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
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
1. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 12 recites “A transitory or non-transitory computer-readable medium”, but neither the claim nor the disclosure limit the medium to the statutory embodiments. Such recitation could be reasonably understood to include computer readable media that cover signals per se, which the USPTO must reject under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as covering both non-statutory subject matter and statutory subject matter. In an effort to assist the Applicant in overcoming a rejection or potential rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in this situation, the examiner suggests the following approach: a claim drawn to such a computer readable recording medium that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 by adding the limitation "non-transitory" to the claim, i.e., reciting "a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium".
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show every feature of the invention as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2 and 5, 10 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 20100020970) in view of Hasama (US 20110302575 ).
Regarding claim 1, Liu teaches a software component (340) for processing data on a device (100) (p0016: the present invention can be implemented predominantly through software), wherein the device is configured with an operating system, wherein the operating system is configured to allow execution of applications and to provide a system function (320) to enable export of data from the applications to one or more export destinations (abstract:using cameras to download data to cell phones), wherein the one or more export destinations are selectable by a user via a user interface (700) provided by the operating system, wherein the software component is configured to be installed on the operating system and to:
receive an export of data (400-402) of an application (300) via the system function (fig. 6 and p0065:On the PC side 610, the encoder 614 splits the data 612 into small chunks and encodes them into a "V-Code");
generate at least one 2D barcode (500-502), wherein the at least one 2D barcode comprises an encoding of the data and/or a link to the data; and display the at least one 2D barcode on a display (142) of the device to enable a receiver device (200) to access the data by capturing and decoding the at least one 2D barcode (p0017: encoding data in a visual code where the visual code comprises a plurality of two-dimensional bar codes, displaying the visual code, capturing the plurality of two-dimensional bar codes with the camera and decoding the plurality of two-dimensional bar codes).
Liu does not teach register as an export destination with the system function;
Hasama teaches register as an export destination with the system function (abstract: The user can select an output destination device (and fig. 9a)
Liu and c are combinable because they both deal with management servers with a printing apparatus. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Liu with the teaching of Hasama for purpose output data to selected destination.
Regarding claim 2, Liu teaches the software component (340) according to claim 1, further configured to generate and display a sequence of 2D barcodes (500-502) which together comprise the encoding of the data (fig. 6).
Regarding claim 5, Liu teaches the software component (340) according to claim 1, further configured to: upload a first part of the data (401) to an external repository (600); generate the at least one 2D barcode (500-502) to include the link (420) to the first part of the data on the external repository and an encoding of a second part of the data (402) (p0039:This may encode supplemental information such as URL, telephone number, and/or special offers).
Regarding claim 10, Liu teaches the software component (340) according to claim 1, further configured to generate the at least one 2D barcode (500-502) by generating a file of the data and generate the at least one 2D barcode to comprise an encoding of the file and/or a link to the file (p0063:After defining the individual frame, a large data file can be split into many smaller chunks so that the data in each small chunk can be encoded into one frame).
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is system claim of claim 1, therefore it is rejecton for the same reason as claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, The structural elements of apparatus claim 1 perform all of the steps of method claim 14. Thus, claim 14 is rejected for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
Claim 15 has been analyzed and rejected with regard to claim 1 and in accordance with Liu’s further teaching on: A computer-readable memory that contains instructions, which when executed by a processor perform steps in a method (p0225).
Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Hasama as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Collier (US 20220414055).
Regarding claim 6, Liu in view of Hasama does not teach the software component (340) according to claim 1, further configured to: upload to the data (400), or a first part of the data (401), to an external repository (600); determine an URL at which the data or the first part of the data can be retrieved from the external repository; and use the URL as the link (420) to include in the one or more 2D barcodes (500-502).
Collier teaches upload to the data (400), or a first part of the data (401), to an external repository (600); determine an URL at which the data or the first part of the data can be retrieved from the external repository; and use the URL as the link (420) to include in the one or more 2D barcodes (500-502) (p0054).
Liu in view of Hasama and Colloer are combinable because they both deal with management servers with a printing apparatus. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Liu with the teaching of Colloer for purpose of providing systems for efficient alphanumeric encoding of URIs.
Claims 3-4 and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Hasama as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Principato (US 20200356831).
Regarding claim 3, Liu in view of Hasama does not teach the software component (340) according to claim 1, further configured to, based on a characteristic of the data or a setting, switch between including, in the at least one 2D barcode, i) the encoding of the data (400, 401) and ii) the link (420) to the data.
