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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-6 are pending in this application.
Claim rejections 35 USC 101 are withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments on claim rejections 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103, filed 8/20/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner respectfully traverses applicant’s arguments and made this action Final.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that the timestamp described in Hurley is not an update of the date and time indicated by the data by the date and time attribute, from a first date and time, at which the file was generated, to a second date and time, at which the file was acquired. Moreover, Hurley does not describe that the timestamp is somehow used as the starting point for the "limited period of time" before deletion (Remarks, page 12).
Examiner respectfully submits that Hurley discloses: “Push server 130 updates the row to indicate an identifier for the received file and a timestamp of when the file was received.” ([0069]) and “The indication sent in step 310 may include identification data that identifies the particular file. Alternatively, push server 130 creates an identifier for the particular file. The identifier for the particular file may be based on one or more criteria, such as the particular file's name, an identity (e.g., name) of source device 110, date and time the particular file was created, and/or date and time the notification was received at push server 130.” ([0077]) and “For example, all pending image files transmitted from source device 110 are deleted after 30 days of storage.” ([0100])
Examiner interprets that the date and time the particular file was created in Hurley is similar to claimed “a first date and time, at which the file was generated”. Examiner interprets that the received file and a timestamp of when the file was received in Hurley is similar to claimed “a second date and time, at which the file was acquired”. Therefore, push server updates the row to indicate a timestamp of when the file was received from the date and time the particular file was created in Hurley is similar to claimed “updates the first date and time indicated by the date and time attribute of the data to a second date and time at which the data was acquired by the acquirer”.
Furthermore, examiner interprets that deleting all pending image files after 30 days of storage in Hurley is similar to the starting point for the "limited period of time" before deletion.
Applicant argues that the cited paragraph of Hara merely describes that a 1-bit deletion flag is used for identifying whether the purchase record is in a deleted state (1 for deleted, 0 for non-deleted). See Hara, at paragraph [0081]. However, this flag does not indicate whether or not data is a deletion target, much less the features recited in amended dependent claim 4 (Remarks, page 14).
Examiner respectfully submits that Hara discloses “The deletion flag is 1-bit data for identifying whether the purchase record is in a deleted state. In an embodiment, the deletion flag of the purchase record in the deleted state is set to “1”, and the deletion flag of the purchase record in a non-deleted state is set to “0”.” ([0081]), “The temporary registration flag F1 of the purchase record is “1” and the deletion flag F2 thereof is “0”. That is, the purchase record is the record for temporary registration. The purchase record is not the record targeted for deletion.” ([0111]) and “The processor 61 updates the deletion flag of the purchase record to “1”, as ACT 27. With this configuration, the purchase record becomes a record targeted for deletion.” ([0121])
Examiner interprets that if the deletion flag of the purchase record to “1” then the purchase record becomes a record targeted for deletion, and if the deletion flag is “0” then the purchase record is not the record targeted for deletion in Hara is similar to the flag indicates whether or not data is a deletion target.
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 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.
Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hurley et al. (US 2012/0311096, hereinafter “Hurley”) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chatt et al. (US 7,546,384, hereinafter “Chatt”).
Regarding claim 1, Hurley teaches A processing apparatus comprising ([0019]: discussing about FIG. 1 is a block diagram that depicts an example system for causing files that originate from one computing device to be sent to one or more other computing devices):
an acquirer that acquires data from an external apparatus, wherein the data has a date and time attribute indicating a first date and time at which the data was generated in the external apparatus (Hurley, [0077]: The indication sent in step 310 may include identification data that identifies the particular file. Alternatively, push server 130 creates an identifier for the particular file. The identifier for the particular file may be based on one or more criteria, such as the particular file's name, an identity (e.g., name) of source device 110, date and time the particular file was created, and/or date and time the notification was received at push server 130.);
a storage that stores the data acquired-data by the acquirer (Hurley, [0024]: Destination devices 150A-C are configured to receive and store a file that was transmitted from source device 110.); and
at least one controller that: in response to the data being acquired by the acquirer, updates the first date and time indicated by the date and time attribute of the data to a second date and time at which the data was acquired by the acquirer (Hurley, [0069]: Push server 130 updates the row to indicate an identifier for the received file and a timestamp of when the file was received. When a destination device sends, to push server 130, a request for information about one or more files, push server 130 determines which source device(s) are associated with the destination device and analyzes the request for a "last-seen" timestamp.), and
deletes, from the storage, data for which a predetermined period has elapsed from the second date and time indicated by the date and time attribute, among pieces of data stored in the storage (Hurley, [0100]: For example, all pending image files transmitted from source device 110 are deleted after 30 days of storage.).
