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 .
This communication is in response to Application No. 19/055177, filed on 2/17/2025. Claims 1-4 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 1-4 have been rejected as follows.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
The claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: The claims 1-3 are a system and claim 4 is a computer readable medium. Thus, each independent claim, on its face, is directed to one of the statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. §101.
Step 2A Prong 1: The independent claims (1 and 4, taking claim 1 as a representative claim) recite:
A consumables ordering system comprising:
an input device that receives an input of an instruction of a user;
a storage device containing ordering prohibition information, indicating whether ordering of consumables used in an electronic device is prohibited;
a control device including a processor, and configured to act, when the processor executes a consumables ordering program, as an automatic ordering device that keeps from ordering the consumables, when the ordering prohibition information is indicating that the ordering of the consumables is prohibited, and orders the consumables when the ordering prohibition information is indicating that the ordering of the consumables is not prohibited, wherein the automatic ordering device causes the ordering prohibition information, upon receipt of an instruction to prohibit the ordering of the consumables through the input device, to indicate that the ordering of the consumables is prohibited.
These limitations, except for the italicized portions, under their broadest reasonable interpretations, recite certain methods of organizing human activity for managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) as well as commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations). The claimed invention recites steps for automated ordering of a consumable based on the set rule (to prohibit or to allow). The steps under its broadest reasonable interpretation specifically fall under sales activities. The Examiner notes that although the claim limitations are summarized, the analysis regarding subject matter eligibility considers the entirety of the claim and all of the claim elements individually, as a whole, and in ordered combination.
Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of:
A consumables ordering system comprising: (claim 1)
A computer-readable, non-transitory recording medium having a consumables ordering program recorded thereon, the consumables ordering program being configured to cause a computer (claim 4)
an input device that receives an input of an instruction of a user;
a storage device containing ordering prohibition information, indicating whether ordering of consumables used in an electronic device is prohibited;
a control device including a processor, and configured to act, when the processor executes a consumables ordering program, as an automatic ordering device that keeps from ordering the consumables, when the ordering prohibition information is indicating that the ordering of the consumables is prohibited, and orders the consumables when the ordering prohibition information is indicating that the ordering of the consumables is not prohibited, wherein the automatic ordering device causes the ordering prohibition information, upon receipt of an instruction to prohibit the ordering of the consumables through the input device, to indicate that the ordering of the consumables is prohibited.
The additional elements of emphasized above are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application – MPEP 2106.05(f).
Accordingly, these additional elements when considered individually or as a whole do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The independent claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong two, the additional elements in the claims amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using a generic computer component.
Even when considered as an ordered combination, the additional elements of claim 1 and 4 do not add anything that is not already present when they are considered individually. Therefore, under Step 2B, there are no meaningful limitations in claims 1, 11, and 20 that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself (see MPEP 2106.05).
As such, independent claims 1 and 4 are ineligible.
Dependent claims 2-3 when analyzed as a whole, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the additional recited limitations fail to establish that the claims are not directed to the same abstract idea of Independent Claims 1 and 4 without significantly more.
Claim 2 recites wherein, upon detecting that the consumables have been replaced in the electronic device, the automatic ordering device causes the storage device to cause the ordering prohibition information to indicate that the ordering of the consumables is not prohibited. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 3 recites wherein, when the ordering of the consumables has succeeded, the automatic ordering device causes the storage device to cause the automatic ordering prohibition information to indicate that the ordering of the consumables is prohibited. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
For these reasons claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 USC 101.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inami (US 20030040984).
Regarding claims 1 and 4, Inami discloses:
A consumables ordering system comprising: (claim 1)
A computer-readable, non-transitory recording medium having a consumables ordering program recorded thereon, the consumables ordering program being configured to cause a computer, (claim 4) [0224] Further, the storage medium, such as a floppy disk, a hard disk, an optical disk, a magneto-optical disk, CD-ROM, CD-R, a magnetic tape, a non-volatile type memory card, and ROM can be used for providing the program codes.
an input device that receives an input of an instruction of a user; [0156] Also, step S802 is assumed as a process for checking if a display instruction is input to an order placement sheet window shown in FIG. 16A (to be described later). In such case, the display instruction of an order placement window included in one function of an order placement means may be made based on an instruction via a pointing device such as a mouse, keyboard, or the like, or based on a user's instruction via a liquid crystal input screen.
a storage device containing ordering prohibition information (see storage means executed in [0220]) , indicating whether ordering of consumables used in an electronic device is prohibited; [0124] If the user continues the print processes in this state, the remaining amount detection works again (step S302). In this case, if the CPU supplies a current, which is weak enough not to disconnect the fuse, to the C circuit to check the energization state in the same manner as the previous process (step S303), since the fuse has been disconnected by the previous remaining amount detection, no weak current flows. Hence, the CPU of the image forming apparatus main body detects this state, and inhibits the order placement system from being launched (step S304). In this manner, redundant orders for a developer or process cartridge can be avoided.
