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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) were filed on 3/31/2026 and 7/13/2026. The submission is incompliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(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) 1,2, 3, 4, 6, 9, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Suzuki et al. US. publication 20100259777 (hereinafter “Suzuki”).
As per claim 1, Suzuki discloses,
A method of determining document alteration, comprising: imaging a document, the document comprising document content and graphically- encoded document information [Suzuki, par 0042, “An image combining unit 204 combines the original document image data formed by the document reading unit 201 with the two-dimensional code generated by the embedded information generation unit 203 to generate image data of the delivery document 103. “]; decoding the graphically-encoded document information to obtain reported textually- encoded document information [Suzuki, par 0065, “The alteration detection unit 206 extracts the two-dimensional code 801 from the delivery document image data 800 formed by the document reading unit 201 and decodes the extracted two-dimensional code. “]; encoding the document content to produce derived textually-encoded document information [Suzuki, par 0070, “the alteration detection unit 206 searches the image data 501 obtained by decoding the two-dimensional code 801 in step S1001 for the character area selected in step S1002 by pattern matching. For example, a feature quantity of each character in the character area in the image data 501 obtained by decoding the two-dimensional code 801 and each character in the character area selected in step S1002 are compared with a dictionary to perform the search in step S1003. “]; and upon determining that the reported textually-encoded document information matches the derived textually-encoded document information, identifying the document as unaltered [Suzuki, par 0079 , “ No flag is set for all the character areas “], [Suzuki, par 0080, “ In this case, the alteration detection unit 206 determines that the delivery document image data 800 is not altered “], and upon determining that the reported textually-encoded document information differs from the derived textually-encoded document information, identifying the document as altered [ Suzuki, par 0082, “the alteration detection unit 206 determines that the character area 811 for which the flag is set is altered to other characters. Accordingly, the output unit 207 displays a message indicating that the delivery document is altered “].
As per claim 19, the limitations of claims 19 correspond to the features of claim 1
is/are rejected for the same reasons.
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki discloses wherein the graphically-encoded document information comprises a machine-readable set of geometric elements that graphically encode the reported textually-encoded document information [Suzuki, par 0053, “the embedded information generation unit 203 converts an encoded result into a two-dimensional code. The two-dimensional code in the present exemplary embodiment may have a format which can print the encoded result on paper. For example, in step S403, codes such as the Veri Code (registered trademark), the QR code (registered trademark), and the communication platform (CP) code can be used. “]
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki discloses wherein the reported textually-encoded document information encodes at least one of characters of the document content, character-location pairs of the document content, words of the document content, word-location pairs of the document content, numbers of the document content, number-location pairs of the document content, symbols of the document content, symbol-location pairs of the document content, or any one or more of the foregoing within a previously determined portion of the document content [Suzuki, Fig 18, the following figure describes character areas such as pairs, character strings, location number, symbol pairs and location pairs].
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki discloses wherein encoding the document content to produce the derived textually-encoded document information comprises encoding at least one of characters of the document content, character-location pairs of the document content, words of the document content, word-location pairs of the document content, numbers of the document content, number-location pairs of the document content, symbols of the document content, symbol-location pairs of the document content, or any one or more of the foregoing within a previously determined portion of the document content [Suzuki, par 0069, “ the alteration detection unit 206 selects an unprocessed character area from a plurality of character areas 311 searched by the character area determination unit 202. “], [Suzuki, par 0070, “a feature quantity of each character in the character area in the image data 501 obtained by decoding the two-dimensional code 801 and each character in the character area selected in step S1002 are compared with a dictionary to perform the search in step S1003. “].
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki discloses wherein the graphically-encoded document information comprises a first Quick Response (QR) code [Suzuki, par 0053, “codes such as the Veri Code (registered trademark), the QR code (registered trademark), and the communication platform (CP) code can be used.”].
As per claim 9, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki discloses wherein the document is a physical document [Tian, par 0040, “A document reading unit 201 includes a scanner and optically scans an input original image (the original document 102) to form electronic original document image data.), using the printed hardcopy of the document such as distributing it, copying it, etc. “].
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Merz (US 20060288281 A1, published Dec.21.2006).
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 4 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki does not disclose, but Merz discloses wherein the at least one of characters of the document content comprises a Unicode character [Merz, Fig.1, discloses steps of determining Unicode values in text of digital documents].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki so that one of the characters of the document content comprises a Unicode character as taught by Merz. One would have been motivated to do so in order to expand the character representation of multiple symbols and scripts with a single well-known encoding technique.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Kumar (US 10366315 B1, published Jul.30.2019) in view of Tonnelier (US 20170091504 A1, published Mar.30.2017).
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 6 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki does not disclose but Kumar discloses wherein: the graphically-encoded document information further comprises a second Quick Response (QR) code and a third Quick Response (QR) code ([Kumar, col 7, lines 47-50], “a QR grid using the map of QR codes. Because the map defines the sequence of QR codes, the QR grid module 106c can arrange the QR codes in a grid pattern using the map data. “); and wherein the second QR code comprises an encoded hash of the first QR code ([Kumar, col 6, lines 60-67], “The header 302 and the footer 304 typically include either a hash value corresponding to the payload of another QR code (which in turn comprise the map of QR codes), and the payload 306 typically includes the portion of electronic data (i.e., the key-value pairs). In this way, the header and the footer serve to link the QR codes together into an ordered sequence (as provided in detail below). “);
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki so that the graphically-encoded document information further comprises a second Quick Response (QR) code and a third Quick Response (QR) code and wherein the second QR code comprises an encoded hash of the first QR code as taught by Kumar. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide verification and ensure the integrity of the data stored in the first QR code.
Suzuki and Kumar do not disclose but Tonnelier discloses and wherein the third QR code comprises an identifier of an encoding method used to generate the first QR code from the document content [Tonnelier, par 0087, “object 30 furthermore bears a machine-readable code 32. As show, the machine readable code is a two dimensional bar code in the QR code format, and lacking the human readable rendering of the code, which for the purposes of the present description is assumed to constitute a machine readable code 32 comprising a URI, incorporating a representation of the object identifier encoded according to a selected one of a plurality of predefined combinations of encoding algorithms and parameters, and further specifying the encoding identifier corresponding to the combination of algorithm and parameters used to encode the object identifier. “].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki in view of Kumar so that the third QR code comprises an identifier of an encoding method used to generate the first QR code from the document content as taught by Tonnelier. One would have been motivated to do so in order to make sure a device can correctly identify a method for encoding and accurately decode the first QR code without any errors.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Kumar and Tonnelier, and further in view of LEFEBVRE (US 20120308072 A1, published Dec.6.2012) and Pedersoli (US 20140279560 A1, published Sep.18.2014).
As per claim 8, the rejection of claim 7 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki does not disclose but LEFEBVRE discloses wherein: the graphically-encoded document information comprises a two-dimensional rendering of a cube [LEFEBVRE, Fig 5, shows a rendering of a cube subdivided from 2 projections] comprising a first facet, a second facet, and a third facet [LEFEBVRE, Fig.6, shows 3 faces of the cube].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki so that the graphically-encoded document information comprises a two-dimensional rendering of a cube comprising a first facet, a second facet, and a third facet as taught by LEFEBVRE. One would have been motivated to do so in order to increase the visually encoded data storage.
Suzuki and LEFEBVRE do not disclose but Pedersoli discloses the first facet comprises a skewed image of the first QR code the second facet comprises a skewed image of the second QR code; and the third facet comprises a skewed image of the third QR code [Pedersoli, par 0023, “FIG. 3A illustrates a three-dimensional cube rotating in a direction and rotation speed wherein the 6 faces recite certain encrypted data encoded as a QR Code image “], [Pedersoli par 0024, “ FIG. 3B illustrates a three-dimensional cube wherein the 6 faces are flattened. On each of the 6 flattened faces recite certain encrypted data encoded as a QR Code image”], [Pedersoli, par 0042, “displayed on screen 115 of computing device 110. In certain embodiments, the image displayed comprises a three dimensional ("3D") rotating object.”].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki in view of LEFEBVRE so the rendered cube has multiple facets each with a QR code as taught by Pedersoli. One would have been motivated to do so to enhance functionality of the secure graphic by providing a visually distinct and interconnected representation of multiple related QR codes.
Claim(s) 10,11,12,13,15,18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Suzuki in view of Swayn (US 20100155464 A1, published Jun.24.2010).