Assuming, arguendo, that Hurley does not explicitly teach an acquirer that acquires data from an external apparatus, wherein the data has a date and time attribute indicating a first date and time at which the data was generated in the external apparatus; and a storage that stores the data acquired-data by the acquirer.
Chatt teaches an acquirer that acquires data from an external apparatus, wherein the data has a date and time attribute indicating a first date and time at which the data was generated in the external apparatus; and a storage that stores the data acquired-data by the acquirer (Chatt, column 3 lines 31-35 and Fig. 1: FIG. 1 illustrates, for sake of clarity, a typical list of files 101 located on a server (i.e., computer) with an associated "Date Modified" timestamp 102 and an associated "Date Created" timestamp 103.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the file management of Hurley with the teaching about the date created timestamp of Chatt because it would automatically establish an immutable, chronological baseline for when a record, file, or data entry first came into existence, enabling reliable sorting, auditing, and lifecycle tracking.
Regarding claim 2, Hurley in view of Chatt teaches the acquirer acquires a file as the data from the external apparatus, the file has a save date and time attribute indicating a date and time at which the file was saved at the external apparatus (Hurley, [0077]: The indication sent in step 310 may include identification data that identifies the particular file. Alternatively, push server 130 creates an identifier for the particular file. The identifier for the particular file may be based on one or more criteria, such as the particular file's name, an identity (e.g., name) of source device 110, date and time the particular file was created, and/or date and time the notification was received at push server 130.), and
the at least one controller, in response to the file being acquired by the acquirer, updates the save date and time attribute of the file to the second date and time (Hurley, [0069]: Push server 130 updates the row to indicate an identifier for the received file and a timestamp of when the file was received.).
Regarding claim 3, Hurley in view of Chatt teaches the at least one controller deletes, at predetermined time intervals set by a user, the data for which the predetermined period has elapsed from the second date and time indicated by the date and time attribute, among the pieces of data stored in the storage (Hurley, [0100]: For example, all pending image files transmitted from source device 110 are deleted after 30 days of storage. [0120]: Thus, the period of time associated with a file may be established by push server 130 or source device 110 and enforced by third-party storage service 140. For example, push server 130 may send deletion time data to third-party storage service 140, which determines, based on the deletion time data, when to delete the particular file.).
Claim 6 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hurley in view of Chatt and further in view of Hara (US 2021/0264503).
Regarding claim 4, Hurley in view of Chatt teaches the apparatus of claim 3 as discussed above. Hurley in view of Chatt does not explicitly teach the at least one controller adds flag information indicating that the data acquired by the acquirer is not a deletion target to the data, and in deletion processing performed at the predetermined time intervals, in a case that the flag information is added to the data, does not delete the data and updates the flag information to indicate that the data is a deletion target.
