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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 2, filed 7/31/2026, with respect to specification objection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the specification has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed page 7 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The 101 rejection of claims 12-15 is maintained based on the previous rationale. It is suggested to add the phrase “non-transitory” to these claims in order to overcome the rejection.
Applicant's arguments filed pages 7-9 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The arguments state that the applied references do not disclose the features of “determine a mapping between the first attributes in the job ticket and second attributes in a target protocol”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees with this assertion and will briefly explain why below.
Regarding the contended limitation, this claimed feature is interpreted as mapping first attributes, such as print settings, within a first language to the same settings but converted into another output language. The other output language is considered as the target protocol that is used by the printer for output. The primary reference discloses evaluating the lines of the original language associated with the print settings and converting these lines into another language corresponding to the equivalent or same print settings, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30]. This is an example of mapping settings in one language into another language reflecting the same print settings. The print settings in another language are considered as the second attributes. Therefore, based on these features, the mapping of a print settings from one language to reflect the print settings into another language performs both the determination of mapping and conversion steps of the claims.
Thus, based on the above, the rejection of the claims is maintained below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the computer-readable medium can be considered as both transitory and non-transitory. Based on the medium being considered as transitory, the claim is considered as a signal and outside of the four statutory categories.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 11 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1 and/or a2) as being anticipated by Pangrazio (US Pub 2012/0092688).
Re claim 1: Pangrazio discloses a system comprising:
at least one physical memory device to store a print workflow manager (e.g. the server hosts software that is used to convert print job data into another format, which is taught in ¶ [48]-[50], [52] and [53].); and
[0048] The computerized device 400 may receive the print job from the printer 300, the computerized device 402 or from another computerized device 400 that may host a document repository service. Any of these devices can perform a preliminary or complete comparison to determine whether the file format and/or the ticketing type of the print job match one of many acceptable format types and acceptable ticketing types acceptable to the printing device. If the file format and/or the ticketing type of the print job match does not one of many acceptable format types and acceptable ticketing types, the processor 424 converts the file format and/or the ticketing type of the print job into one of the acceptable format types and the acceptable ticketing types to produce a converted print job. The computerized device 400 sends the converted print job to the printing device through the communications port 426 over the computerized network 500 to allow the printing device 300 to print the converted print job.
[0049] Therefore, as shown above, the embodiments herein provide a unique use of on-printer application access for the purpose of converting a print job ticket from one format to another using a web or cloud hosted service. In some embodiments, there is no need for a computer workstation or centralized software, since all operations can be performed through the printing device user interface and web or cloud hosted services.
[0050] The embodiments herein are platform independent and therefore, regardless of the device manufacturer, the hosted application to convert job tickets described herein is a powerful tool when using non-conforming printing devices with restrictive systems.
[0052] Additionally, the embodiments herein do not require software to be installed locally because the embodiments herein are hosted in the web or cloud architecture and are accessible via the printing device user interface.
[0053] Many computerized devices are discussed above. Computerized devices that include chip-based central processing units (CPU's), input/output devices (including graphic user interfaces (GUI), memories, comparators, processors, etc. are well-known and readily available devices produced by manufacturers such as Dell Computers, Round Rock Tex., USA and Apple Computer Co., Cupertino Calif., USA. Such computerized devices commonly include input/output devices, power supplies, processors, electronic storage memories, wiring, etc., the details of which are omitted herefrom to allow the reader to focus on the salient aspects of the embodiments described herein. Similarly, scanners and other similar peripheral equipment are available from Xerox Corporation, Norwalk, Conn., USA and the details of such devices are not discussed herein for purposes of brevity and reader focus.
one or more processors coupled with the at least one physical memory device to execute the print workflow manager to:
receive a print job (e.g. the computerized device receives a print job, which is taught in ¶ [48] above.);
receive a job ticket including first attributes (e.g. the print job includes a job ticket that includes various attributes about how to output a job, which is taught in ¶ [24] and [25]. The first attributes can be considered the number of copies and finishing of the job.);
[0024] The print job contains one of a plurality of data formats (e.g. Page Description Languages (PDLs)) and one of a plurality of ticketing types that would be generated via a print driver or custom printing application that emits print jobs. Those ordinarily skilled in the art would understand that there is practically an unlimited number of file formats currently in use by different organizations and more are being created. The embodiments herein are not limited to any specific file format type and work with all existing file formats, and will work with formats that are developed in the future.
[0025] The job ticket accompanies the electronic file document to be printed. The job ticket contains instructions as to how the document within the print job is to be handled by the printer. The job ticket may, for example, specify that one or multiple copies of one document is to be printed. Similarly, the job ticket may direct that the document within the print job be finished in some manner (bound, stapled, folded, etc.).
determine a mapping between the first attributes in the job ticket and second attributes in a target protocol (e.g. the system determines whether the job ticket format, including the settings or attributes of number of copies and finishing setting, maps to the language of the printer or needs conversion to another language to be output by the printer. This is explained in ¶ [27]-[30].); and
[0027] In item 102, the printing device or the web service automatically compares a file format and a ticketing type of the print job with acceptable file format types and acceptable ticketing types that are acceptable to the printing device. With embodiments herein, either the printer or the web service (or a combination of the two) can determine whether the file format and/or ticketing type are correct. For example, the printer can perform the full comparison itself, or the printer can perform no comparison (can just automatically send all potential print jobs to the web service). In other embodiments, the printer can perform a preliminary comparison that is based on what device sent the print job to the printer, what device created the print job, what application or driver was used to create the print job, etc. Based on this preliminary comparison, the printer can determine whether to send the print job to the web service to have the web service perform a more complete and more sophisticated comparison to determine whether the print job contains an acceptable file format and ticketing type for the individual printer. If the file format and the ticketing type of the print job match the acceptable format types and the acceptable ticketing types in item 102, the method prints the print job using the printing device in item 110.
[0028] However, if the file format and/or the ticketing type of the print job do not match the acceptable format types and/or the acceptable ticketing types of the printer, the method performs a conversion and printing method 104-110. In this conversion and printing method, the printing device automatically sends the print job to a hosted conversion service in item 104. The hosted conversion service comprises and operates on at least one computerized device that is separate from, but operatively connected to (directly or indirectly connected to) the printing device through a computerized network. The computerized device is operatively connected to a plurality of different printing devices in addition to the printing device.
[0029] In item 106, the computerized device automatically converts the file format and/or the ticketing type of the print job into one of the acceptable format types and/or the acceptable ticketing types to produce a converted print job, which is automatically sent to the printing device.
[0030] To perform the conversion, the embodiments herein maintain a database of which document format types and which ticketing types are acceptable to the printing device that sent the print job. When converting the instructions within the document and job ticket, the embodiments translate the instructions (line by line, in groups, all simultaneously, etc.) from the original document format (language) and job ticket type (language) into instructions matching one of the document formats and job ticket types that it is acceptable to the printing device that sent the print job.
convert the first attributes into the second attributes in the job ticket based on the mapping (e.g. the system discloses conversion of the settings of the job ticket from a first format associated with the original job ticket to a second format associated with second attributes that map to the first attributes in order to output the print job according to the settings in the print job ticket, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.).
Re claim 9: Pangrazio discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising a printer to receive the second attributes (e.g. the printer receives the converted print job that consists of the second attributes of another format associated with the settings of the initial print job, which is taught in ¶ [31].).
[0031] In item 108 of this conversion and printing method, the printing device receives the converted print job from the computerized device over the computerized network. In item 110, the printing device prints the converted print job.
Re claim 11: Pangrazio discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:
receive a print job (e.g. the computerized device receives a print job, which is taught in ¶ [48] above.);
receive a job ticket including first attributes (e.g. the print job includes a job ticket that includes various attributes about how to output a job, which is taught in ¶ [24] and [25] above. The first attributes can be considered the number of copies and finishing of the job.);
determine a mapping between the first attributes in the job ticket and second attributes in a target protocol (e.g. the system determines whether the job ticket format, including the settings or attributes of number of copies and finishing setting, maps to the language of the printer or needs conversion to another language to be output by the printer. This is explained in ¶ [27]-[30] above.); and
convert the first attributes into the second attributes in the job ticket based on the mapping (e.g. the system discloses conversion of the settings of the job ticket from a first format associated with the original job ticket to a second format associated with second attributes that map to the first attributes in order to output the print job according to the settings in the print job ticket, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.).