As per claim 10, Suzuki discloses,
A system, comprising: a microprocessor; and a computer readable medium, coupled with the microprocessor and comprising microprocessor readable and executable instructions that, when executed by the microprocessor, cause the microprocessor to: access an image of a document captured [Suzuki, par 0042, “ An image combining unit 204 combines the original document image data formed by the document reading unit 201 with the two-dimensional code generated by the embedded information generation unit 203 to generate image data of the delivery document 103. “]; decode the graphically-encoded document information to obtain reported textually-encoded document information [Suzuki, par 0065, “The alteration detection unit 206 extracts the two-dimensional code 801 from the delivery document image data 800 formed by the document reading unit 201 and decodes the extracted two-dimensional code “]; encode the document content to produce derived textually-encoded document information [Suzuki, par 0070, “ the alteration detection unit 206 searches the image data 501 obtained by decoding the two-dimensional code 801 in step S1001 for the character area selected in step S1002 by pattern matching. For example, a feature quantity of each character in the character area in the image data 501 obtained by decoding the two-dimensional code 801 and each character in the character area selected in step S1002 are compared with a dictionary to perform the search in step S1003. “]; and upon determining that the reported textually-encoded document information matches the derived textually-encoded document information, identify the document as unaltered [Suzuki, par 0079, “No flag is set for all the character areas “], [Suzuki, par 0080, “ In this case, the alteration detection unit 206 determines that the delivery document image data 800 is not altered. “], and upon determining that the reported textually-encoded document information differs from the derived textually-encoded document information, identify the document as altered [Suzuki, par 0082, “the alteration detection unit 206 determines that the character area 811 for which the flag is set is altered to other characters. Accordingly, the output unit 207 displays a message indicating that the delivery document is altered “].
Suzuki does not disclose, but Swayn discloses wherein the image of a document captured by a camera [Swayn, par 0104, “ one QR code formed thereon is scanned by the scanner 3326 or captured by the camera 3327 to deliver to the computer 3301 via the interface 3313 an acquired image of the document 3390 “].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki so that the image of the document is captured by a camera as taught by Swayn. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a real-time preview or capture of the document to improve user convenience and ensure the image is correctly aligned before processing.
As per claim 11, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated herein.
In addition, Suzuki discloses wherein the graphically-encoded document information comprises a machine-readable set of geometric elements that graphically encode the reported textually-encoded document information [Suzuki, par 0053, “the embedded information generation unit 203 converts an encoded result into a two-dimensional code. The two-dimensional code in the present exemplary embodiment may have a format which can print the encoded result on paper. For example, in step S403, codes such as the Veri Code (registered trademark), the QR code (registered trademark), and the communication platform (CP) code can be used. “]
As per claim 12, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated herein.
In addition, Suzuki discloses wherein the reported textually-encoded document information encodes at least one of characters of the document content, character-location pairs of the document content, words of the document content, word-location pairs of the document content, numbers of the document content, number-location pairs of the document content, symbols of the document content, symbol-location pairs of the document content, or any one or more of the foregoing within a previously determined portion of the document content [Suzuki, Fig 18, the following figure describes character areas such as pairs, character strings, location number, symbol pairs and location pairs].
As per claim 13, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated herein.
In addition, Suzuki discloses wherein the instructions to cause the microprocessor to encode the document content to produce the derived textually-encoded document information comprises to encode at least one of characters of the document content, character-location pairs of the document content, words of the document content, word-location pairs of the document content, numbers of the document content, number-location pairs of the document content, symbols of the document content, symbol-location pairs of the document content, or any one or more of the foregoing within a previously determined portion of the document content [Suzuki, par 0069, “ the alteration detection unit 206 selects an unprocessed character area from a plurality of character areas 311 searched by the character area determination unit 202. “], [Suzuki, par 0070, “a feature quantity of each character in the character area in the image data 501 obtained by decoding the two-dimensional code 801 and each character in the character area selected in step S1002 are compared with a dictionary to perform the search in step S1003. “].
As per claim 15, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki discloses wherein the graphically-encoded document information comprises a first Quick Response (QR) code [Suzuki, par 0053, “codes such as the Veri Code (registered trademark), the QR code (registered trademark), and the communication platform (CP) code can be used.”].
As per claim 18, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki discloses wherein the document is a physical document [Tian, par 0040, “A document reading unit 201 includes a scanner and optically scans an input original image (the original document 102) to form electronic original document image data.), using the printed hardcopy of the document such as distributing it, copying it, etc. “].
As per claim 20, the rejection of claim 19, is incorporated herein.
Suzuki does not disclose, but Swayn discloses wherein accessing the image of the document comprises receiving the image of the document from a camera [Swayn, par 0104, “one QR code formed thereon is scanned by the scanner 3326 or captured by the camera 3327 to deliver to the computer 3301 via the interface 3313 an acquired image of the document”].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki so that accessing the image of the document receiving the image of the document from a camera as taught by Swayn. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a real-time preview or capture of the document to improve user convenience and ensure the image is correctly aligned before processing.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Swayn, and further in view of Merz.
