CTNF 19/062,001 CTNF 83889 DETAILED ACTION This is in response to the application filed on February 24, 2025 where Claims 1 – 7, of which Claims 1 and 7 are in independent form, are presented for examination. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 06-52 The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on February 24, 2025 and June 16, 2025 were filed before the mailing date of the current action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 101 Analysis Claims 1 and 7 are directed to protecting access to a device by starting the device in a restricted mode based on input of a default administrator password. The claims do not recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon. Therefore, the claims satisfy Step 2A, Prong One of the 2019 Revised 101 Patent Eligibility Guidelines as patent eligible subject matter. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 1 – 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. 1. Regarding Claim 1 , the claim limitations “a determination processing portion configured to determine whether an administrator password…is a predetermined initial password,” “a startup processing portion configured to start the electronic device in a restricted mode,” and “a reception processing portion configured to receive a change operation” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification is silent as to any particular functions, processes, or structure that are used to perform the various functions other than a generic computer implementing instructions that execute the various functions. 2. Claims 2 – 6 are also rejected based on the dependency on Claim 1. In some instances, the claims also contain claim limitations that also invoke 13 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, without sufficient structure in the specification, such as “an output processing portion configured to output identification information of the electronic device in the communication network,” “a temporary transition processing portion configured to…switch an operating mode of the electronic device from the restricted mode to a normal mode,” “a transition processing portion configured to…switch the operating mode of the electronic device from the restricted mode to a normal mode,” and “one or both of an image reading portion configured to read an image of a document and an image forming portion configured to form an image based on image data.” The specification is silent as to any particular functions, processes, or structure that are used to perform the various functions other than a generic computer implementing instructions that execute the various functions. For a computer-implemented means-plus-function claim limitation that invokes 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, the corresponding structure is required to be more than simply a general purpose computer or microprocessor. See Aristocrat, 521 F.3d 1328, 1333, (Fed. Cir. 2008). The corresponding structure for a computer-implemented function must include the algorithm as well as the general purpose computer or microprocessor. See WMS Gaming, Inc., 184 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The written description of the specification must at least disclose the algorithm that transforms the general purpose microprocessor to a special purpose computer programmed to perform the disclosed algorithm that performs the claimed function. See Aristocrat, 521 F.3d at 1338. Applicant may express the algorithm in any understandable terms including as a mathematical formula, in prose, in a flow chart, or in any other manner that provides sufficient structure. See Finisar Corp., 523 F.3d 1323, 1340, (Fed. Cir. 2008). A rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, is appropriate if the written description of the specification discloses no corresponding algorithm. See Aristocrat, 521 F.3d at 1337-38. For example, merely referencing to a general purpose computer with appropriate programming without providing any detailed explanation of the appropriate programming, See Id. at 1334, or simply reciting software without providing some detail about the means to accomplish the function, would not be an adequate disclosure of the corresponding structure to satisfy the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, even when one of ordinary skill in the art is capable of writing the software to convert a general purpose computer to a special purpose computer to perform the claimed function. See Finisar, 523 F.3d at 1340-41. The specification provides structure for implementing the functional limitations, however that structure is limited to general purpose computers [See PGPub 2025/0272370; Figs. 2, 4, Para. 0031, 0070]. The Applicant is reminded that general purpose computers is not sufficient to provide the required structural disclosure, Aristocrat, 521 F.3d at 1338, and that indefiniteness analysis does not turn on the name of the structure that does the processing. See NetMoneylN, Inc. v. VergiSign, Inc., 545 F.3d 1359, 1366-67 (Fed. Cir. 2008). The Applicant's specification fails to provide any detailed explanation of the algorithm that transforms the general purpose microprocessor to a special purpose computer programmed to perform the disclosed algorithm that performs the claimed function. The Applicant is reminded that the requirement for the disclosure of an algorithm can be avoided if one of ordinary skill in the art is capable of writing the software to convert a general purpose computer to a special purpose computer to perform the claimed function is unpersuasive because the understanding of one skilled in the art does not relieve the patentee of the duty to disclose sufficient structure to support means-plus-function claim terms. The specification must explicitly disclose the algorithm for performing the claimed function, and simply reciting the claimed function in the specification will not be a sufficient disclosure for an algorithm which, by definition, must contain a sequence of steps. See Supplemental Examination Guidelines, 76 FR at 7168. 