Re claim 16: Pangrazio a method comprising:
receiving a print job (e.g. the computerized device receives a print job, which is taught in ¶ [48] above.);
receiving a job ticket including first attributes (e.g. the print job includes a job ticket that includes various attributes about how to output a job, which is taught in ¶ [24] and [25] above. The first attributes can be considered the number of copies and finishing of the job.);
determining a mapping between the first attributes in the job ticket and second attributes in a target protocol (e.g. the system determines whether the job ticket format, including the settings or attributes of number of copies and finishing setting, maps to the language of the printer or needs conversion to another language to be output by the printer. This is explained in ¶ [27]-[30] above.); and
converting the first attributes into the second attributes in the job ticket based on the mapping (e.g. the system discloses conversion of the settings of the job ticket from a first format associated with the original job ticket to a second format associated with second attributes that map to the first attributes in order to output the print job according to the settings in the print job ticket, which is taught in ¶ [27]-[30] above.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2-5, 7, 8, 12-15 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pangrazio in view of Sekine (US Pub 2008/0180728)
Re claim 2: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the system of claim 1, wherein determining the mapping comprises examining a list of job attributes and values in the job ticket to determine one more functions to be performed.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein determining the mapping comprises examining a list of job attributes and values in the job ticket to determine one more functions to be performed (e.g. the system discloses determining a mapping between a PDL containing different attributes of a job to another language or format, which is taught in ¶ [42]-[45].).
[0041] FIG. 4 is a block diagram that illustrates a more detailed example of a printing system in which an embodiment of the invention may be implemented. The system shown in FIG. 4 is one example; embodiments of the invention may include more, fewer, or different components than those shown in FIG. 4. One or more of the components shown in FIG. 4 may be implemented within a single executable program, or within multiple separate executable programs. One or more of the components shown in FIG. 4 may be implemented as separate threads of execution of a single process.
[0042] FIG. 4 shows a PDL-to-job ticket conversion table 402, a job ticket translator 408, a printable data generator 410, job ticket data storage 416, and printable data storage 418. PDL-to-job ticket conversion table 402 comprises a PDL control command table 404 and a job ticket command table 406. PDL control command table 404 comprises entries that specify PDL commands, potentially from multiple different PDLs (e.g., PostScript, PCL, etc.). Job ticket command table 402 comprises entries that comprise, in one embodiment of the invention, non-PDL commands that are functionally equivalent to PDL commands in PDL control command table 404. In one embodiment of the invention, PDL-to-job ticket conversion table 402 comprises, for each entry in PDL control command table 404, a mapping from that entry to one or more corresponding entries in job ticket command table 406.
[0043] According to one embodiment of the invention, PDL parser 414 reads or otherwise receives PDL-compliant print stream 424 as input. PDL parser 414 parses the PDL-compliant print stream and provides the parsed stream to PDL interpreter 412. PDL interpreter 412 interprets the PDL print control commands in the stream and provides those commands to job ticket translator 408.
[0044] According to one embodiment of the invention, for each PDL print control command in the stream, job ticket translator 408 looks up, in PDL control command table 404, an entry that specifies that command. For each such entry, job ticket translator 408 follows the mappings between that entry and one or more corresponding entries in job ticket command table 406. For each corresponding entry in job ticket command table 406, job ticket translator 408 reads the functionally equivalent non-PDL command from that entry and writes that functionally equivalent non-PDL command to a job ticket 420, which job ticket translator stores in job ticket data storage 416.
[0045] For example, PDL-compliant print stream 424 might contain PDL commands as follows: [0046] ?&126A [0047] ?&1100X [0048] ?&14H The above commands might functionally represent commands to set the paper size to A4, to set the number of copies to be printed to 100, and to set Tray 2 as the paper input tray for the print job, for example.
