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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/21/2024 and 04/15/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-9 are pending in this application.
Oath/Declaration
The receipt of Oath/Declaration is acknowledged.
Drawings
6. The receipt of Drawings is acknowledged.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
7. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
8. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
9. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
an acquisition unit configured to acquire capability information from a printer in claim 9 (See Applicant’s. Spec. Para. [0119], [0199], [0220], [0246], Applicant’s Dwg. Fig. 1, Workflow Processing Unit 112b).
a determination unit configured to determine whether to allow image rotation through a function provided by an operating system of the information processing apparatus based on the capability information acquired from the printer in claim 9 (See Applicant’s. Spec. Para. [0121], [0144]-[0149], Applicant’s Dwg. Fig. 1, Workflow Processing Unit 112b).
a provision unit configured to provide information based on the determination by the determination unit to the operating system in claim 9 (See Applicant’s. Spec. Para. [0040], Applicant’s Dwg. Fig.1, The Online Support Service 151 of The Online Support Server 105).
10. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
11. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claim 7 is 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.
13. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 7:
The prior art(s) searched, cited and/or of record fails to explicitly teach, disclose or suggest the teaching(s) of the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 6, wherein the control method further comprises setting, in a case where the capability information does not include the capability for the printer to rotate the image of the image data received from the information processing apparatus and the setting value does not include the setting value for causing the printer to execute the post-process, the setting value for causing the printer to execute the post-process to disabled.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakamura (US PG. Pub. 2014/0092427 A1).
Referring to Claim 1, Nakamura teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing an application program which causes an information processing apparatus to perform a control method (See Nakamura, Sect. [0029] lines 3-7, the flash memory 12 is a rewritable, non-volatile memory which stores a program including operating system 12a, print control app 12b, and a print setting 12c.), the control method comprising:
acquiring capability information from a printer (See Nakamura, Sect. [0060]
lines 15-20, the CPU 11 executes a print processing of transmitting image data corresponding to the selected image and the print setting 13a to a printer);
determining whether to allow image rotation through a function provided by an operating system of the information processing apparatus based on the capability
information acquired from the printer (See Nakamura, Fig. 2, Sect. [0084], the direction of rotation and/or the angle of rotation are/is determined depending on the drag direction. It is allowable to configure that in a case that one image 62 is touched and is subjected to a minute drag operation in a predetermined direction while being touched. For example, it is allowable to configure that, in a case that one image 62 touched is dragged in the right direction, the one image 62 is rotated clockwise by 90 degrees; on the other hand, in a case that the one image 62 touched is dragged in the left direction, the one image is rotated counterclockwise by 90 degrees. Further, such a modification may be configured that the direction of rotation is determined by the drag direction, and that the amount of rotation is determined depending on the drag length. According to such a modification, it is possible to rotate the image with a simple operation while specifying the angle of rotation for the image);
providing information based on the determination to the operating system (See
Nakamura, Sect. [0083] lines 1-10, the one image 62 is rotated clockwise by 90 degrees each. However, it is allowable that the direction of rotation is counterclockwise; and that the angle of rotation with respect to one time of tapping is an angle different from 90 degrees, for example, 180 degrees, etc. Further, it is also allowable that in a case that one image 62 is touched and is subjected to a minute drag operation in a predetermined direction while being touched, the angle of rotation is determined depending on the drag direction.).
Referring to Claim 2, Nakamura teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1 (See Nakamura, Fig. 1, Flash Memory 12), wherein, in a case where a process related to the image rotation is performable by the printer based on image data received from the information processing apparatus, it is determined in the determining that the image rotation through the function provided by the operating system is not allowed (See Nakamura, Sect. [0063] lines 9-20, The rotation information has a value from not less than 0 degree to less than 360 degrees, and is set with respect to each of the selected images 62. Accompanying with the start of the main processing, the CPU 11 stores, in the RAM 13, 0 degree with respect to all of the selected images 62, as the initial value of the rotation information. In Step S702, the rotation information corresponding to the rotated image 62 is updated by adding thereto the angle by which the image 62 is rotated (90 degrees in the embodiment). Note that when the value of the rotation information reaches 360 degrees by the addition, the value is returned to 0 degree.).