Hara teaches the at least one controller adds flag information indicating that the data acquired by the acquirer is not a deletion target to the data, and in deletion processing performed at the predetermined time intervals, in a case that the flag information is added to the data, does not delete the data and updates the flag information to indicate that the data is a deletion target (Hara, [0081]: The deletion flag is 1-bit data for identifying whether the purchase record is in a deleted state. In an embodiment, the deletion flag of the purchase record in the deleted state is set to “1”, and the deletion flag of the purchase record in a non-deleted state is set to “0”. [0111]: The temporary registration flag F1 of the purchase record is “1” and the deletion flag F2 thereof is “0”. That is, the purchase record is the record for temporary registration. The purchase record is not the record targeted for deletion. [0121]: The processor 61 updates the deletion flag of the purchase record to “1”, as ACT 27. With this configuration, the purchase record becomes a record targeted for deletion.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the file management of Hurley and Chatt with the teaching about the deletion flag of Hara because it would prevent accidental data loss, ensure referential integrity, and maintain historical reporting accuracy.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hurley in view of Arifuku (US 2021/0264503) and further in view of Chatt.
Regarding claim 5, Hurley teaches An apparatus comprising:
an acquirer that acquires content data from an external apparatus, wherein the content data has a date and time attribute indicating a first date and time at which the content data was generated in the external apparatus (Hurley, [0077]: The indication sent in step 310 may include identification data that identifies the particular file. Alternatively, push server 130 creates an identifier for the particular file. The identifier for the particular file may be based on one or more criteria, such as the particular file's name, an identity (e.g., name) of source device 110, date and time the particular file was created, and/or date and time the notification was received at push server 130.);
a storage that stores the content data acquired by the acquirer (Hurley, [0024]: Destination devices 150A-C are configured to receive and store a file that was transmitted from source device 110.); and
at least one controller that: in response to the content data being acquired by the acquirer, updates the first date and time indicated by the date and time attribute of the content data to a second date and time at which the content data was acquired by the acquirer (Hurley, [0069]: Push server 130 updates the row to indicate an identifier for the received file and a timestamp of when the file was received. When a destination device sends, to push server 130, a request for information about one or more files, push server 130 determines which source device(s) are associated with the destination device and analyzes the request for a "last-seen" timestamp.), and
deletes, from the storage, content data for which a predetermined period has elapsed from the second date and time indicated by the date and time attribute, among pieces of content data stored in the storage (Hurley, [0100]: For example, all pending image files transmitted from source device 110 are deleted after 30 days of storage.).
Hurley does not explicitly teach an image forming apparatus; and an image former that forms an image based on the content data.
Arifuku teaches an image forming apparatus; and an image former that forms an image based on the content data (Arifuku, [0037]: The image former 19 forms an image based on the image data input from the image inputter 17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the file management of Hurley with the teaching about the image former of Arifuku because it would allow to automate resizing, rotating, cropping, and converting thousands of images at once.
Assuming, arguendo, that Hurley in view of Arifuku does not explicitly teach an acquirer that acquires content data from an external apparatus, wherein the content data has a date and time attribute indicating a first date and time at which the content data was generated in the external apparatus; and a storage that stores the content data acquired by the acquirer.
Chatt teaches an acquirer that acquires content data from an external apparatus, wherein the content data has a date and time attribute indicating a first date and time at which the content data was generated in the external apparatus; and a storage that stores the content data acquired by the acquirer (Chatt, column 3 lines 31-35 and Fig. 1: FIG. 1 illustrates, for sake of clarity, a typical list of files 101 located on a server (i.e., computer) with an associated "Date Modified" timestamp 102 and an associated "Date Created" timestamp 103.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the file management of Hurley and Arifuku with the teaching about the date created timestamp of Chatt because it would automatically establish an immutable, chronological baseline for when a record, file, or data entry first came into existence, enabling reliable sorting, auditing, and lifecycle tracking.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Handy Bosma et al. (US 2020/0293679) discloses that defined data retention time period 246 represents a predetermined amount of time that data deletion manager 218 will retain copy of personal data 228 in structured data store 224. In other words, at expiration of defined data retention time period 246, data deletion manager 218 will permanently delete or erase copy of personal data 228 from structured data store 224. Defined data retention time period 246 may be, for example, 30 days ([0037]).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHONG H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1766. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5pm 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, Ajay Bhatia can be reached at (571) 272-3906. 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.
/PHONG H NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2156
May 25, 2026
Prosecution Insights