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein determining the mapping comprises examining a list of job attributes and values in the job ticket to determine one more functions to be performed, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 3: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the system of claim 2, wherein determining the mapping further comprises identifying a first function to be performed represented by the first attributes.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein determining the mapping further comprises identifying a first function to be performed represented by the first attributes (e.g. when mapping the features from the initial print job to another format, the settings to be mapped are identified, which is taught ¶ [42]-[45] above.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein determining the mapping further comprises identifying a first function to be performed represented by the first attributes, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 4: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the system of claim 3, wherein determining the mapping further comprises searching a mapping database using the first function and determining whether the mapping database includes the mapping of the first function to a corresponding function in the target protocol.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein determining the mapping further comprises searching a mapping database using the first function and determining whether the mapping database includes the mapping of the first function to a corresponding function in the target protocol (e.g. the system checks a table that contains a first function in order to determine an equivalent function to the initial function within the other protocol or format, which is taught in ¶ [42]-[45] above.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein determining the mapping further comprises searching a mapping database using the first function and determining whether the mapping database includes the mapping of the first function to a corresponding function in the target protocol, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 5: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the system of claim 4, wherein the print workflow manager further to select the second attributes upon a determination that the first function corresponds to a function in the target protocol.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein the print workflow manager further to select the second attributes upon a determination that the first function corresponds to a function in the target protocol (e.g. the system checks a table that contains a first function in order to determine an equivalent function to the initial function within the other protocol or format, which is taught in ¶ [42]-[45] above. This allows for a second equivalent function to be selected in order to convert the initial function to another command format.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the print workflow manager further to select the second attributes upon a determination that the first function corresponds to a function in the target protocol, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 7: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the system of claim 4, wherein the print workflow manager further to generate the mapping database.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein the print workflow manager further to generate the mapping database (e.g. the system discloses a program that that are executed to create conversion tables used to determine the mappings between functions, which is taught in ¶ [41]-[45] above.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the print workflow manager further to generate the mapping database, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 8: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the system of claim 4, wherein the mapping database comprises a list of attribute sets in the target protocol associated with each of a plurality of functions in the job ticket.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein the mapping database comprises a list of attribute sets in the target protocol associated with each of a plurality of functions in the job ticket (e.g. the system discloses a table that contains a list of settings or commands associated with settings that corresponds to the print job attributes. The table contains the mappings, which is taught in ¶ [42]-[45] above.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the mapping database comprises a list of attribute sets in the target protocol associated with each of a plurality of functions in the job ticket, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 12: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein determining the mapping comprises examining a list of job attributes and values in the job ticket to determine one more functions to be performed.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein determining the mapping comprises examining a list of job attributes and values in the job ticket to determine one more functions to be performed (e.g. the system discloses determining a mapping between a PDL containing different attributes of a job to another language or format, which is taught in ¶ [42]-[45] above.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein determining the mapping comprises examining a list of job attributes and values in the job ticket to determine one more functions to be performed, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 13: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein determining the mapping further comprises identifying a first function to be performed represented by the first attributes.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein determining the mapping further comprises identifying a first function to be performed represented by the first attributes (e.g. when mapping the features from the initial print job to another format, the settings to be mapped are identified, which is taught ¶ [42]-[45] above.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein determining the mapping further comprises identifying a first function to be performed represented by the first attributes, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 14: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the computer-readable medium of claim 13, wherein determining the mapping further comprises searching a mapping database using the first function and determining whether the mapping database includes the mapping of the first function to a corresponding function in the target protocol.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein determining the mapping further comprises searching a mapping database using the first function and determining whether the mapping database includes the mapping of the first function to a corresponding function in the target protocol (e.g. the system checks a table that contains a first function in order to determine an equivalent function to the initial function within the other protocol or format, which is taught in ¶ [42]-[45] above.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein determining the mapping further comprises searching a mapping database using the first function and determining whether the mapping database includes the mapping of the first function to a corresponding function in the target protocol, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 15: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the computer-readable medium of claim 14, having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors further to select the second attributes upon a determination that the first function corresponds to a function in the target protocol.