As per claim 14, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki does not disclose, but Merz discloses wherein the at least one of characters of the document content comprises a Unicode character [Merz, Fig.1, discloses steps of determining Unicode values in text of digital documents].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki so that one of the characters of the document content comprises a Unicode character as taught by Merz. One would have been motivated to do so in order to expand the character representation of multiple symbols and scripts with a single well-known encoding technique.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Swayn, and further in view of Kumar and Tonnelier.
As per claim 16, the rejection of claim 15 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki does not disclose but Kumar discloses wherein: the graphically-encoded document information further comprises a second Quick Response (QR) code and a third Quick Response (QR) code ([Kumar, col 7, lines 47-50], “a QR grid using the map of QR codes. Because the map defines the sequence of QR codes, the QR grid module 106c can arrange the QR codes in a grid pattern using the map data. “); and wherein the second QR code comprises an encoded hash of the first QR code ([Kumar, col 6, lines 60-67], “The header 302 and the footer 304 typically include either a hash value corresponding to the payload of another QR code (which in turn comprise the map of QR codes), and the payload 306 typically includes the portion of electronic data (i.e., the key-value pairs). In this way, the header and the footer serve to link the QR codes together into an ordered sequence (as provided in detail below). “);
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki so that the graphically-encoded document information further comprises a second Quick Response (QR) code and a third Quick Response (QR) code and wherein the second QR code comprises an encoded hash of the first QR code as taught by Kumar. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide verification and ensure the integrity of the data stored in the first QR code.
Suzuki and Kumar do not disclose but Tonnelier discloses and wherein the third QR code comprises an identifier of an encoding method used to generate the first QR code from the document content [Tonnelier, par 0087, “object 30 furthermore bears a machine-readable code 32. As show, the machine readable code is a two dimensional bar code in the QR code format, and lacking the human readable rendering of the code, which for the purposes of the present description is assumed to constitute a machine readable code 32 comprising a URI, incorporating a representation of the object identifier encoded according to a selected one of a plurality of predefined combinations of encoding algorithms and parameters, and further specifying the encoding identifier corresponding to the combination of algorithm and parameters used to encode the object identifier. “].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki in view of Kumar so that the third QR code comprises an identifier of an encoding method used to generate the first QR code from the document content as taught by Tonnelier. One would have been motivated to do so in order to make sure a device can correctly identify a method for encoding and accurately decode the first QR code without any errors.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Swayn, Kumar and Tonnelier, and further in view of LEFEBVRE and Pedersoli.
As per claim 17, the rejection of claim 16 is incorporated herein.
Suzuki does not disclose but LEFEBVRE discloses wherein: the graphically-encoded document information comprises a two-dimensional rendering of a cube [LEFEBVRE, Fig 5, shows a rendering of a cube subdivided from 2 projections] comprising a first facet, a second facet, and a third facet [LEFEBVRE, Fig.6, shows 3 faces of the cube].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki so that the graphically-encoded document information comprises a two-dimensional rendering of a cube comprising a first facet, a second facet, and a third facet as taught by LEFEBVRE. One would have been motivated to do so in order to increase the visually encoded data storage.
Suzuki and LEFEBVRE do not disclose but Pedersoli discloses the first facet comprises a skewed image of the first QR code the second facet comprises a skewed image of the second QR code; and the third facet comprises a skewed image of the third QR code [Pedersoli, par 0023, “FIG. 3A illustrates a three-dimensional cube rotating in a direction and rotation speed wherein the 6 faces recite certain encrypted data encoded as a QR Code image “], [Pedersoli par 0024, “ FIG. 3B illustrates a three-dimensional cube wherein the 6 faces are flattened. On each of the 6 flattened faces recite certain encrypted data encoded as a QR Code image”], [Pedersoli, par 0042, “displayed on screen 115 of computing device 110. In certain embodiments, the image displayed comprises a three dimensional ("3D") rotating object.”].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Suzuki in view of LEFEBVRE so the rendered cube has multiple facets each with a QR code as taught by Pedersoli. One would have been motivated to do so to enhance functionality of the secure graphic by providing a visually distinct and interconnected representation of multiple related QR codes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Saipratap Prem whose telephone number is (571)270-0894. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 a.m. -4 p.m..
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, Jung Kim can be reached at (571) 272-3804. 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.
/SAIPRATAP PREM/Examiner, Art Unit 2494
/JUNG W KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2494
Prosecution Insights