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 statement (IDS) submitted on 1/28/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 9 are 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.
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) 1,2,3,4,17,18,19,20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bailey (US-20020059278-A1) in view of Bradley(US-20180341381-A1) and Hu (Hu, Donghan, and Sang Won Lee. "Scrapbook: Screenshot-based bookmarks for effective digital resource curation across applications." Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 2022.)
As per claim 1, Bailey discloses An information processing apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors executing the instructions to perform (Bailey in para. [0043] makes reference to storing files in a memory and mentions HTML and XML file formats. Thus, Bailey is a computer-based system and is using computer-based technology. Thus, there would have to be some type of processor and memory present with software instructions in Bailey);
Bailey discloses perform output processing of outputting reproduction data to a save location(para.[0043] “A persistent copy of the project file is then made, indicated at block 312, and stored to memory for utilization in subsequent calls. The persistent copy is output project XML file 314. ” Bailey describes project information stored in project XML files and expressly create a persistent copy of that project data.), the reproduction data being for reproducing a layout(para.[0020] “The project files may include default values for at least one of the following: font type, font color, font size, background color, location of text on the document, location of graphics on the document, size of the document, and/or shape of the document.” The project files contain the information that defines the visual arrangement of the customize document.) created using a layout editing application (para. [0034] “At the “Edit” step 103, an embodiment of which is shown in more detail in FIG. 3, the User personalizes the project data for the selected project, element by element, as part of an iterative loop 103, 104, 105, 106, 107. The user personalizes an element of the project data, and indicates whether the project personalization is finished or not.” Although bailey does not specifically say “layout editing application” Bailey describes custom document design software that performed the claimed function allowing creation and editing of a visual document layout consisting of positions text and graphics.) perform generation processing of generating an image file related to the layout(Bailey states at para.[0020] “A graphical visual representation of the project file may be created with the GUI and then saved as an output data file;” and further at para.[0044] “At block 406, the servlet requests a current preview image from project object 304 and saves it to disk as preview image 410.” Bailey explains generating a visual representation and saving it as a file and further explains that the page includes the “preview image file.”);
However, Bailey does not disclose perform first addition processing of adding information indicative of the save location to the image file generated in the generation processing;
Bradley does disclose first addition processing of adding information indicative of the save location to the image file generated in the generation processing (para.[0040] “In step 302, computing device 101 generates metadata, including resource location, resource navigation and positional metadata, regarding the source data of the screen capture image. An example of resource location metadata includes the uniform resource locator of a webpage containing the captured image” Bradley teaches generating resource location metadata for source data represented by a screen-capture image and the embedding that metadata into the image. Further in para.[0041] “In step 303, computing device 101 embeds the generated metadata into the screen capture image.” Here Bradley teaches the “adding information”. Bradley then states at para.[0057] “Such information may be utilized by computing device 102 to reproduce the state of the source environment when the image was captured (i.e., opening the source document 405 on display 215 in the same state as represented in the screen capture image) using the stored resource location, resource navigation and positional data as shown in FIG. 4;” teaching that the extracted resource-location information can be used to reopen the source.); It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Bradley into the teachings of Bailey in order to modify Bailey’s generated preview image to include Bradley’s resource-location metadata identifying the location of Bailey’s stored project data. This would allow for a predictable association between the preview and the separately stored project data allowing for easy retrieval of the editable project.
However, the combination of Bailey and Bradley still fail to disclose and perform second addition processing of adding identification information for identifying the layout editing application to the image file.
Hu does teach and perform second addition processing of adding identification information for identifying the layout editing application to the image file(Hu discloses in the abstract “Scrapbook extracts and stores all the metadata (URL, file location, and application name) of windows visible in a captured screenshot to facilitate restoring them later.” Later in Section 4.2 Hu explains “Scrapbook extracts all available metadata from each window visible in a screenshot. While a screenshot may help a user reconstruct their mental context, a screenshot alone cannot open a file, an ap plication, or a web page depicted therein. Therefore, metadata, such as file names, URLs, file paths, and application paths, is essential in reopening applications…. In addition to the metadata mentioned above, Scrapbook collects other information that may assist users when using the search feature, such as application names, web page titles, window titles (which may not simply be the names of open files), or any user provided data they may choose to add. For instance, a user may be able to resume reading a paper by searching for its title and finding a PDF viewer window whose title contains the paper’s title.” Thus, Hu directly teaches identification information capable of identifying an application, namely the application name and application path. The functional purpose of Hu’s teaching is analogous to the claimed purpose of identifying the editing application.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Hu into the teachings of Bailey in order to apply Hu’s teachings into Bailey’s project preview to predictably assist a user in identifying the application appropriate for reopening or restoring the project represented by the preview.