07-34-23 Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Applicant may: (a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; (b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)). If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either: (a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim (s) 1 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by PGPub. 2021/0382983 (hereinafter “Ogasawara”) . 3. Regarding Claims 1 and 7 , Ogasawara discloses of an electronic device [Para. 0002-3], comprising: a determination processing portion configured to determine whether an administrator password used for authenticating an administrator of the electronic device is a predetermined initial password when the electronic device is started [Fig. 5; Para. 0004]; a startup processing portion configured to start the electronic device in a restricted mode in which functions of the electronic device are restricted when the determination processing portion determines that the administrator password is the initial password [Figs 4 and 5; Para. 0004-5]; and a reception processing portion configured to receive a change operation to change the administrator password when started in the restricted mode [Figs. 5-8; Para. 0004-5, 0013]. 4. Regarding Claim 2 , Ogasawara discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Ogasawara further discloses that the reception processing portion receives the change operation at an operation input device communicatively connected to the electronic device [Fig. 1, item 12; Para. 0043; can be a keyboard or mouse]. 5. Regarding Claim 3 , Ogasawara discloses the limitations of Claim 2. Ogasawara further discloses of an output processing portion configured to output identification information of the electronic device in the communication network in response to a predetermined output operation when the electronic device is started in the restricted mode and the electronic device is connected to the communication network [Para. 0047-50, 0066, 0069]. 6. Regarding Claim 4 , Ogasawara discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Ogasawara further discloses of a temporary transition processing portion configured to, when the electronic device is started in the restricted mode and a predetermined temporary transition operation is received, switch an operating mode of the electronic device from the restricted mode to a normal mode in which functions of the electronic device are not restricted until a predetermined end condition is satisfied [Figs. 4-8, 11; Para. 0172-0215]. 7. Regarding Claim 5 , Ogasawara discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Ogasawara further discloses of a transition processing portion configured to, when the administrator password is changed from the initial password by the change operation, switch the operating mode of the electronic device from the restricted mode to a normal mode in which functions of the electronic device are not restricted [Figs. 4-8, 12; Para. 0180-183]. 8. Regarding Claim 6 , Ogasawara discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Ogasawara further discloses of one or both of an image reading portion configured to read an image of a document and an image forming portion configured to form an image based on image data [Fig. 1, items 14, 15, 16, 17; Para. 0050-51, 0058-63] . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. PGPub. 2022/0269772; PGPub. 2016/0004851 . Contacts Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tae K. Kim, whose telephone number is (571) 270-1979. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday (10:00 AM - 6:30 PM EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Jorge Ortiz-Criado, can be reached on (571) 272-7624. The fax phone number for submitting all Official communications is (703) 872-9306. The fax phone number for submitting informal communications such as drafts, proposed amendments, etc., may be faxed directly to the examiner at (571) 270-2979. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (toll-free). /TAE K KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2496 Application/Control Number: 19/062,001 Page 2 Art Unit: 2496 Application/Control Number: 19/062,001 Page 3 Art Unit: 2496 Application/Control Number: 19/062,001 Page 4 Art Unit: 2496 Application/Control Number: 19/062,001 Page 5 Art Unit: 2496 Application/Control Number: 19/062,001 Page 6 Art Unit: 2496 Application/Control Number: 19/062,001 Page 7 Art Unit: 2496 Application/Control Number: 19/062,001 Page 8 Art Unit: 2496 Application/Control Number: 19/062,001 Page 9 Art Unit: 2496 Application/Control Number: 19/062,001 Page 10 Art Unit: 2496
Prosecution Insights