DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to application filed on May 26th, 2025.
Claims 1~5 are examined.
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 05/26/25 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the disclosure is objected to because the current title, “INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, SERVER APPARATUS, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM”, is more indicative of a general category/subject to which claims are directed. While the current title describes the invention it does so in only a very general sense and is not clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. It lacks the necessary level of detail to differentiate Applicant’s MFP/Printer data migration from others (i.e. a title clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed).
If a satisfactory title is not supplied by the Applicant, the Examiner may, at the time of allowance, change the title by Examiner’s Amendment pursuant to MPEP 606.01.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1~5 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.
Claims 1, 4, and 5 reciting, “the migration data…being a migration target…” It is unclear how the first information processing apparatus is a migration target when the second information processing apparatus is the target that receives the migrated data from the server. Is the first information processing device a migration source or target? If it is a target, then the claim limitation would not make sense since the second information processing apparatus is the target. Clarification is requested.
Claims 2 and 3 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency to claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1~5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki (JP2020135115A).
Regarding Claim 1,
Suzuki taught an information processing system, comprising:
a first information processing apparatus including a migration data upload unit that sends a first device number and migration data to a server apparatus when the migration data upload unit receives a data collection instruction from the server apparatus [Fig. 4, when issuing an export instruction, the export instruction unit 409 transmits the model and machine number of the information processing device (migration source) 21 and the model and machine number of the information processing device (migration destination) 22 to the server device 30 as additional information; Fig. 5, the export processing unit 504 monitors the export instruction from the information processing device (migration source) 21, and sends an export acceptance notification to the information processing device (migration source) 21 when there is an export instruction],
the first device number identifying the first information processing apparatus itself [Fig. 4, the device information is the model and machine number of the information processing device],
the migration data being recorded on the first information processing apparatus and being a migration target [Fig. 4, the data transferred from the information processing device (migration source) 21 to the information processing device (migration destination) 22 is, for example, setting information of an information processing device such as an image forming device];
the server apparatus including a migration data collection management unit that sends the data collection instruction to the first information processing apparatus, receives the first device number and the migration data from the first information processing apparatus [Fig. 5, the server device 30 receives an export instruction and migration data from the information processing device (migration source) 21], and stores the first device number and the migration data in association with each other on a storage medium [Fig. 5, the storage medium 503 stores the program, the setting information, the migration data received from the information processing device (migration source) 21]; and
a second information processing apparatus including an import instruction unit that sends an import instruction including the first device number to the server apparatus [Fig. 4, the import instruction unit 411 goes to the cloud server (that is, the server device 30) connected to the network 100 when a data import request is made from the display / operation unit 404 of the information processing device (migration destination) 22 by the user],
wherein the server apparatus further includes an import management unit that receives the import instruction from the second information processing apparatus and sends the migration data associated with the first device number included in the import instruction to the second information processing apparatus [Fig. 4, when issuing an import instruction, the import instruction unit 411 transmits the machine number of the information processing device (migration destination) 22 to the server device 30 as additional information. The import processing unit 412 receives the import acceptance notification from the server device 30, and performs the data import process (that is, the data reception process) from the server device 30], and
the second information processing apparatus further includes an import processing unit that receives the migration data from the server apparatus and records the migration data on the second information processing apparatus [Fig. 4, in the storage medium 407 of the information processing device (migration destination) 22, the customer ID, model, and machine number of the information processing device (migration destination) 22 are stored as setting information].
Regarding Claims 2,
Suzuki taught wherein the server apparatus further includes a data conversion unit that generates, in a case where a device type identified by the first device number is different from a device type identified by a second device number identifying the second information processing apparatus, compatible data by converting the migration data so that the migration data is compatible with the device type identified by the second device number, the import management unit of the server apparatus sends the compatible data to the second information processing apparatus, and the import processing unit of the second information processing apparatus receives the compatible data and records the compatible data on the second information processing apparatus [Fig. 6, step 109, the server device 30 determines whether or not it is necessary to convert the data exported in S106. If the model of the information processing device (migration source) 21 and the model of the information processing device (migration destination) 22 received in S103 are different models, it is determined that data conversion is necessary. When data conversion is required, the server device 30 converts the data exported in S106]
Regarding Claim 3,
Suzuki taught further comprising a plurality of the second information processing apparatuses [Fig. 4, receives information and requests from the server device 30 and other information processing devices].
Regarding Claims 4 and 5, the claims are similar in scope to claim 1 and therefore, rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEE SOO KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3229. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicholas Taylor can be reached on (571) 272-3889. 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.
/HEE SOO KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights