Ex Parte Ataka

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 5, 2014

11185867 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 5, 2014)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
__________

Ex parte HIROYUKI ATAKA1
__________

Appeal 2012-003306
Application 11/185,867
Technology Center 2600
__________

Before DONALD E. ADAMS, ERIC B. GRIMES, and MELANIE L.
McCOLLUM, Administrative Patent Judges.

McCOLLUM, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 involving claims to a printing
apparatus, method, and computer-readable medium. The Examiner has
rejected the claims as obvious. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Claims 1-17 are pending and on appeal (App. Br. 1-2). Claim 16 is
representative and reads as follows (emphasis added):

1 Appellant identifies the Real Party in Interest as SHARP KABUSHIKI
KAISHA (App. Br. 1).
Appeal 2012-003306
Application 11/185,867

2
16. A printing method for a printing apparatus, comprising the steps
of:
(a) carrying out print processing in terms of forming images with
respect to received print jobs;
(b) detecting whether or not there is a source required for the print
processing of each of the print jobs;
(c) managing print processing order of the print jobs, and carrying out
control such that a shortage print job is skipped and the print processing is
carried out with respect to each of succeeding print jobs coming after the
shortage print job in the print processing order, the shortage print job being
either a print job that has order to be next print-processed, or that is a print
job that is being print-processed, and the shortage print job being a print job
which is so judged in the step (b) as to cause a shortage of the source; and
(d) judging whether or not the shortage print job and a print job
which comes just before the shortage print job need to be consecutively
print-processed, by comparing (i) print job information, which is included in
the shortage print job and which includes at least identification information
for identifying (1) a print processing condition of the print job and/or (2) the
print job, with (ii) print job information of the print job which comes just
before the shortage print job, and by judging a correlation between the
shortage print job and the print job which comes just before the shortage job
in accordance with the comparison,
in cases where the shortage print job and the a print job which comes
just before the shortage print job are so judged in the step (d) that the
shortage print job and the print job which comes just before the shortage
print job are required to be sequentially print-processed because of the
judged correlation between the shortage print job and the print job which
comes just before the shortage print job, the print processing is suspended
until supply of the source is detected by the detecting section, control being
carried out in the step (c) such that the shortage print job, judged to be print-
processed in continuity with the print job which comes just before the
shortage print job, is not skipped for print processing with respect to the
succeeding print job coming after the shortage job, until completion of the
print processing of the shortage print job.
Claim 1 is similar to claim 16, but is directed to a printing apparatus.
Claim 1 recites that the printing apparatus comprises “a judgment section for
App
App

judg
just b
(App
recor
whic
comp
set fo
from
obvi
al. (U
over
2006
initia
burd
argu
Cir.
be su
artic
conc
eal 2012-0
lication 11
ing whethe
efore the
. Br. 19).
ding med
h controls
uter to fu
rth in clai
claim 1 (i
Claims 1
ous over N
S 7,158,2
Claims 1
Noda in v
) (Ans. 10
“In rejec
l burden o
en is met,
ment shift
1993) (cita
stained by
ulated reas
lusion of o
03306
/185,867
r or not th
shortage p
Claim 17
ium storin
a printing
nction as t
m 1” (id. a
d. at 20-22
-10 and 1
oda (US 6
44 B2, Jan
1 and 12 s
iew of Som
).
ting claim
f presentin
does the b
to the app
tion omitt
mere con
oning wit
bviousnes
e shortage
rint job ne
is directed
g a control
apparatus
he respect
t 23). Cla
).
3-17 stand
,897,972 B
. 2, 2007)
tand rejec
mer and
PRINCIP
s under 35
g a prima
urden of c
licant.” In
ed). “[R]e
clusory st
h some rat
s.” In re K
3
print job
ed to be c
to a “com
program f
, said cont
ive section
ims 2-15
rejected u
1, May 2
(Ans. 4).
ted under
Suzuki et
LES OF L
U.S.C. §
facie case
oming forw
re Rijcka
jections o
atements; i
ional unde
ahn, 441
and a prin
onsecutive
puter-read
or control
rol progra
s of the pr
depend dir
nder 35 U
4, 2005) in
35 U.S.C.
al. (US 7,1
AW
103, the ex
of obviou
ard with
ert, 9 F.3d
n obviousn
nstead, th
rpinning t
F.3d 977,
t job which
ly print-pr
able non t
ling a com
m causing
inting app
ectly or in
.S.C. § 10
view of S
§ 103(a) a
48,991 B2
aminer be
sness. On
evidence o
1531, 153
ess groun
ere must b
o support
988 (Fed.
comes
ocessed”
ransitory
puter
the
aratus as
directly
3(a) as
ommer et
s obvious
, Dec. 12,
ars the
ly if that
r
2 (Fed.
ds cannot
e some
the legal
Cir. 2006)

.
Appeal 2012-003306
Application 11/185,867

4
I
The Examiner relies on Noda for disclosing many aspects of the
claims (Ans. 4-5). However, the Examiner finds:
Noda fails to disclose a judgment section for judging whether
or not a shortage print job and the preceding job to the shortage
job need to be consecutively print processed and are correlated
by comparing print job information, including identification
information, of the shortage print job and the preceding print
job which comes just before the shortage job, and wherein in
cases when it is judged that the shortage print job and the
preceding print job need to be processed consecutively, the
shortage print job is not skipped for print processing with
respect to the succeeding print jobs until completion of the print
processing of the shortage print job.
(Id. at 5.)
The Examiner relies on Sommer for teaching
determining whether a print job and the preceding print job
need to be consecutively print processed . . . and wherein when
it is judged that a print job and the preceding print job need to
be processed consecutively, the processing for the print job is
not skipped with respect to the succeeding print jobs.
(Id. at 5-6.) The Examiner concludes:
[I]t would have been obvious for one skilled in the art to
include to Noda’s apparatus a judgment section for judging
whether or not a shortage job and the preceding job to the
shortage job need to be consecutively print processed, and
controlling the print processing order such that the shortage . . .
job is not skipped for print processing with respect to the
succeeding jobs until completion of the print processing of the
shortage print job, when it is determined that the shortage job
and the preceding job to the shortage job need to be
consecutively print processed. The motivation would be to
determine whether a print job (shortage print job) and the
preceding print job are correlated print jobs that require specific
Appeal 2012-003306
Application 11/185,867

5
output order. A print document may require multiple print jobs
to be outputted in an order for which they have been created.
(Id. at 6.)
Findings of Fact
1. Noda discloses:
[T]here is provided a printing method of using a host which can
set an auto retreat of print data and a print output apparatus
which is connected so that it can bidirectionally communicate
with the host and is equipped with a memory device which can
perform a retreat processing of the data in response to a request
from the host, wherein the host sends the print data to the print
output apparatus, the print output apparatus receives the print
data sent from the host and discriminates whether the data can
be normally printed or not on the basis of print attributes of the
received print data and a status of the print output apparatus,
when it is determined that the data can be normally printed, the
printing is executed, and when it is determined that the data
cannot be normally printed, the print data is retreated to the
memory device in accordance with the setting of the auto
retreat, thereby enabling the printing of other print data to be
executed.
(Noda, col. 2, ll. 26-43.)
2. In particular, Noda discloses:
[T]he controller 2010 of the printer analyzes the print
attributes of the head print data in the job execution
management data stored in the RAM 2031 in the storage 2030
of the printer in order to start the processing of the print-waiting
job (step 1601). . . .
Subsequently, the controller 2010 of the printer analyzes
the status of the printer (step 1602). Specifically speaking, the
size of paper set at present is checked, whether the papers of
such a size exist or not is discriminated, and whether the other
expendable supplies are absent or not are discriminated.
Appeal 2012-003306
Application 11/185,867

6
(Id. at col. 6, ll. 28-40.)
3. In addition, Noda discloses:
Subsequently, the controller 2010 of the printer
discriminates whether the print data “SAMPLE-B” can be
normally printed or not (an error occurs or not) by collating the
results in steps 1601 and 1602 (step 1603). In this case, since
the print data “SAMPLE-B” designates the paper size B5 of the
papers which are not set at present, the controller 2010 of the
printer determines that the print data “SAMPLE-B” cannot be
normally printed (an error occurs).
Subsequently, the controller 2010 of the printer checks
the print data “SAMPLE-B” stored in the RAM 2031 in the
storage 2030 of the printer to see if the auto retreat flag has
been set (step 1604).
If the auto retreat flag is not set in the print data
“SAMPLE-B”, an operation similar to that in the conventional
apparatus is executed. The whole processing is temporarily
suspended, the print processing is resumed at a point when the
user supplements the expendable supplies, and an output can be
soon obtained. Specifically speaking, the controller 2010 of the
printer suspends the print processing (step 1615).
. . .
In this case, since the auto retreat flag has been set in the
print data “SAMPLE-B”, an auto retreat information table as
shown in FIG. 13 stored in the RAM in the storage 2030 of the
printer is referred to (step 1609).
Subsequently, the controller 2010 of the printer analyzes
the contents of the error which occurs at present and the auto
retreat information table and discriminates whether the print
data can be automatically retreated or not (step 1610). In this
case, since the cause of the error relates to “no paper” (the
papers of the relevant paper size do not exist) in the auto retreat
information table, it is decided that the print data can be
retreated. If the cause of the error does not exist in the auto
Appeal 2012-003306
Application 11/185,867

7
retreat information table, step 1615 follows and processing is
executed in a manner similar to the conventional technique.
Subsequently, the controller 2010 of the printer suspends
the print processing of the print data “SAMPLE-B” (step 1611).
. . .
In this instance, although an error occurred in the print
job “SAMPLE-B” and the processing was suspended, by
automatically retreating the print data, the printer can be set into
a status where the processing of the next print data can be
started. . . .
(Id. at col. 7, l. 26, to col. 8, l. 56.)
4. Sommer discloses:
a method of managing a queue of print jobs in a printer,
wherein the jobs are created by specifying a data source and
print parameters for each job, and the jobs are put into the print
queue, and wherein, before print processing of a job in the
queue begins, a start condition for the job is checked and
printing is started only when the start condition is fulfilled, the
method including the steps of checking a status of a mode
indicator specifying whether the printer is in a “keep going”
mode or a “keep sequence” mode; and when a job in the queue
is reached for which the start condition is not fulfilled,
(1) postponing processing of this job and proceeding with a
next job, if any, for which the start condition is fulfilled, if the
printer is in the “keep going” mode, or (2) stopping print
processing, if the printer is in the “keep sequence” mode.
(Sommer, col. 2, ll. 37-51.)
5. In particular, Sommer discloses:
FIG. 2 is a flow chart of a decision routine which is
executed repeatedly while an active job is being printed
according to one embodiment of the present invention. . . . In
step S1, it is checked whether the current job is completed. . . .
Appeal 2012-003306
Application 11/185,867