As per claim 2, the combination of Bailey. Bradley and Hu disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Bailey also discloses wherein in the output processing, the reproduction data is outputted to the save location outside the information processing apparatus (Bailey teaches that the reproduction data is output to a save location outside the information processing apparatus. Bailey discloses a client-server architecture in which the user operates a client computing device that communicates with a separate server over a network and expressly states at para.[0020] “Default project files may be generated with a Graphical User Interface (GUI), and stored on the server.”)
As per claim 3, the combination of Bailey, Bradley and Hu disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Bailey also discloses wherein in the output processing, the reproduction data is outputted to the save location inside the information processing apparatus(Bailey also teaches that the reproduction data may be output to a save location inside the information processing apparatus. Bailey states at para.[0043] “ A persistent copy of the project file is then made, indicated at block 312, and stored to memory for utilization in subsequent calls. The persistent copy is output project XML file 314.” Thus, the persistent project/XML data is stored in memory internal to the machine corresponding to the claimed information processing apparatus.)
As per claim 4, the combination of Bailey, Bradley and Hu disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Bradley also discloses wherein in the first addition processing, the information indicative of the save location is added as metadata of the image file(Bradley teaches that the information indicative of the save location is added as metadata of the image files. Bradley teaches at para.[0015]“ Metadata, including the resource location, resource navigation and positional metadata, regarding the source data of the screen capture image is generated. The generated metadata is then embedded into the screen capture image” further in para.[0040-0041] “n example of resource location metadata includes the uniform resource locator of a webpage containing the captured image… In step 303, computing device 101 embeds the generated metadata into the screen capture image.” Thus, when Bradley’s known metadata technique is applied to Bailey’s preview image with respect to claim 1, the location of Bailey’s underlying project data would be added as metadata of the image file.) The rationale of claim 1 is incorporated herein.
As per claim 17, the combination of Bailey, Bradley and Hu disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. The combination also discloses wherein the one or more processors further execute the instructions to perform reception processing of receiving an instruction from a user and perform obtainment processing of obtaining the reproduction data based on information indicative of the save location added to the image file(Bradley teaches obtaining an underlying source resource based on location information added to an image file. Specifically at para.[0015] “. The metadata in the received screen capture image is extracted to identify the resource location, resource navigation and positional data (e.g., compression type, data precision, image height, image width, reference to the base uniform resource identifier, reference to the navigational operation vector and reference to the scroll location). The state of the source environment when the image was captured is then reproduced (i.e., the source document is opened in the same state as represented in the screen capture image) using the resource location, resource navigation and positional data.” Here Bradley’s retrieval technique can be applied to Bailey’s preview image and stored project data, the system would obtain Bailey’s reproduction data based on the save-location information embedded in the image file.) The rationale from claim 1 is incorporated herein.
As per claim 18, the combination of Bailey, Bradley and Hu disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Bailey also discloses wherein the one or more processors further execute the instructions to control the output processing, the generation processing, the first addition processing, and the second addition processing upon reception of an instruction to save the layout in the reception processing(Bailey teaches processor controlled processing in response to user interation with a document layour project, including updating and storing the project data and generating and saving a current preview image. As taught in para.[0044] “At block 406, the servlet requests a current preview image from project object 304 and saves it to disk as preview image 410. At block 412, the servlet reads field data from project object 304 and sends an updated HTML page 413 to the user. Updated HTML page 413 includes localized data from configuration file 222 and preview image file 410. A persistent copy of the project is made and stored to memory, replacing the previous persistent copy. The process described above repeats until the user has completed the customization process and has no further customization data to enter. In this manner, the system is data-driven, such that the preview image is continually rebuilt and displayed to the user to reflect the current status of his customization process according to the customization data provided by the user.”).
Claim 19 and 20, are similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bailey, Bradley and Hu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lin(US-20110191211-A1).
As per claim 5, the combination of Bailey, Bradley and Hu disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. However, the combination does not disclose wherein in the first addition processing, the information indicative of the save location is added to Exif of the image file.
