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 .
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 9-11, 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nagatomo (US 2015/0277813).
Nagatomo (…813) discloses an image forming system comprising: an image forming apparatus (5); and a server apparatus (1) capable of communicating with the image forming apparatus, wherein the image forming apparatus includes a collecting unit configured to collect operation history data relating to an operation history of the image forming apparatus on the basis of a collection data setting which is a setting relating to collection of data and configured to transmit the collected operation history data to the server apparatus ([0045]; [0048]; and [0074]), and wherein the server apparatus includes an analyzing unit configured to analyze the operation history data and a collection data setting unit configured to provide notification to the image forming apparatus so that the collection data setting is changed on the basis of an analysis result of the analyzing unit ([0075]-[0079]) [see Applicant’s claim 1]. The collection data setting is changeable to a first collection data setting and a second collection data setting ([0075]-[0079]), and wherein the operation history data includes information on acquiring timings of the operation history data and information indicating a state of the image forming apparatus at each of the acquiring timings, and a data amount of the operation history data per each acquiring timing or per predetermined period is smaller in the first collection data setting than in the second collection data setting ([0074]; and [0093]) [see Applicant’s claim 2]. A designating unit configured to designate a change rule of the collection data setting for the collection data setting unit ([0074]-[0079]) [see Applicant’s claim 5]. A designating unit is provided in an information processing device capable of communicating with the server apparatus ([0074]-[0079]) [see Applicant’s claim 6]. The server apparatus further comprises: a measure content determining unit configured to determine a measure content on the basis of the analysis result of the analyzing unit; and a notifying unit configured to notify the measure content to a notification client device ([0074]-[0079]) [see Applicant’s claim 9]. The measure content includes at least one of exchange of an element constituting the image forming apparatus, cleaning or adjustment of the element constituting the image forming apparatus, and a change in operation setting relating to image formation in the image forming apparatus ([0054]-[0057]) [see Applicant’s claim 10]. The notification client device is an information processing device capable of communicating with the server apparatus ([0074]-[0079]) [see Applicant’s claim 11]. An image forming apparatus (5) capable of communicating with a server apparatus (1), comprising: a collecting unit configured to collect operation history data relating to an operation history of the image forming apparatus on the basis of a collection data setting which is a setting relating to collection of data and configured to transmit the collected operation history data to the server apparatus ([0045]; [0048] and [0074]), wherein the collection data setting is changed on the basis of notification received from the server apparatus by the image forming apparatus ([0075]-[0079]) [see Applicant’s claim 25]. A server apparatus (1) capable of communicating with the image forming apparatus (5), comprising: an analyzing unit configured to receive operation history data, relating to an operation history of the image forming apparatus, collected in the image forming apparatus on the basis of a collection data setting which is a setting relating to collection of data and configured to analyze the received operation history data ([0074]-[0079]; and a collection data setting unit configured to provide notification to the image forming apparatus so that the collection data setting is changed on the basis of an analysis result of the analyzing unit ([0079]) [see Applicant’s claim 26].
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7, 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagatomo (US 2015/0277813).
Nagatomo (…813) discloses the features mentioned previously, but does not disclose the designating unit provided in the image forming apparatus, the change rule including information on a contract plan setting, and the notification client being the image forming apparatus. The placement of the designating unit is considered to be a matter of an engineering decision [see Applicant’s claim 7]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the designating unit provided in the image forming apparatus, since such a placement is considered to be merely a matter of an engineering decision. Nagatomo (…813) disclose service information can be transmitted and can be accumulated ([0054]-[0057]), where it is considered to be obvious that the service information could include information on a contract plan setting [see Applicant’s claim 8]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the claimed change rule include information on a contract plan setting since it is obvious that a contract plan could be included in service information. Moreover, the apparatus that is the notification client device is considered to be merely a matter of an engineering decision [see Applicant’s claim 12]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the notification client device be the image forming apparatus, since such is considered to be merely a matter of an engineering decision.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4 and 13-24 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.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANDRA BRASE whose telephone number is (571)272-2131. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at 571-272-1674. 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.
/SANDRA BRASE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852 March 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights