DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This is an initial office action in response to communication(s) filed on September 9, 2024.
Claims 1-14 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 13, 2024 and January 13, 2025 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukada et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0409558 A1, hereinafter as “Tsukada”), and further in view of Kitada et al. (U.S. Pub. NO. 2008/0239329 A1, hereinafter as “Kitada”).
With regard to claim 1, the claim is drawn to an image processing apparatus (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 1-2 and etc, disclose the MFP 101) comprising:
at least one memory storing instructions (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 2, disclose the ROM 112, RAM 113 and storage 114)); and
at least one processor (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 2, disclose the CPU 111) executing the instructions causing the image processing apparatus to:
transmit image data obtained by scanning a document to an external server, wherein information corresponding to the image data transmitted to the external server is displayed on a display of a client terminal capable of communicating with the external server (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 6, step S904, para. 54 and etc., disclose that “[0056] In step S904, the CPU 111 controls the communication unit 126 to perform transmission processing for posting the image data to the message application server 300 by HTTP communication…”, and further in para. 61, disclose that “[0061] In step S906, the CPU 301 of the message application server 300 transmits a result corresponding to whether the post is successful to the MFP 101 as HTTP communication response information. If the post is successful, the CPU 111 of the MFP 101 may display a notification that the post is successful on the operation unit 116. If the post is failed, the CPU 111 of the MFP 101 may display a notification that the post is failed on the operation unit 116. Alternatively, the CPU 111 may display the notification that the post is failed only when the post is failed, without displaying a notification when the post is successful.…”);
display a list in which logs of a plurality of jobs including a log of a job that transmits the image data to the external server are displayed (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 18, para. 128-130 and etc., disclose that “[0128] FIG. 18 illustrates a correspondence table including categories for the message application server 300 to handle, names, icon images, and sources for the MFP 101 to obtain the icon images from…”);
receive selection of a log of a job that transmits the image data to the external server in the list; and receive an instruction to delete information corresponding to the image data that has been transmitted to the external server in a job corresponding to the selected log, wherein information corresponding to the image data displayed on a display of the client terminal is deleted (see the teachings of Kitada supplemented below).
The teachings of Tsukada do not explicitly disclose the aspect(s) relating to “receive selection of a log of a job that transmits the image data to the external server in the list; and receive an instruction to delete information corresponding to the image data that has been transmitted to the external server in a job corresponding to the selected log, wherein information corresponding to the image data displayed on a display of the client terminal is deleted”.
However, Kitada discloses an analogous invention relates to an image processing device and method for modifying images on an image processing device including a scanner configured to produce an image of at least one document having multiple pages (see Kitada, i.e. abstract and etc.). More specifically, in Kitada, i.e. in fig. 6, para. 56 and etc., disclose that “[0056] FIG. 6 shows an illustration of a pop-up box 70 that is displayed when the delete button 50, shown in FIG. 5, is selected. If the user does not desire the currently displayed page to be included in the final job set, the current page may be deleted with the delete function initiated by selecting the delete button 50. When the delete function is used, the current page preferably is not generated in the final document. Once the delete button 50 is selected, the pop-up window shown in FIG. 6 is displayed. The user may select either the ok button 71 to agree with the deletion or the cancel button 72 which returns the user back to the preview window. If the user presses the ok button 71 the current page is deleted and the preview window displays the next page of the scan. If the deleted page is the last page in the total scan, the next image shown in the preview window is the previous image in the scan…” (also see fig. 22A, para. 108 and etc.); in addition, in fig. 2A, para. 45 and etc., disclose the job log tab 16, and “the job log tab 16 allows the user to see a list of previously performed scan jobs on the MFD 1”.
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 Tsukada to include the limitation(s) discussed and also taught by Kitada, 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/document 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 Tsukada by the teachings of Kitada, and to incorporate the limitation(s) discussed and also taught by Kitada, thereby providing “… a user interface configured to display a selectable graphical indicia corresponding to at least one operation for modifying the preview image or the at least one image of the scanned document” (see Kitada, i.e. abstract and etc.).