Lin does disclose (para.[0018-0019] “Preferably, when the image is in jpg or jpeg format, storing the annotation content in the auxiliary information of the image and storing the image may include: storing the annotation content into a user comments tag in accordance with the Exchangeable image file format (Exif) specification and storing the image.“ Lin discloses that annotation content associated with an image, which can include the save location data from the Bailey combination, can be stored in EXIF file format.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lin into the combination of teachings of Bailey, Bradley and Hu in order to a store save location information in a standard image metadata structure.
Claim(s) 6,7,10,11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bailey as modified by Bradley and Hu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cummins(US-20050251758-A1)
As per claim 6, the combination of Bailey, Bradley and Hu disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. However, the combination does not disclose wherein in the second addition processing, an icon indicative of the layout editing application is integrated with the image file as the identification information.
Cummins does disclose wherein in the second addition processing, an icon indicative of the layout editing application is integrated with the image file as the identification information(Cummins teaches a known visual technique for identifying the application associated with a represented file by using an application icon as an overlay on a thumbnail image. Specifically, Cummins teaches that the overlay selection module may, described in para.[0088] “the overlay selection module may use a variation of the corresponding application's icon as the type overlay (e.g., in reduced size), or the overlay selection module may select a default type overlay (or none at all). The overlay selection module may determine that type overlays are used for a first genre of file types (e.g., data files such as .doc, .xls, etc.), but not used for a second genre of file types (e.g., multimedia files such as tif, gif, jpg, .png, .bmp, .mpg, .wav, .avi, etc.)” and further in para.[0093] “If the application does not specify a type overlay, then in step 1119 the overlay selection module may display a variation of the application's icon as the type overlay for the file's icon (e.g., a reduced size version of the application icon) for example, as is shown in FIG. 6A.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Cummins into the combination of teachings of Bailey, Bradley and Hu in order to apply predictably provide a readily recognizable visual indication of the application appropriate for opening or editing the project data.
As per claim 7, the combination of Bailey, Bradley, Hu and Cummins disclose all the elements of claim 6 as discussed above. Cummins also discloses wherein the icon is a preset, fixed icon(Cummins teaches that it is well-known in para.[0002] that “Icons are usually stored as static bitmaps,” and further teaches at para.[0088] “ For example, an individual file may specify a type overlay to be used (or that no type overlay should be used), the type overlay may be selected based on an application to which the file type corresponds (the corresponding application specifies the type overlay to be used), the overlay selection module may use a variation of the corresponding application's icon as the type overlay (e.g., in reduced size), or the overlay selection module may select a default type overlay (or none at all).” Thus, rather than requiring a newly generated or user-created image, Cummins teaches using a preexisting, stored application icon as the application identifying overlay, aligning with the claim element.) The rationale from claim 6 is incorporated herein.
As per claim 10, the combination of Bailey, Bradley, Hu and Cummins disclose all the elements of claim 6 as discussed above. Cummins also discloses wherein the one or more processors further execute the instructions to perform edit processing of editing the icon(Cummins teaches processing for editing the application-identifying icon. Specifically, Cummins teaches that a user may select an icon size and that the overlay selection module may, as taught in para.[0028] “ Similarly, in some aspects, the overlay selection module 220 may select, scale, and/or position a status overlay and/or a type overlay based on the scaling selection, and the label placement module 240 may determine an appropriate location for a label associated with the icon based on the scaling selection.” This suggests edit processing that modifies the size and position of the icon). The rationale of claim 6 is incorporated herein.
As per claim 11, the combination of Bailey, Bradley, Hu and Cummins disclose all the elements of claim 10 as discussed above. Cummins also discloses wherein in the edit processing, at least one of a position and a size of the icon integrated with the image file is edited(“Cummins teaches processing for editing the application-identifying icon. Specifically, Cummins teaches that a user may select an icon size and that the overlay selection module may, as taught in para.[0028] “ Similarly, in some aspects, the overlay selection module 220 may select, scale, and/or position a status overlay and/or a type overlay based on the scaling selection, and the label placement module 240 may determine an appropriate location for a label associated with the icon based on the scaling selection.” This suggests edit processing that modifies the size and position of the icon). The rationale of claim 6 is incorporated herein.
Claim(s) 12,13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bailey as modified by Bradley, Hu and Cummins as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Crutchfield(US-20190026854-A1)
As per claim 12, the combination of Bailey, Bradley, Hu, and Cummins disclose all the elements of claim 10 as discussed above. However, the combination does not disclose wherein in the edit processing, at least one of any selected text, any selected graphic, and any selected image is edited as the icon.
