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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed on 2 December, 2025.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species 2 (claims 4 - 7) in the reply filed on 23 July, 2026 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 30 September, 2024, 16 December, 2024, 17 January, 2025, and 5 May, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 23 July, 2026 has been entered.
The amendment of claim 5 has been acknowledged.
The addition of new claims 10 - 17 has been acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 1, 4, 8 – 10, and 14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Japanese Patent Publication JP2013167996A Sogo et al (employed using the provided machine translation, hereinafter “Sogo”).
Regarding claim 1, Sogo teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing an information editing program that enables sharing of information among a first terminal and a second terminal and editing of the information in each of the first terminal and the second terminal (¶ 0023: The computer 10 is connected to an external storage device 40 such as a hard disk drive (HDD). The external storage device 40 stores a program 41 executed by the computer 10. The computer 10 and the external storage device 40 constitute a message creation support device 50.; ¶ 0025: A user who uses the message creation support device 50 can create a message to which another user is a transmission destination using the client terminal 20), the information editing program causing a computer to execute:
storing a state of information entered or edited on the first terminal as a first state (¶ 0067: Here, it is assumed that the first user has already sent the first message with the first document attached to the second user. (Emphasis added); Examiner’s note: The transmitted first document is understood to be the information’s first state.);
subsequent to storing the information in the first state (¶ 0067: That is, the first and second messages are stored in the message storage unit 44, and the first document is stored in the document storage unit 45.), obtaining a state of the information after editing as a second state in response to the information having been edited on the first terminal (¶ 0068: First, the message creating unit 51 creates a third message as a reply to the above-described second message in response to the operation of the first user on the client terminal 20 (step S1). In this case, the first user uses, for example, the second document, which is a modification of the first document, with reference to the comment of the second user (comment for the first document) included in the second message. It can be attached to the message.);
comparing the information in the second state and the information in the first state (¶ 0073: The document difference generation unit 54 is a difference between the first document attached to the first message (the first document stored in the document storage unit 45) and the second document attached to the third message.);
extracting change data based on a result of the comparison, the change data representing a changed portion that has been changed from the information in the first state (¶ 0073: The difference generated by the document difference generation unit 54 includes the contents of all the range changes in the revision from the first document to the second document.; ¶ 0078: In addition, the document difference processing unit 55 described above converts the difference (changed content) of the interest range in the first document into, for example, a form having high readability for the main reply destination user.); and
notifying the second terminal of the changed portion by including the change data in a message, the second terminal being different from the first terminal (¶ 0079: The third message to which the difference processed by the document difference processing unit 55 is added is transmitted from the client terminal 20 used by the first user to the message creation support apparatus 50; ¶ 0080: The message reception unit 56 receives the third message (third message to which the processed difference is added) transmitted by the client terminal 20 (step S7). A second document is attached to the third message received by the message receiving unit 56.; ¶ 0082: The message transmission unit 58 transmits the third message received by the message reception unit 56 to the second user as the transmission destination of the third message (step S9).).
Regarding claim 4, Sogo teaches the information editing program according to claim 1.
Additionally, Sogo teaches, wherein
the extracting the change data includes specifying a specific portion and generating a partial image (¶ 0078: Specifically, even if it is converted to a character string (fixed form) such as “The two lines starting with xxx have been changed,” which represents the gist of the difference in the range of interest (change content) in the first document The document may be converted into a format in which the before-changed document and the after-changed document are arranged side by side and the addition / deletion / replacement portions of each other are presented (visualized) side by side.), the specific portion being the changed portion of the information in the second state that has changed compared to the information in the first state (¶ 0078: In addition, the document difference processing unit 55 described above converts the difference (changed content) of the interest range in the first document into, for example, a form having high readability for the main reply destination user.), the partial image representing a display state of an image including the specific portion and a certain area surrounding the specific portion (¶ 0078: The document may be converted into a format in which the before-changed document and the after-changed document are arranged side by side and the addition / deletion / replacement portions of each other are presented (visualized) side by side.),
the change data included in the message includes the partial image (¶ 0078: Specifically, even if it is converted to a character string (fixed form) such as “The two lines starting with xxx have been changed,” which represents the gist of the difference in the range of interest (change content) in the first document The document may be converted into a format in which the before-changed document and the after-changed document are arranged side by side and the addition / deletion / replacement portions of each other are presented (visualized) side by side.; Examiner’s note: Sogo discloses providing a visual comparison of the document which indicates the changes as well as a character string that describes the changes between the document. These in combination teach the limitation of a partial image (side by side visual of the documents) as well as the specifying of the specific portion of changed data.).
