Ex Parte Herold et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

May 31, 2016

12784684 (P.T.A.B. May. 31, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
121784,684 05/21/2010 James M. Herold
76073 7590 05/31/2016
InfoPrint Solutions/ Blakely
1279 Oakmead Parkway
Sunnyvale, CA 94085-4040
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
8185P095 9326
EXAMINER
NGUYEN, LAMS
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2853
MAILDATE DELIVERY MODE
05/31/2016 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte JAMES M. HEROLD and JEFFREY A. SCHILLING
Appeal2014-009053
Application 12/784,684
Technology Center 2800
Before TERRY J. OWENS, PETER F. KRATZ, and MARK NAGUMO
Administrative Patent Judges.
OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's
rejection of claims 1, 3-10, 12-16 and 18. We have jurisdiction under
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
The Invention
The Appellants claim a printer, a method for using it, and a machine
readable medium including data which causes a machine to carry out the
method. Claim 1 is illustrative:
1. A printer comprising:
a graphical user interface to select from among a list of
print jobs designated as either monochrome or color;
a control unit to identify a print job as a monochrome
print job or a color print job, the control unit including:
Appeal2014-009053
Application 12/784,684
Yorkey
Kidani
Barry
a color management unit to determine color values
for each pixel in an object in the print job, and
having:
and
a first International Color Consortium (ICC)
profile invoked by the control unit to print the print
job if identified as a monochrome print job; and
a second ICC profile invoked by the control
unit to print the print job if identified as a color
print job;
a monitor to track a print volume of the
monochrome print job during periods in which the first
ICC profile has been invoked and track a print volume of
the color print job during periods in which the second
ICC profile has been invoked.
The References
US 6,317,218 Bl
US 2003/0164971 Al
US 7,116,444 B2
The Rejection
Nov. 13, 2001
Sep.4,2003
Oct. 3, 2006
Claims 1, 3-10, 12-16 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
over Yorkey in view of Barry and Kidani.
OPINION
We affirm the rejection.
The Appellants argue the claims as a group (App. Br. 7-12). We
therefore limit our discussion to one claim, i.e., 1. Claims 3-10, 12-16
and 18 stand or fall with that claim. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l)(iv) (2012).
Yorkey discloses a printer (12) comprising monochrome (32) and
color (30a-c) print heads and a raster image processing circuit (52) which
selects a monochrome ( 44; Fig. 2A) or color ( 48; Fig. 2B) printing position
of the printer (12)'s paper feed path (40), sends signals over a command
2
Appeal2014-009053
Application 12/784,684
interface bus (80) to a print engine controller (82) coupled to the print
engine (42) and, once the raster image processing circuit (52) has configured
the printer (12) and the print process has begun, sends bitmap data over a
video interface bus (84) to the print engine controller (82) for printing on
sheets (14) with the monochrome (32) or color (30a-c) print heads (col. 4,
11. 49---62; Fig. 1 ).
Barry teaches that due to color balancing, most systems have used
device profiles which resulted from a color management system
specification that was created by the International Color Consortium (ICC),
typically are generated by the manufacturer or the user, and describe the
color characteristics of a particular device (col. 28, 11. 25-31 ).
The Appellants assert that "nowhere in Yorkey is there a reasonable
suggestion of performing any type of color space mapping (e.g., between a
device color space and a profile connection space (PCS)" (App. Br. 11 ).
That assertion is not well taken because it is directed toward a
limitation which is not in the claims. See In re Self, 671 F.2d 1344, 1348
(CCP A 1982) ("[A ]ppellant's arguments fail from the outset because ...
they are not based on limitations appearing in the claims.").
The Appellants assert that "a printing process performed at print heads
cannot reasonably be construed as being equivalent to invoking ICC profiles
to perform color mapping" (App. Br. 11 ).
Yorkey' s printing using monochrome (32) or color (30a-c) print heads
(col. 4, 11. 60---61) appears to invoke color profiles such as ICC profiles, and
the Appellants have provided no evidence or even substantive argument to
the contrary.
3
Appeal2014-009053
Application 12/784,684
The Appellants argue regarding the combination of Yorkey and Barry
that "one skilled in the art would recognize that the generation of bitmap
data occurs independent of color mapping. Thus, the bitmap data generated
for a color printing operation would typically implement the same ICC
profile as for bitmap data generated for a monochrome printing operation"
(Reply Br. 3).
That argument is unconvincing in view of Yorkey' s disclosure that the
bitmap data is used to control printing using both monochrome printing
heads (32) (wherein a black-and-white color profile is invoked) and color
printing heads (30a-c) (wherein a color profile is invoked) (col. 4, 11. 56-61).
Hence, we are not persuaded of reversible error in the rejection.
DECISION/ORDER
Claims 1, 3-10, 12-16 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
over Yorkey in view of Barry and Kidani.
It is ordered that the Examiner's decision is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
4