8
If the current job is not yet completed (N), the routine
loops back and repeats the same step S1, until the check has an
affirmative result (Y). Then it is checked in step S2 whether a
subsequent job exists in the print queue. If this is not the case
(N), the print processing is stopped in step S3. Otherwise (Y) it
is checked in step S4 whether there exists a flag indicating that
the start condition for the subsequent job is not fulfilled. . . . If
the start condition is fulfilled (Y) at step S4, the print
processing of the next job is started in step (S5). . . .
If the result in step S4 is negative (N), it is checked in
step S6 whether the machine is in the “keep going” mode. If
this is not the case (N), this means that the machine is in the
“keep sequence” mode, and print processing is stopped in
step S3. . . . After the operator has taken the necessary action in
order to fulfill the start conditions and has pressed the start
key 38, the printing process will be resumed. Thus, it is assured
in this mode that the jobs will be printed exactly in the
sequence in which they appear in the print queue 64.
If it is found in step S6 that the machine is in the “keep
going” mode (Y), the routine loops back to step S2, where it is
now checked whether there is yet another job in the print queue.
Then, the step S4 and the subsequent steps are executed as
described above. As a result, the job for which the start
condition has not been fulfilled is skipped, and if there is at
least one other job in the print queue for which the start
condition is fulfilled, this job becomes active and is moved to
the top of the list in the queue, and the print processing will
continue without being interrupted.
(Id. at col. 7, l. 31, to col. 8, l. 19.)
Analysis
Noda discloses:
a printing method of using a host which can set an auto retreat
of print data and a print output apparatus which . . . is equipped
with a memory device which can perform a retreat processing
of the data . . . , wherein . . . the print output apparatus receives
Appeal 2012-003306
Application 11/185,867

9
the print data sent from the host and discriminates whether the
data can be normally printed or not on the basis of print
attributes of the received print data and a status of the print
output apparatus, . . . and when it is determined that the data
cannot be normally printed, the print data is retreated to the
memory device in accordance with the setting of the auto
retreat, thereby enabling the printing of other print data to be
executed.
(Finding of Fact (FF) 1.) Similarly, Sommer discloses:
a method of managing a queue of print jobs in a printer, . . .
wherein, before print processing of a job in the queue begins, a
start condition for the job is checked and printing is started only
when the start condition is fulfilled, . . . and when a job in the
queue is reached for which the start condition is not fulfilled,
. . . postponing processing of this job and proceeding with a
next job, if any, for which the start condition is fulfilled, if the
printer is in the “keep going” mode.
(FF 4.) We agree with the Examiner that these teachings suggest “managing
print processing order of . . . print jobs, and carrying out control such that a
shortage print job is skipped and the print processing is carried out with
respect to each of succeeding print jobs coming after the shortage print job
in the print processing order,” as recited in step (c) of claim 16.
Noda also discloses a mode in which the auto retreat flag is not set
(FF 3). In this case, the “whole processing is temporarily suspended” until
“the user supplements the expendable supplies” (id.). Similarly, Sommer
discloses a “keep sequence” mode in which print processing is stopped
“when a job in the queue is reached for which the start condition is not
fulfilled” (FF 4). We agree with the Examiner that these teachings suggest a
mode in which “the print processing is suspended until supply of the source
is detected . . . , such that [a] shortage print job . . . is not skipped for print
Appeal 2012-003306
Application 11/185,867

10
processing with respect to the succeeding print job coming after the shortage
job, until completion of the print processing of the shortage print job,” as
recited in claim 16.
However, in order to select the “keep sequence” mode, we agree with
Appellant that the Examiner has not adequately explained how Noda and
Sommer suggest:
judging whether or not the shortage print job and a print job
which comes just before the shortage print job need to be
consecutively print-processed, by comparing (i) print job
information, which is included in the shortage print job . . . ,
with (ii) print job information of the print job which comes just
before the shortage print job, and by judging a correlation
between the shortage print job and the print job which comes
just before the shortage job in accordance with the comparison,
as recited in claim 16 (App. Br. 12-16), much less a printing apparatus
comprising a judgment section for making this judgment, as recited in
claim 1 (id. at 5-11). In particular, the Examiner has not shown where either
reference teaches this nor has the Examiner adequately explained why this
would have been obvious.
Conclusion
The Examiner has not set forth a prima facie case of that Noda and
Sommer render claims 1-10 and 13-17 obvious. We therefore reverse the
obviousness rejection of these claims.
II
In rejecting claims 11 and 12, which ultimately depend from claim 1,
the Examiner additionally relies on Suzuki (Ans. 10-12). However, the
Examiner does not adequately explain how Suzuki overcomes the
Appeal 2012-003306
Application 11/185,867

11
deficiencies of Noda and Sommer discussed above. We therefore also
reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 11 and 12.

REVERSED

lp