With regard to claim 10, the claim is drawn to the image processing apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the image data is transmitted to the external server via a cooperative server with which the image processing apparatus can communicate (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 6, para. 53 and etc., disclose that “[0053] FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of a sequence where the MFP 101 scans a document and transmits the generated. file to the message application server 300…”).
With regard to claim 11, the claim is drawn to the image processing apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein a log of a job in which the image data has been transmitted to the external server is managed by the external server in association with an identifier that identifies the information displayed on a display of the client terminal, and wherein in a case where an instruction to delete the information is received, a request to delete the information is transmitted to the external server together with the identifier managed in association with the information (see Tsukada, i.e. in para. 150 and etc., disclose that “[0150] FIG. 16 is a diagram illustrating an example of association between Ms and token information. In the table of FIG. 16, user IDs or device IDs are registered in association with authorization information (token information). This table is stored in an HDD 405 of the bat server 400. Here, the user IDs and the device IDs are information stored in MFPs 101. A user ID is user identification information set for each user who uses an MFP 101. A device ID is device identification information set for each MFP. The user IDs are identification information set by the users in generating a user account for logging in to the MFPs 101. The device IDs are identification information specific to the respective MFPs 101, set upon factory shipment…”; in addition, in Kitada, i.e. in fig. 22A, para. 108 and etc., disclose that “[0108] FIG. 22A illustrates this process beginning with step 540 in which the delete button is pressed by the user. Once the MFD 1 receives a command from the user to delete the preview image, the delete request and an upload.xml file are uploaded to the GlobalScan server 5 in step 542. Once the GlobalScan server 5 receives the delete request and the upload.xml file, the GlobalScan server 5 marks the scanned image for deletion and returns a response XML data including the next preview image and a Job ID in step 544. Once the MFD 1 has received the next preview image, the next preview image is displayed on the preview window 51 in step 546…”).
With regard to claim 12, the claim is drawn to the image processing apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the external server is a server that provides a chat service in which a message transmitted to the external server is displayed in a talk room displayed on a display of the client terminal (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 11, 14, 15, para. 86-88 and etc., disclose that “[0086] FIGS. 14 and 15 are diagrams illustrating an example of screen transitions in the scan to chat processing. The screens illustrated in FIGS. 14 and 15 are displayed on the touch panel 601 of the operation unit 116. A scan to chat screen is displayed on the touch panel 601 of the operation unit 116 if the scan to chat button 602 displayed on the home screen 608 is selected. [0087] The button icon to be displayed varies depending on the settings I/F the scan to chat button. If only application service information about the transmission destination is registered, a scan to chat button 708 is displayed on a home screen 704. [0088] If the scan to chat button 708 is selected, an organization selection screen 712 is displayed on the touch panel 601 of the operation unit 116. The organization selection screen 712 is a screen for the user to select an organization to be included in the service registered in association with the scan to chat button 708…”).
With regard to claim 13, the claim is drawn to a control method of an image processing apparatus (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 1-2, para. 1 and etc, disclose the MFP 101, and the control method), the method comprising:
transmitting image data obtained by scanning a document to an external server, wherein information corresponding to the image data transmitted to the external server is displayed on a display of a client terminal capable of communicating with the external server (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 6, step S904, para. 54 and etc., disclose that “[0056] In step S904, the CPU 111 controls the communication unit 126 to perform transmission processing for posting the image data to the message application server 300 by HTTP communication…”, and further in para. 61, disclose that “[0061] In step S906, the CPU 301 of the message application server 300 transmits a result corresponding to whether the post is successful to the MFP 101 as HTTP communication response information. If the post is successful, the CPU 111 of the MFP 101 may display a notification that the post is successful on the operation unit 116. If the post is failed, the CPU 111 of the MFP 101 may display a notification that the post is failed on the operation unit 116. Alternatively, the CPU 111 may display the notification that the post is failed only when the post is failed, without displaying a notification when the post is successful.…”);
displaying a list in which logs of a plurality of jobs including a log of a job that transmits the image data to the external server are displayed (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 18, para. 128-130 and etc., disclose that “[0128] FIG. 18 illustrates a correspondence table including categories for the message application server 300 to handle, names, icon images, and sources for the MFP 101 to obtain the icon images from…”);
receiving selection of a log of a job that transmits the image data to the external server in the list; and receiving an instruction to delete information corresponding to the image data that has been transmitted to the external server in a job corresponding to the selected log, wherein information corresponding to the image data displayed on a display of the client terminal is deleted (see the teachings of Kitada supplemented below).