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors further to select the second attributes upon a determination that the first function corresponds to a function in the target protocol (e.g. the system checks a table that contains a first function in order to determine an equivalent function to the initial function within the other protocol or format, which is taught in ¶ [42]-[45] above. This allows for a second equivalent function to be selected in order to convert the initial function to another command format.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors further to select the second attributes upon a determination that the first function corresponds to a function in the target protocol, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 17: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the method of claim 16, wherein determining the mapping comprises examining a list of job attributes and values in the job ticket to determine one more functions to be performed.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein determining the mapping comprises examining a list of job attributes and values in the job ticket to determine one more functions to be performed (e.g. the system discloses determining a mapping between a PDL containing different attributes of a job to another language or format, which is taught in ¶ [42]-[45] above.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein determining the mapping comprises examining a list of job attributes and values in the job ticket to determine one more functions to be performed, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 18: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the method of claim 17, wherein determining the mapping further comprises identifying a first function to be performed represented by the first attributes.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein determining the mapping further comprises identifying a first function to be performed represented by the first attributes (e.g. when mapping the features from the initial print job to another format, the settings to be mapped are identified, which is taught ¶ [42]-[45] above.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein determining the mapping further comprises identifying a first function to be performed represented by the first attributes, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 19: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the method of claim 18, wherein determining the mapping further comprises searching a mapping database using the first function and determining whether the mapping database includes the mapping of the first function to a corresponding function in the target protocol.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses wherein determining the mapping further comprises searching a mapping database using the first function and determining whether the mapping database includes the mapping of the first function to a corresponding function in the target protocol (e.g. the system checks a table that contains a first function in order to determine an equivalent function to the initial function within the other protocol or format, which is taught in ¶ [42]-[45] above.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein determining the mapping further comprises searching a mapping database using the first function and determining whether the mapping database includes the mapping of the first function to a corresponding function in the target protocol, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Re claim 20: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the method of claim 19, further comprising selecting the second attributes upon a determination that the first function corresponds to a function in the target protocol.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Sekine. Similar to the primary reference, Sekine discloses mapping settings from one format to another (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Sekine discloses further comprising selecting the second attributes upon a determination that the first function corresponds to a function in the target protocol (e.g. the system checks a table that contains a first function in order to determine an equivalent function to the initial function within the other protocol or format, which is taught in ¶ [42]-[45] above. This allows for a second equivalent function to be selected in order to convert the initial function to another command format.).
Therefore, in view of Sekine, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of further comprising selecting the second attributes upon a determination that the first function corresponds to a function in the target protocol, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to provide support for another printer that contains a different print job format, which can improve the printing process by supporting multiple print formats (as stated in Sekine ¶ [02]-[04]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pangrazio, as modified by the features of Sekine, as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Williams (US Pub 2011/0222107).
Re claim 6: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the system of claim 4, wherein the print workflow manager further to generate an error message indicating that the mapping has not been found upon a determination that the first function does not correspond to a function in the target protocol.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Williams. Similar to the primary reference, Williams discloses converting JDF job to a PDL (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Williams discloses wherein the print workflow manager further to generate an error message indicating that the mapping has not been found upon a determination that the first function does not correspond to a function in the target protocol (e.g. the invention discloses detecting if JDF can be mapped using the constraint information within the device postscript table. If the JDF cannot be performed, or invoked, on the printer for output, an error message can be generated, which is taught in ¶ [30] and [31].).
[0030] Printer controller 108 may include JDF job ticket processing component 110 adapted to receive a JDF job ticket 102 from a computing system 150 and adapted to interpret the attributes/elements of the JDF job ticket (e.g., the JDF features and features settings) to generate corresponding device command strings. As generally discussed above, elements or features in a JDF job ticket include a feature name and a setting name for a setting for the named feature. One of the various available settings may be selected as the desired device feature setting name for each element of the job ticket. In general, JDF job ticket processing component 110 is adapted to retrieve each element from the received JDF job ticket 102 and to translate the JDF element into corresponding device command strings (e.g., "device control strings") based on the contents of device PostScript table 120 stored in memory 112. In one exemplary embodiment discussed further herein below, the device PostScript table 120 is implemented as a PostScript dictionary. In such an embodiment, the "translation" is performed by looking up a key value representing a feature name in the PostScript dictionary. The dictionary entry so located provides the device control string/strings associated with that entry (e.g., derived from the values of the located entry). The device command strings so generated by the translation (e.g., identified by the PostScript dictionary lookup) are then applied to print job processing component 114 within print controller 108 along with the device command strings (e.g., "page image data") embodied in print job data 104. Print job processing component 114 processes all such device command strings (e.g., the device control strings and the page image data) to generate the desired page images for application to marking engine 116. Further, print job processing component 114 is adapted to assure proper ordering/sequencing of the device command strings with respect to one another and with respect to the print job data 104 to generate the proper output as defined by the job ticket 102 and the print job data 104.