Pricipato teaches based on a characteristic of the data or a setting, switch between including, in the at least one 2D barcode, i) the encoding of the data (400, 401) and ii) the link (420) to the data (p0155: a QR code cannot encode all specifications or other data of interest for a particular manufacturing process due to data size limitations of the QR code…these encoded data items can be links that point to stored data).
Liu in view of Hasama and Pricipato are combinable because they both deal with management servers with a printing apparatus. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Liu with the teaching of Pricipato for purpose of encoding big data.
Regarding claim 4, Liu in view of Hasama and Pricipato teaches the software component (340) according to claim 3, wherein the characteristic of the data is a size of the data (p0155:data size limitations of the QR code).
The rational applied to the rejection of claim 3 has been incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 8, Liu in view of Hasama and Pricipato teaches the software component (340) according to claim 1, further configured to process the data exported by the application (300) and generate the one or more 2D barcodes (500-502) based on said processed version of the data (p0054:each PPAP can have a unique version identifier that is encoded in the QR code).
The rational applied to the rejection of claim 3 has been incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 9, Liu teaches the software component (340) according to claim 8, wherein said processing comprises one or more of: omitting a part of the data, selecting a part of the data for inclusion, adjusting a size or a quality of a part of the data, before generating the one or more 2D barcodes (p0055:To encode a data file into a VCode, we first split the data file into small segments).
Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Hasama as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Teran Guajardo et al. (US 20210377033) and Ravnna et al. (US 20240080315).
Regarding claim 7, Liu in view of Hasama does not teach the software component (340) according to claim 5, further configured to: before uploading, encrypt the data (400), or the first part of the data (401), using an encryption key (440); include the encryption key and the link (420) in the at least one 2D barcode.
Teran Guajardo teaches before uploading, encrypt the data (400), or the first part of the data (401) (p0046:upload the encrypted data blob to the intermediate cloud storage 112), Ravnna teaches using an encryption key (440); include the encryption key and the link (420) in the at least one 2D barcode (p0058: medical device 52 will encode in QR code 72 (or in the query parameters of the URL, which is encoded in the QR code) the ID of the public key used in the encryption, alongside the encrypted hidden file.
Liu in view of Hasama and Teran and Ravnna are combinable because they both deal with management servers with a printing apparatus. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Liu in view of Hasama with the teaching of Teran and Ravnna for purpose of provide the requisite secret registration system suggested by Teran and authentication on medical devices suggested by Ravnna.
Claim 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Hasama as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Anup et al.( US 758341).
Regarding claim 11, Liu in view of Hasama does not teaches the software component (340) according to claim 1, wherein the system function (320) is a print system function to enable printing of data from the applications to one or more printers, and wherein the software component is configured to register as a virtual printer driver (710).
Anup teaches wherein the system function (320) is a print system function to enable printing of data from the applications to one or more printers, and wherein the software component is configured to register as a virtual printer driver (710) (col. 5, lines 4-10:a virtual printer 34, including a print driver 35, and a print creation application 32. The virtual printer 34 may operate to generate an electronic print created document (e.g., a PDF formatted electronic document), as opposed to a physical print created document that would be created by a physical printer).
Liu in view of Hasama and Anup are combinable because they both deal with management servers with a printing apparatus. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Liu in view of Hasama with the teaching of Anup for purpose of to generate an electronic print created document (e.g., a PDF formatted electronic document).
Claim 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Hasama as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jazayeri et al. (US 8854669).
Regarding claim 12, Liu in view of Hasama does not teach the software component (340) according to claim 1, wherein the system function (320) provides a sharing interface, such as an iOS share sheet-based interface or an Android share intent-based interface, and wherein the software component is configured to register as a share destination in the sharing interface.
wherein the system function (320) provides a sharing interface, such as an iOS share sheet-based interface or an Android share intent-based interface (col, 4, lines 45-55:Android, Symbian, or iPhone OS,), and wherein the software component is configured to register as a share destination in the sharing interface (col. 26, lines:35-45:In particular, the legacy printer 120 may already have a relatively large amount of hardware/software resources, including the print driver 158 and Fig. 2c: cloud print: save to docs)).
Liu in view of Hasama and Jazayeri are combinable because they both deal with management servers with a printing apparatus. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Liu in view of Hasama with the teaching of Jazayeri for purpose of receiving a print request over a network from an application associated with a device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELEN Q ZONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1600. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-6.
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, Merouan, Abderrahim 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.
HELEN ZONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2683
/HELEN ZONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
Prosecution Insights