The teachings of Tsukada do not explicitly disclose the aspect(s) relating to “receive selection of a log of a job that transmits the image data to the external server in the list; and receive an instruction to delete information corresponding to the image data that has been transmitted to the external server in a job corresponding to the selected log, wherein information corresponding to the image data displayed on a display of the client terminal is deleted”.
However, Kitada discloses an analogous invention relates to an image processing device and method for modifying images on an image processing device including a scanner configured to produce an image of at least one document having multiple pages (see Kitada, i.e. abstract and etc.). More specifically, in Kitada, i.e. in fig. 6, para. 56 and etc., disclose that “[0056] FIG. 6 shows an illustration of a pop-up box 70 that is displayed when the delete button 50, shown in FIG. 5, is selected. If the user does not desire the currently displayed page to be included in the final job set, the current page may be deleted with the delete function initiated by selecting the delete button 50. When the delete function is used, the current page preferably is not generated in the final document. Once the delete button 50 is selected, the pop-up window shown in FIG. 6 is displayed. The user may select either the ok button 71 to agree with the deletion or the cancel button 72 which returns the user back to the preview window. If the user presses the ok button 71 the current page is deleted and the preview window displays the next page of the scan. If the deleted page is the last page in the total scan, the next image shown in the preview window is the previous image in the scan…” (also see fig. 22A, para. 108 and etc.); in addition, in fig. 2A, para. 45 and etc., disclose the job log tab 16, and “the job log tab 16 allows the user to see a list of previously performed scan jobs on the MFD 1”.
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 Tsukada to include the limitation(s) discussed and also taught by Kitada, 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/document 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 Tsukada by the teachings of Kitada, and to incorporate the limitation(s) discussed and also taught by Kitada, thereby providing “… a user interface configured to display a selectable graphical indicia corresponding to at least one operation for modifying the preview image or the at least one image of the scanned document” (see Kitada, i.e. abstract and etc.).
With regard to claim 14, the claim is drawn to a non-transitory storage medium storing a control program of an image processing apparatus causing a computer to perform each step of a control method of the image processing apparatus (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 1-2, para. 1, 165 and etc, disclose the MFP 101, the control method and the computer readable storage medium and etc.), the method comprising:
transmitting image data obtained by scanning a document to an external server, wherein information corresponding to the image data transmitted to the external server is displayed on a display of a client terminal capable of communicating with the external server (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 6, step S904, para. 54 and etc., disclose that “[0056] In step S904, the CPU 111 controls the communication unit 126 to perform transmission processing for posting the image data to the message application server 300 by HTTP communication…”, and further in para. 61, disclose that “[0061] In step S906, the CPU 301 of the message application server 300 transmits a result corresponding to whether the post is successful to the MFP 101 as HTTP communication response information. If the post is successful, the CPU 111 of the MFP 101 may display a notification that the post is successful on the operation unit 116. If the post is failed, the CPU 111 of the MFP 101 may display a notification that the post is failed on the operation unit 116. Alternatively, the CPU 111 may display the notification that the post is failed only when the post is failed, without displaying a notification when the post is successful.…”);
displaying a list in which logs of a plurality of jobs including a log of a job that transmits the image data to the external server are displayed (see Tsukada, i.e. in fig. 18, para. 128-130 and etc., disclose that “[0128] FIG. 18 illustrates a correspondence table including categories for the message application server 300 to handle, names, icon images, and sources for the MFP 101 to obtain the icon images from…”);
receiving selection of a log of a job that transmits the image data to the external server in the list; and receiving an instruction to delete information corresponding to the image data that has been transmitted to the external server in a job corresponding to the selected log, wherein information corresponding to the image data displayed on a display of the client terminal is deleted (see the teachings of Kitada supplemented below).