The rejection of manufacture claim 1 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 8 while noting that the rejection above cites to both manufacture and device disclosures.
For the device limitations of claim 8 see Sogo’s teaching on:
An information system comprising:
A server (¶ 0021: FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a hardware configuration of a client-server system including a message creation support device according to the embodiment.);
A first terminal and a second terminal connected to each other via the server (¶ 0022: The client-server system of FIG. 1 mainly includes a computer 10 and a plurality of client terminals (user terminals) 20 used by a plurality of users.),
The information editing system enabling sharing of information among the first terminal and the second terminal and editing of the information in each of the first terminal and the second terminal (¶ 0023: The computer 10 is connected to an external storage device 40 such as a hard disk drive (HDD). The external storage device 40 stores a program 41 executed by the computer 10. The computer 10 and the external storage device 40 constitute a message creation support device 50.; ¶ 0025: A user who uses the message creation support device 50 can create a message to which another user is a transmission destination using the client terminal 20)…
The rejection of manufacture claim 1 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 9 while noting that the rejection above cites to both manufacture and device disclosures.
The rejection of manufacture claim 4 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 10 while noting that the rejection above cites to both manufacture and device disclosures.
The rejection of manufacture claim 4 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 14 while noting that the rejection above cites to both manufacture and device disclosures.
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.
Claims 5 – 7, 11 – 13, and 15 - 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Japanese Patent Publication JP2013167996A Sogo et al (employed using the provided machine translation, hereinafter “Sogo”) in view of Sternby et al (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0108004 A1, hereinafter “Sternby”).
Regarding claim 5, Sogo teaches the information editing program according to claim 4.
Additionally Sogo teaches in a case
(¶ 0076: Next, the document difference processing unit 55 processes the difference generated by the document difference generation unit 55 based on the interest range in the first document described above (step S6).)
the change data included in the message includes a character string (¶ 0078: Specifically, even if it is converted to a character string (fixed form) such as “The two lines starting with xxx have been changed,” which represents the gist of the difference in the range of interest (change content) in the first document)
Sogo does not explicitly teach wherein the first terminal and the second terminal allow for information entry through stroke drawing, a portion entered by stroke drawing, and the extracting the change data includes reading the portion entered by stroke drawing by optical character recognition to obtain a character code.
However, Sternby does teach wherein the first terminal and the second terminal allow for information entry through stroke drawing (¶ 0016: Described in detail below is a linguistically aided auto-commit system for handwriting recognition user interfaces (Uls).; Figure 3A – 3D; ¶ 0027: The process begins at block 205 where the user interface receives a single character input from a user. As explained in further detail below, the user can create the single character input through one or a series of strokes or input features (e.g., using a finger and/or a stylus on a touch screen interface).),
a portion entered by stroke drawing, and reading the portion entered by stroke drawing by optical character recognition to obtain a character code (¶ 0027: At block 210, the process 200 performs character recognition on the input character from block 205. Character recognition can take many forms such as, for example, comparing a best match between one or more strokes/gestures input at a touch-sensitive input device to a database of recognized characters.), and
a character string based on the character code (¶ 0027: At block 215, after finding a best match, the process 200 adds the character to a temporary editable character buffer, which may be presented to the user.; ¶ 0028: As a result, a user can continually enter characters without spaces, and the system can automatically parse words from the string of input characters, as described herein.).
Sternby is considered to be analogous art as it pertains to reading and analyzing user inputs on transmission devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the message generation support device (as taught by Sogo) and the text/character input system (as taught by Sternby) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation for this combination of references would be the system of Sternby teaches utilizing linguistic tools with an intermediary buffer to allow the system to use a “history” of characters input by the user to increase the speed and accuracy of handwritten characters input into the system (See ¶ 0018).
This motivation for the combination of Sogo and Sternby is supported by KSR exemplary rationale (G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. MPEP 2141 (III).
Regarding claim 6, the Sogo and Sternby combination teaches the information editing program according to claim 5.
Additionally, Sternby teaches wherein
in a case where the changed portion of the information in the second state that has changed compared to the information in the first state is a partially deleted portion (¶ 0009: According to this, it is possible to easily grasp the part added, deleted or replaced between the two documents.), the extracting the change data includes generating a partially deleted portion image, the partially deleted portion representing a partial change of the information performed by partial deletion, the partially deleted portion image representing a display state of the entire information in the second state to be displayed in the second terminal (¶ 0078: The document may be converted into a format in which the before-changed document and the after-changed document are arranged side by side and the addition / deletion / replacement portions of each other are presented (visualized) side by side.), and
the change data included in the message includes the partially deleted portion image and a partial deletion report (¶ 0078: Specifically, even if it is converted to a character string (fixed form) such as “The two lines starting with xxx have been changed,” which represents the gist of the difference in the range of interest (change content) in the first document the document may be converted into a format in which the before-changed document and the after-changed document are arranged side by side and the addition / deletion / replacement portions of each other are presented (visualized) side by side.).