Referring to Claim 3, Nakamura teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1 (See Nakamura, Fig. 1, Flash Memory 12), wherein, in a case where the capability information indicating that a process related to the image rotation is performable by the information processing apparatus is acquired in the acquiring, it is determined in the determining that the image rotation through the function provided by the operating system is not allowed (See Nakaura, Sect. [0082], when an image 62 included in the print preview image 60 is tapped, the tapped image 62 is rotated. However, it is also allowable to configure that when one image among a plurality of images displayed on a screen displaying a list of images is tapped, only the one image tapped is rotated, without rotating another image different from the one image tapped.).
Referring to Claim 4, Nakamura teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 1 (See Nakamura, Fig. 1, Flash Memory 12), wherein, the determining whether to allow the image rotation through the function provided by the operating system is based on the capability information and a setting value set via a print setting screen (See Nakamura, Fig. 7B, Preview Screen 50, Sect. [0066] lines 1-13, The processing shown in FIG. 7B is a processing of generating a print preview image 60 in which the print paper (print object 61) is rotated with respect to the image 62 and for displaying the generated print preview image 60 on the preview screen 50. At first, in a case that the paper orientation information which is stored as one of the print setting 13a indicates a value "vertically oriented" indicating that the orientation of the print paper is vertical (S721: YES), the CPU 11 changes the orientation of the paper object to horizontally oriented display (S722), and updates the paper orientation information in the print setting 13a to a value "horizontally oriented" indicating that the orientation of the print paper is horizontal (S723).).
Referring to Claim 5, Nakamura teaches the non-transitory computer-readable
storage medium according to claim 4 (See Nakamura, Fig. 1, Flash Memory 12), wherein, in a case where the capability information does not include a capability for the printer to rotate an image of image data received from the information processing apparatus and the setting value does not include a setting value for causing the printer to execute a post-process, it is determined in the determining that the image rotation through the function provided by the operating system is allowed (See Nakamura, Sect. [0083] lines 9-19, the angle of rotation is determined depending on the drag direction. For example, it is allowable to configure that, in a case that one image 62 touched is dragged in the right direction, the one image 62 is rotated clockwise by 90 degrees; on the other hand, in a case that the one image 62 touched is dragged in the left direction, the one image is rotated clockwise by 270 degrees. Further, such a modification may be configured that, in a case that the one image 62 touched is drag in the down direction or up direction, the one image 62 is rotated by 180 degrees.).
Referring to Claim 6, Nakamura teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 5 (See Nakamura, Fig. 1, Flash Memory 12), wherein the control method further comprises performing control so that a process related to printing in the information processing apparatus is cancelled in a case where the capability information does not include the capability for the printer to rotate the image of the image data received from the information processing apparatus and the setting value does not include the setting value for causing the printer to execute the post-process (See Nakamura, Sect. [0064], in a case that the rotated image 62 extends out of the paper object 61, more specifically, extends out of the print area excluding margin in the paper object 61 (S703: YES), the CPU 11 reduces the rotated image 62 in accordance with the size of the paper object 61 and the layout (N-in-1) so that the rotated image 62 is accommodated within the print area (S704), and completes the processing. Accordingly, for example, the image 62a displayed on the preview screen 50a on the upper left side in FIG. 2 is displayed, as the result of performing the processing in Step S701 and the processing in Step S704, as an image which is rotated clockwise by 90 degrees and reduced so as to be accommodated in the print area of the paper object 61, like the image 62a as displayed on the preview screen 50b on the upper right side in FIG. 2.).
Referring to Claim 8, arguments analogous to claim 1 are applicable herein. The storing elements of “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium” in claim 1 perform all of the operations of “a control method” in claim 8. Thus, “a control method” in claim 8 is rejected for reasons explicitly taught in the rejection of claim 1.
Referring to Claim 9, arguments analogous to claim 1 are applicable herein. The storing elements of “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium” in claim 1 perform all of the functions of “an information processing apparatus” in claim 9. Thus, “an information processing apparatus” in claim 9 is rejected for reasons explicitly taught in the rejection of claim 1.
Cited Art
17. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure Tokuda et al. (US PG. PUB. No. 2020/0387332 A1) discloses a virtual printer service according to the present disclosure acquires a response to a device search request from an actual printer and a virtual printer, determines based on the acquired response whether or not each device that has responded to the device search request is a virtual device, and presents, to a user, information on one or more devices in which a device determined as the virtual printer is excluded from the plurality of devices that have responded. A virtual device that transmits a print job to one device is then created based on information on the one device selected by the user from the presented information on one or more devices.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARRYL V DOTTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-5471. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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 on 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.
/DARRYL V DOTTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
/DARRYL V DOTTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
Prosecution Insights