The teachings of Tsukada do not explicitly disclose the aspect(s) relating to “receive selection of a log of a job that transmits the image data to the external server in the list; and receive an instruction to delete information corresponding to the image data that has been transmitted to the external server in a job corresponding to the selected log, wherein information corresponding to the image data displayed on a display of the client terminal is deleted”.
However, Kitada discloses an analogous invention relates to an image processing device and method for modifying images on an image processing device including a scanner configured to produce an image of at least one document having multiple pages (see Kitada, i.e. abstract and etc.). More specifically, in Kitada, i.e. in fig. 6, para. 56 and etc., disclose that “[0056] FIG. 6 shows an illustration of a pop-up box 70 that is displayed when the delete button 50, shown in FIG. 5, is selected. If the user does not desire the currently displayed page to be included in the final job set, the current page may be deleted with the delete function initiated by selecting the delete button 50. When the delete function is used, the current page preferably is not generated in the final document. Once the delete button 50 is selected, the pop-up window shown in FIG. 6 is displayed. The user may select either the ok button 71 to agree with the deletion or the cancel button 72 which returns the user back to the preview window. If the user presses the ok button 71 the current page is deleted and the preview window displays the next page of the scan. If the deleted page is the last page in the total scan, the next image shown in the preview window is the previous image in the scan…” (also see fig. 22A, para. 108 and etc.); in addition, in fig. 2A, para. 45 and etc., disclose the job log tab 16, and “the job log tab 16 allows the user to see a list of previously performed scan jobs on the MFD 1”.
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 Tsukada to include the limitation(s) discussed and also taught by Kitada, 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/document 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 Tsukada by the teachings of Kitada, and to incorporate the limitation(s) discussed and also taught by Kitada, thereby providing “… a user interface configured to display a selectable graphical indicia corresponding to at least one operation for modifying the preview image or the at least one image of the scanned document” (see Kitada, i.e. abstract and etc.).
Allowable Subject Matter
With regard to Claim 2-9, claims are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and overcoming the corresponding rejections and/or objection (if any) set forth in the Office Action above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regard to claim 2, the closest prior arts of record, Tsukada and Kitada, do not disclose or suggest, among the other limitations, the additional required limitation of “the image processing apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein on a screen on which the list is displayed, in a case where the external server can delete information corresponding to the image data that has been transmitted to the external server in a job corresponding to the selected log, a button for receiving the deletion instruction is displayed in a selectable state”. These additional features in combination with all the other features required in the claimed invention, are neither taught nor suggested by Tsukada and Kitada.
With regard to claims 3-7, the claims are depending directly or indirectly from the independent Claim 2, each encompasses the required limitations recited in the independent claim discussed above.
With regard to claim 8, the closest prior arts of record, Tsukada and Kitada, do not disclose or suggest, among the other limitations, the additional required limitation of “the image processing apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein in a case where the information cannot be deleted by the external server, a message indicating that the information is erroneous is transmitted to the external server”. These additional features in combination with all the other features required in the claimed invention, are neither taught nor suggested by Tsukada and Kitada.
With regard to claim 9, the closest prior arts of record, Tsukada and Kitada, do not disclose or suggest, among the other limitations, the additional required limitation of “the image processing apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein in a case where the information can be deleted by the external server and the image data has already been downloaded in the client terminal based on the information, a message indicating that the information is erroneous is transmitted to the external server”. These additional features in combination with all the other features required in the claimed invention, are neither taught nor suggested by Tsukada and Kitada.
Therefore, claim 2-9 are objected to.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ushinohama et al. (U.S. Pat/Pub No. 200) disclose an invention relates to image processing apparatus that communicate with the chat server which controls displaying of received image data in a chat server which controls displaying of the received image data (i.e. see Ushinohama, i.e. abstract, para. 6 and etc.).
The Art Unit (or Workgroup) location of your application in the USPTO has changed. To aid in correlating any papers for this application, all further correspondence regarding this application should be directed to Art Unit 2681.
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