Crutchfield does disclose wherein in the edit processing, at least one of any selected text, any selected graphic, and any selected image is edited as the icon(Crutchfield teaches editing selected content for use as an icon. Specifically, Crutchfield at para.[0016] “It is disclosed herein that the embedded digital content can be that in the form of an icon, a logo, a string of text/numerals, a picture, a photograph, and/or the like (i.e., generally refereed to herein as a watermark).”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Crutchfield into the combination of teachings of Bailey, Bradley, Hu and Cummins in order to permit selected text, graphics or images to be edited and used as an identifying icon.
As per claim 13, the combination of Bailey, Bradley, Hu, and Cummins disclose all the elements of claim 10 as discussed above. However, the combination does not disclose wherein in the edit processing, the icon is edited so that an aspect ratio of the icon is adjusted according to an aspect ratio of the image file.
Crutchfield does disclose wherein in the edit processing, the icon is edited so that an aspect ratio of the icon is adjusted according to an aspect ratio of the image file(Crutchfield teaches adjusting the icon according to the aspect ration of the underlying image. Para.[0028] “The watermark image is sized to the same dimensions (e.g., aspect ratio) of the as-displayed visual content being viewed by the digital imaging device (e.g., full size of the image viewing structure). Because the watermark image is displayed on the image viewing structure in a foreground layer and the viewed image content is displayed on the image viewing structure in a background layer, it allows a user to see as-viewed visual content in a background layer through the transparent portion of the watermark image.“) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Crutchfield into the combination of teachings of Bailey, Bradley, Hu and Cummins to be able to adjust the aspect ratio if the image which is integrated.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bailey as modified by Bradley, Hu and Cummins as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Miyazaki(US-20090046323-A1)
As per claim 14, the combination of Bailey, Bradley, Hu and Cummins disclose all the elements of claim 10 as discussed above. However, the combination does not disclose wherein in the second addition processing, a thumbnail integrated with the icon is added to the image file.
The combination alongside Miyazaki does disclose wherein in the second addition processing, a thumbnail integrated with the icon is added to the image file(para.[0039]“ As described in detail below, the image processing device 1 allows a user o designate image data, process the selected image data as thumbnail image data, and adds the thumbnail image data to substantial image data. That is, the image processing device 1 is able to create image data with a thumbnail.” Para.[0044] “ In step S15, an image insertion process is executed. In the image insertion process, the thumbnail image data selected in step S10 is inserted into the thumbnail part PB of the image data having the body part PA in which the image data obtained in step S5 is stored. Thus, the image insertion process terminates.” These passages support Miyazaki teaching adding a thumbnail to an underlying image file. Specifically teaching that its iamge processing device processes selected image data as thumbnail image data. Cummins as discussed in claim 7, teaches integrating an application-identifying icon with a thumbnail image by providing a thumbnail representation comprising the thumbnail image and a type overlay corresponding to the application where the overlay may comprise the application’s icon). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Miyazaki into the combination of teachings of Bailey, Bradley, Hu and Cummins to take Miyazaki’s technique of storing a thumbnail within an image file to Cummins’ icon-integrated thumbnail, adding a thumbnail integrated with the application identifying icon to the image file.)
Claim(s) 15,16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bailey as modified by Bradley and Hu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of NPL Video Titled “Photoshop Quick Tip: Save Options & File Naming Conventions”, available for viewing at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ebemDofjVg; published on Jun 24, 2023, herein referred to as “Watts”).
As per claims 15-16, the combination of Bailey, Bradley and Hu disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. However, the combination does not disclose wherein in the second addition processing, a character string indicative of the layout editing application is added to a file name of the image file as the identification information or wherein in the second addition processing, an extension indicative of the layout editing application is added to an extension of the image file as the identification information.
However, Watts discloses both of these limitations at 1:45 in the video where the character string “.PSD” is added to the file name File123_M. This character string identification information is indicative of the layout editing application (Adobe Photoshop in this instance). This also forms the extension indicative of the layout editing application as well.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Watts into the combination of teachings of Bailey, Bradley and Hu in order to create a file name that indicates to the user of the system which editing application is associated with working on that file. This may help the user with understanding and organization of the files on their system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRIS ALEJANDRO PUNTIER whose telephone number is (703)756-1893. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00.
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, Daniel Hajnik can be reached at 571-272-7642. 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.
/CHRIS ALEJANDRO PUNTIER/Examiner, Art Unit 2616
/DANIEL F HAJNIK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2616
Prosecution Insights