Sternby is considered to be analogous art as it pertains to reading and analyzing user inputs on transmission devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the message generation support device (as taught by Sogo) and the text/character input system (as taught by Sternby) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation for this combination of references would be the system of Sternby teaches utilizing linguistic tools with an intermediary buffer to allow the system to use a “history” of characters input by the user to increase the speed and accuracy of handwritten characters input into the system (See ¶ 0018).
Regarding claim 7, the Sogo and Sternby combination teaches the information editing program according to claim 5.
Additionally, Sogo teaches wherein
(¶ 0076: Next, the document difference processing unit 55 processes the difference generated by the document difference generation unit 55 based on the interest range in the first document described above (step S6).) is a still image or a moving image (¶ 0068: First, the message creating unit 51 creates a third message as a reply to the above-described second message in response to the operation of the first user on the client terminal 20 (step S1). In this case, the first user uses, for example, the second document, which is a modification of the first document, with reference to the comment of the second user (comment for the first document) included in the second message. It can be attached to the message.; Examiner’s note: Under broadest reasonable interpretation, the examiner is interpreting the edited text information which has been placed in the document to be a still image as text within a document on the devices is understood to be a collection of image pixels. There is no definition or bounds given for “image” that would exclude the text from reading on this limitation.), the extracting the change data includes obtaining data corresponding to the still image or the moving image (¶ 0073: The difference generated by the document difference generation unit 54 includes the contents of all the range changes in the revision from the first document to the second document.; ¶ 0078: In addition, the document difference processing unit 55 described above converts the difference (changed content) of the interest range in the first document into, for example, a form having high readability for the main reply destination user.), and
the change data included in the message includes the data corresponding to the still image or the moving image (¶ 0079: The third message to which the difference processed by the document difference processing unit 55 is added is transmitted from the client terminal 20 used by the first user to the message creation support apparatus 50; ¶ 0080: The message reception unit 56 receives the third message (third message to which the processed difference is added) transmitted by the client terminal 20 (step S7). A second document is attached to the third message received by the message receiving unit 56.; ¶ 0082: The message transmission unit 58 transmits the third message received by the message reception unit 56 to the second user as the transmission destination of the third message (step S9).).
Additionally, Sternby teaches a still image or a moving image (¶ 0027: The process begins at block 205 where the user interface receives a single character input from a user. As explained in further detail below, the user can create the single character input through one or a series of strokes or input features (e.g., using a finger and/or a stylus on a touch screen interface; Examiner’s note: The examiner is interpreting a series of strokes which generates writing on the screen to be a still image as it is a collection image pixels that later become text recognized.).
Sternby is considered to be analogous art as it pertains to reading and analyzing user inputs on transmission devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the message generation support device (as taught by Sogo) and the text/character input system (as taught by Sternby) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation for this combination of references would be the system of Sternby teaches utilizing linguistic tools with an intermediary buffer to allow the system to use a “history” of characters input by the user to increase the speed and accuracy of handwritten characters input into the system (See ¶ 0018).
The rejection of manufacture claim 5 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 11 while noting that the rejection above cites to both manufacture and device disclosures.
The rejection of manufacture claim 6 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 12 while noting that the rejection above cites to both manufacture and device disclosures.
The rejection of manufacture claim 7 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 13 while noting that the rejection above cites to both manufacture and device disclosures.
The rejection of manufacture claim 5 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 15 while noting that the rejection above cites to both manufacture and device disclosures.
The rejection of manufacture claim 6 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 16 while noting that the rejection above cites to both manufacture and device disclosures.
The rejection of manufacture claim 7 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of device claim 17 while noting that the rejection above cites to both manufacture and device disclosures.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yukihisa et al (Japanese Patent Publication JP2016192060A employed using the provided machine translation) teaches a system for determining input writing characteristics that correspond to images or characters, performing character recognition, and storing the determined information to a character string.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to whose telephone number is (703)756-4573. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:00 EST, off Every Other Friday.
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, Matthew Bella can be reached at (571) 272-7778. 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.
/ANDREW B. JONES/Examiner, Art Unit 2667
Prosecution Insights