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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-18 are pending in this application.
Drawings
The drawings received on 10/24/2024 are accepted for examination purposes.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/24/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 9-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hwang et al. (US-2016/0316100).
As to Claim 1, Hwang teaches ‘An information processing apparatus comprising a hardware processor that: detects a plurality of devices for printing connected to a communication network; and registers the detected plurality of devices directly connected to each other as one printing system [Fig 6B, par 0060, 0072, 0090, 0113 – cloud server receives phone number of mobile device and ID information of image forming apparatus connected to each other and stores/registers the phone number and ID information as mapping information associated with each other as registration information of the mobile device]’.
Further, in regards to claim 10, the information processing apparatus of claim 1 performs the device registration method of claim 10.
Further, in regards to claim 11, the device registration method of claim 10 is fully embodied on the non-transitory recording medium of claim 11.
As to Claims 2 and 12, Hwang teaches ‘wherein the hardware processor acquires information of each of the devices from the detected plurality of devices and registers the detected plurality of devices as one printing system based on the acquired information of each of the devices [Figs 6B, 6E, par 0129-0132 – cloud server receives phone number of mobile device and obtains ID information of image forming apparatus when accessed and stores/registers the phone number and ID information as mapping information associated with each other as registration information of the mobile device]’.
As to Claims 3 and 13, Hwang teaches ‘wherein the information of each of the devices includes device-specific information of each of the devices and device-specific information of a connection destination device of each of the devices [par 0047-0048, 0060, 0109, 0144 – phone number of mobile device and ID information of image forming apparatus (i.e., connection destination device)]’.
As to Claims 4 and 14, Hwang teaches ‘wherein the hardware processor determines, from the acquired device-specific information of each of the devices, whether or not the detected plurality of devices form one printing system [par 0064, 0142-0144 – cloud server registers phone number of mobile device and ID information of image forming apparatus as mapping information associated with each other and information regarding direct printing mode, where if mobile device registers an image forming apparatus with direct printing mode, then that mobile device and image forming apparatus would be determined and registered as one printing system]’.
As to Claims 5 and 15, Hwang teaches ‘wherein the hardware processor is not able to acquire device-specific information of a connection destination device of a second device corresponding to a first device, and the hardware processor acquires network address information of the first device and network address information of the connection destination device and registers the first device and the second device as one printing system based on the acquired network address information of each of the devices [Fig 6E, par 0134-0144 – mobile device registers a new printer to be associated and mapped with to cloud server, by receiving phone number of mobile device and ID information of image forming apparatus including information about the registration and direct printing mode performed by printing application of mobile device]’.
As to Claims 6 and 16, Hwang teaches ‘wherein the hardware processor switches a type of information of each of the devices to be acquired based on a type of each of the devices [par 0071, 0088 – registration information about a mapping relationship may be updated in the cloud server by completing a registration process of the mobile devices in one of the image forming apparatuses]’.
As to Claims 7 and 17, Hwang teaches ‘wherein the hardware processor is not able to acquire information of a connection destination device of a first device, and the hardware processor receives a designation input of the connection destination device of the first device and registers the first device and the connection destination device for which the designation input has been performed as one printing system [Fig 6E, par 0134-0144 – mobile device inputs and registers a new printer to be associated and mapped with to cloud server, by receiving phone number of mobile device and ID information of image forming apparatus including information about the registration and direct printing mode performed by printing application of mobile device]’.
As to Claim 9, Hwang teaches ‘A management system comprising: the information processing apparatus according to claim 1; and a plurality of devices connected to the communication network [Fig 2 – image forming system]’.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. in view of Sako (US-2017/0277481).
As to Claims 8 and 18, Hwang teaches all of the claimed elements/features as recited in independent claims 1 and 11. Hwang does not disclose expressly ‘wherein the hardware processor acquires version information of each of the devices of the registered printing system and sets at least one of invalidity of a predetermined function of the printing system and invalidity of registration of the printing system, based on the version information’, although Hwang teaches registering mapping information of devices [par 0060, 0072, 0090, 0113].
Sako in the proposed combination of Hwang teaches ‘wherein the hardware processor acquires version information of each of the devices of the registered printing system and sets at least one of invalidity of a predetermined function of the printing system and invalidity of registration of the printing system, based on the version information [Fig 9, par 0029, 0062 – determining whether registered cloud printer can no longer be used based on version information of the image forming apparatus that is supported]’.
Hwang and Sako are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely digital image data printing systems. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include determining version information, as taught by Sako. The motivation for doing so would have been to monitoring firmware updates of registered devices to determine if image forming apparatuses are supported. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Sako with Hwang to obtain the invention as specified in claims 8 and 18.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record
a. US Publication No. 2016/0316100
b. US Publication No. 2017/0277481
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
c. US Publication No. 2020/0293245
d. US Publication No. 2021/0029269
e. US Patent No. 12,001,744
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIYA J CATO whose telephone number is (571)270-3954. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 830-530.
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, Akwasi Sarpong can be reached at 571.270.3438. 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.
/MIYA J CATO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681
Prosecution Insights