[0031] In one exemplary embodiment, printer controller 108 also includes constraint information 122 stored in memory 112. JDF job ticket processing component 110 may be further adapted to utilize constraint information 122 to determine whether any specified combination of JDF elements in job ticket 102 gives rise to conflicts such that the combination of JDF elements is incapable of invocation on the printing system 106. Thus, constraint information 122 may be used by JDF job ticket processing component 110 to validate the elements of the JDF job ticket 102. If the validation processing of JDF job ticket processing component 110 detects a conflict in the specified JDF elements of the JDF job ticket 102, an error signal may be generated to indicate a reason that the provided print job cannot be successfully processed. Such an error signal may include, for example, returning an error message to the computing system 150 or, for example, generating and printing an error indicator page describing the nature of the error/conflict encountered. In one exemplary embodiment discussed further herein below, the constraint information is implemented as a PostScript dictionary (e.g., as a portion of the device PostScript table 120 or as a separate dictionary data structure). In such an embodiment one or more key values representing a feature name and/or feature setting names are used to locate entries of the dictionary that specify constraints related to feature and setting names. The located constraint information entry is then used to determine of other feature or setting names specified in the job ticket that create a conflict for the printing system 106. More generally, constraint information 112 identifies mutually exclusive groups of JDF feature names and JDF feature setting names.
Therefore, in view of Williams, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the print workflow manager further to generate an error message indicating that the mapping has not been found upon a determination that the first function does not correspond to a function in the target protocol, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, as modified by Sekine, in order to convert JDF job ticket information into another print language format using a mapping table, which can improve processing of JDF job tickets (as stated in Williams ¶ [16]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pangrazio in view of Williams.
Re claim 10: However, Pangrazio fails to specifically teach the features of the system of claim 1, wherein the job ticket comprises a Job Definition Format (JDF) job ticket and the target protocol comprises a printer format language.
However, this is well known in the art as evidenced by Williams. Similar to the primary reference, Williams discloses converting JDF job to a PDL (same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the problem).
Williams discloses wherein the job ticket comprises a Job Definition Format (JDF) job ticket and the target protocol comprises a printer format language (e.g. the system discloses converting JDF into a postscript language for output on the printer, which is taught in ¶ [17].).
[0017] One aspect hereof provides for a method for printing a print job on a printing system. The method comprises providing a printer description file for the printing system. The printer description file including a plurality of entries each entry associating a device feature name and a device feature setting name and a corresponding device command string. The method further comprises providing a mapping file having a plurality of entries wherein each entry maps one or more Job Definition Format (JDF) feature names to one or more device feature names and to one or more device feature setting names and generating, in a computing system, a device capability file based on the printer description file and on the mapping file. The device capability file associating each of a plurality of Job Definition Format (JDF) feature names with a corresponding one or more device feature setting names. The method also comprises generating a device PostScript table based on the printer description file and the mapping file. The device PostScript table associating one or more JDF feature names with one or more device feature setting names and with one or more device command strings corresponding to the one or more device feature setting names. The method further comprises generating, in the computing system, a JDF job ticket for a print job based on the device capability file and transmitting the JDF job ticket and print job data associated with the print job from the computing system to the printing system. The method also comprises translating, within the printing system, entries of the JDF job ticket into corresponding device command strings based on entries in the device PostScript table and executing, within the printing system, the corresponding device command strings and the print job data to generate printed output for the print job.
Therefore, in view of Williams, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have the feature of wherein the job ticket comprises a Job Definition Format (JDF) job ticket and the target protocol comprises a printer format language, incorporated in the device of Pangrazio, in order to convert JDF job ticket information into another print language format using a mapping table, which can improve processing of JDF job tickets (as stated in Williams ¶ [16]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gaertner discloses converting JDF to PDL.
Morales discloses direct mapping from one language to another.
Matsuo discloses a conversion mapping table.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAD S DICKERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1351. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM EST..
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, Abderrahim Merouan can be reached at 571-270-5254. 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.
/CHAD DICKERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