a control device including a processor, and configured to act, when the processor (the CPU of the image forming apparatus main body detects this state) executes a consumables ordering program, as an automatic ordering device that keeps from ordering the consumables, when the ordering prohibition information is indicating that the ordering of the consumables is prohibited, [0124] If the user continues the print processes in this state, the remaining amount detection works again (step S302). In this case, if the CPU supplies a current, which is weak enough not to disconnect the fuse, to the C circuit to check the energization state in the same manner as the previous process (step S303), since the fuse has been disconnected by the previous remaining amount detection, no weak current flows. Hence, the CPU of the image forming apparatus main body detects this state, and inhibits the order placement system from being launched (step S304). In this manner, redundant orders for a developer or process cartridge can be avoided.
and orders the consumables when the ordering prohibition information is indicating that the ordering of the consumables is not prohibited, [0121] If remaining amount detection works in a process cartridge which is in use (step S302), the CPU controls the current output control circuit to supply a current, which is weak enough not to disconnect to the fuse, to the electrical circuit (C circuit 210) provided to the process cartridge, and checks the energization state (step S303). If the weak current flows through the C circuit, the CPU determines that the remaining amount detection works for the first time, and launches the order placement system (step S305). Note that launch of the order placement system is the same as the first embodiment. [0122] If the image forming apparatus main body detects upon receiving order placement complete information that the order place system has placed an order for a developer or process cartridge to the selling agency (step S306), the CPU controls the current output control circuit to supply a current, which is high enough to surely disconnect the fuse, to the C circuit of the process cartridge, so as to disconnect the fuse (step S307).
wherein the automatic ordering device causes the ordering prohibition information, upon receipt of an instruction to prohibit the ordering of the consumables through the input device, to indicate that the ordering of the consumables is prohibited. [0195] As stock count management control, for example, the apparatus (image forming apparatus/information processing apparatus) determines whether or not launch of the order placement system is inhibited, as has been explained using FIGS. 5A and 5B, and the stock count is decremented when the inhibited state of launch of the system is canceled. [0196] With the above-mentioned flow, whether or not an order is placed in consideration of the stock count can be confirmed. Hence, the user can be prevented from placing an order although he or she has a large stock, and a redundant order upon completion of order placement.
Regarding claim 2, Inami discloses the limitations set forth above and further discloses upon detecting that the consumables have been replaced in the electronic device, the automatic ordering device causes the storage device to cause the ordering prohibition information to indicate that the ordering of the consumables is not prohibited. [0195] As stock count management control, for example, the apparatus (image forming apparatus/information processing apparatus) determines whether or not launch of the order placement system is inhibited, as has been explained using FIGS. 5A and 5B, and the stock count is decremented when the inhibited state of launch of the system is canceled. [0196] With the above-mentioned flow, whether or not an order is placed in consideration of the stock count can be confirmed. Hence, the user can be prevented from placing an order although he or she has a large stock, and a redundant order upon completion of order placement. And see Figure 14-S808 order placement instruction.
Regarding claim 3, Inami discloses the limitations set forth above and further discloses when the ordering of the consumables has succeeded, the automatic ordering device causes the storage device to cause the automatic ordering prohibition information to indicate that the ordering of the consumables is prohibited. [0195] As stock count management control, for example, the apparatus (image forming apparatus/information processing apparatus) determines whether or not launch of the order placement system is inhibited, as has been explained using FIGS. 5A and 5B, and the stock count is decremented when the inhibited state of launch of the system is canceled. [0196] With the above-mentioned flow, whether or not an order is placed in consideration of the stock count can be confirmed. Hence, the user can be prevented from placing an order although he or she has a large stock, and a redundant order upon completion of order placement. And see Figure 14- S809 Prohibited order placement window control.
Relevant Art Not Cited
US 6233409 discloses a redundant reorder prevention system prevents redundant reorders for replaceable components in printing devices. The replaceable component has memory integrated therein which contains a reorder value field. The reorder value field is initially configured in a first state which indicates that a new replaceable component has not been ordered to replace the current replaceable component. Before the system orders a new replaceable component, it checks the reorder value field. If the first state is detected, a new replaceable component is ordered and the reorder value field is reconfigured to a second state which indicates that the new replaceable component has been ordered. If the second state is detected before an order is placed, the order process is terminated before a new replaceable component is ordered.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA E. FRUNZI whose telephone number is (571)270-1031. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 7-4 (EST).
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, Marissa Thein can be reached at (571) 272-6764. 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.
VICTORIA E. FRUNZI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit TC 3689
/VICTORIA E. FRUNZI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689 7/1/2026
Prosecution Insights