94 and etc., disclose that, “[0012] FIG. 9 is a diagram for explaining an operation, performed by an image forming apparatus, of restricting use of a scan to optical character recognition (OCR) function based on a personal information protection policy, according to an example;”, and “[0033] For example, the personal information protection policy may include a policy of blocking execution of an application including a scan function. When the first application is any one of the scan to FTP application, the scan to cloud application, the scan to OCR application, the scan to SMB application, or the like, the image forming apparatus 10 may determine that the first job is restricted to the personal information protection policy….”).
With regard to claim 9, the claim is drawn to the image output apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the image outputter is able to output an image including character data to be outputted as a result of executing the function of recognizing the character (see Kim, i.e. in para. 30 and etc., disclose that “[0030] In operation 220, the image forming apparatus 10 may receive an execution request of a first application installed in the image forming apparatus 10. For example, the image forming apparatus 10 may receive an input to execute the first application through a user interface apparatus of the image forming apparatus 10. For example, the first application may correspond to any one of a scan to file transfer protocol (FTP) application, a scan to cloud application, a scan to optical character recognition (OCR) application, a scan to server message block (SMB), or the like.”).
With regard to claim 10, the claim is drawn to the image output apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the setting items of the system include a setting regarding the character data, and the controller controls selection of the setting regarding the character data when the use of the function of recognizing the character is restricted on the first screen (see Kim, in i.e. para. 94 and etc. disclose that “[0094] For example, when the user interface apparatus receives a command to perform the scan to OCR function, the image forming apparatus 10 may determine whether the application performing the scan to OCR function is an application whose execution is restricted according to the personal information protection policy based on the personal information protection policy set in the image forming apparatus 10. When the application performing the scan to OCR function is the application whose execution is restricted according to the personal information protection policy, the user interface apparatus may display a screen 920 including a message 921 indicating that “the use of the scan to OCR function is restricted according to the personal information protection policy”).
With regard to claim 11, the claim is drawn to an image output method, comprising:
displaying a first screen including setting items of a system to be used for restricting a use of functions, and a second screen including setting items for setting contents of a job (see Kakutani, i.e. in Fig. 2, disclose the CPU 202 and in para. 28, 37 and etc., disclose that “[0028] The CPU 202 integrally controls access to the various devices connected to the system bus 206 based on control programs stored in the ROM 203 or the HDD 205…”, including the “panel operation I/F 208”, and further in para. 33, discloses that “[0033] The panel operation I/F 208 performs control of display in an operation panel 212, such as a touch panel, and control of input of various setting information based on operations performed through the operation panel 212”, and in para. 60, discloses that “[0060] The panel UI function unit 304 accepts input through the operation panel 212 using the panel operation I/F 208”; in addition, in para. 62, discloses that “…The examples of the remote assistance operation further include an operation of updating setting information of the multifunction peripheral 101 to an appropriate value. By this, in a case where the user mistakenly changes setting information of the multifunction peripheral 101 or the like, the assistance system may set an appropriate value to the setting information of the multifunction peripheral 101. [or as “a setting of operation of the image output apparatus”]; further in fig. 8A, discloses the settings, such as “sheet setting”, “print setting” and further in para. 119, discloses that “[0119] In step S1303, the CPU 202 receives an operation instruction externally input through the remote UI screen. FIG. 8A is a diagram illustrating a remote UI screen 7001 provided by the CPU 202. When receiving a request for an operation through the remote UI from an external PC, an external mobile terminal, of the like, the CPU 202 transmits information on the remote UI screen 7001 to the request source. The request source, such as the external PC or the external mobile terminal, displays the remote UI screen 7001 corresponding to the transmitted information in a display unit. The request source, such as the external PC or the external mobile terminal, receives an instruction for operating the multifunction peripheral 101 based on a user operation input through the displayed remote UI screen 7001 and transmits the received operation instruction to the multifunction peripheral 101. The CPU 202 performs an operation in accordance with the transmitted operation instruction. By the process described above, the operation of the multifunction peripheral 101 through the remote UI screen is realized. The remote UI screen 7001 is an example of an operation screen used for the operation of the multifunction peripheral 101. The process in step S1303 is an example of an acceptance process of accepting an operation performed on the multifunction peripheral 101” [or as “a second setting screen including setting items of a job to be used in a setting of operation in job execution”], and Fig. 8A and 8B, for examples, illustrates two different setting screens; also see the teachings of Kim supplemented below);
outputting an image by executing the job based on a setting of an operation in the execution of the job (see Fig. 2 and in para. 32, disclose that “[0032] The printer I/F 207 controls image output to a printer 216”; also see the teachings of Kim supplemented below, i.e. in fig. 1, para. 19-21 and etc., disclose image forming apparatus 10); and
when a user of a specific function used in the execution of the job is restricted on the first screen: restricting, on the second screen, selection of one or more setting items of the job associated with the specific function (see Kim, i.e. illustrations of Fig. 7, screens, 720, 740, Fig, 8, screens 820, 840 and etc.), and displaying a third screen, different from the first screen and the second screen, when a setting item selected on the second screen is one of the one or more setting items, the selections of which are restricted (see Fig. 8A, 8B, Fig. 9, and in para. 124, discloses that “… In the example of FIG. 8B, the remote UI screen 7001 includes a message indicating that operations performed through the remote UI screen are prohibited since the remote assistance operation is being performed. The CPU 202 displays the screen illustrated in FIG. 8B in the display unit of the request source, such as the PC or the mobile terminal, so as to notify the user of prohibition of operations performed through the remote UI screen”; also see in Fig. 11, step S1506, para. 147 and etc.; also see the teachings of Kim supplemented below, specifically, see Kim, i.e. in Fig. 7, screens 721, 741; fig. 8, screens 821, 841; fig. 9, screens 921, 941 and etc.).
Claim(s) 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakutani and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Corona (U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0183002 A1).
With regard to claim 4, the claim is drawn to the image output apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the third screen includes a button that is for selecting the login name is selectable from a list.
The teachings of Kakutani and Kim do not explicitly disclose the aspect relating to “wherein the third screen includes a button that is for selecting the login name is selectable from a list”.
However, Corona discloses an analogous invention relates to system and method for user selectable scan settings on a scan capable device (i.e. abstract of Corona). More specifically, in Corona, i.e. in para. 8-11, fig. 5, steps S366, S368 and etc., disclose that “[0008] In another aspect, a method of retrieving previously saved scan settings at a device with scan capability for each of a plurality of users comprises retrieving and displaying a list of identifiers each associated with a set of settings saved in association with each user and retrieving a set of settings associated with the identifier selected by the user from the list”, and “[0011] In another aspect, a system for retrieving previously saved scan settings at a device with scan capability for each of a plurality of users comprises means for logging on each user to a user account with authentication data received from the user, means for retrieving and displaying a list of identifiers each associated with a set of settings saved in association with the user account, and means for retrieving a set of settings associated with the identifier selected by the user from the list.”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kakutani to include the limitation(s) discussed and also taught by Corona, with the aspect(s) discussed above, as the cited prior arts are at least considered to be analogous arts if not also in the same field of endeavor relating to user interface (UI) processing arts. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kakutani by the teachings of Corona, and to incorporate the limitation(s) discussed and also taught by Corona, thereby “… to increase work efficiency, there is a need to allow individual users to modify, save, and retrieve settings customized for their own needs on the device” (see Corona, i.e. para. 4 and etc.).
With regard to claim 5, the claim is drawn to the image output apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the third screen is a selection screen for selecting user information (see Corona, , in Corona, i.e. in para. 8-11, fig. 5, steps S366, S368 and etc., disclose that “[0008] In another aspect, a method of retrieving previously saved scan settings at a device with scan capability for each of a plurality of users comprises retrieving and displaying a list of identifiers each associated with a set of settings saved in association with each user and retrieving a set of settings associated with the identifier selected by the user from the list”, and “[0011] In another aspect, a system for retrieving previously saved scan settings at a device with scan capability for each of a plurality of users comprises means for logging on each user to a user account with authentication data received from the user, means for retrieving and displaying a list of identifiers each associated with a set of settings saved in association with the user account, and means for retrieving a set of settings associated with the identifier selected by the user from the list.”).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1-11 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Arifuku (U.S. Pat/Pub No. 2023/0386234 A1, Sharp) disclose an invention relates to image processing apparatus and image processing method.
Fujisaki (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0280954 A1) discloses an invention relates to image processing apparatus and image processing method.
Applicants’ 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 Jacky X. Zheng whose telephone number is (571) 270-1122. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, alt. Friday Off.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Akwasi Sarpong can be reached on (571) 272-3438. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JACKY X ZHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681
Prosecution Insights