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
2. Applicant’s arguments received 06/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (REMARKS, p.8-9):
PNG
media_image1.png
166
696
media_image1.png
Greyscale
….
PNG
media_image2.png
179
682
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner respectfully disagrees. With the BRI to the claims, Examiner considers that TORII discloses a sound signal generation method and device comprising: receiving a pitch and an intensity, and generating a sound signal corresponding to the pitch (para. 0029-0030). TORII is silent on: generating said sound signal such that, as the intensity increases, a size of a sound image of the sound signal is made larger so that at least a perceived physical size of a sound source is made at least larger. In the same field of endeavor and/or dealing with related subject matter (e.g., reproducing stereophonic sound to provide sound perspective to a sound object), Cho teaches: obtaining (from the output of the level controller 571; see para. 0025, 0100, 0117) an intensity of an input signal (para. 0064: “Limiting the selection of the frequency bands to only those above a threshold value is done to acquire a location of a sound object that has a large signal intensity …”); and generating a sound signal such that, as the intensity increases, a size of a sound image (i.e., “sound perspective” or “the perceived size of the sound object”) of the sound signal is made larger so that at least a perceived physical size of a sound source is made at least larger (see discussion of Fig. 6; see also para. 0023, 0025, 0117-0118), wherein the sound image corresponds to at least one of a perceived physical location, the perceived physical size, or a perceived physical shape of the sound source (para. 0041, 0048-0049; see also discussion of parameter calculator 570 in Fig. 5). It is deemed that it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify (e.g., via programing) TORII’s sound generation circuit, in view of Cho’s teaching of sound signal generation technique, to generate/reproduce a sound not only corresponding to a pitch but also to an intensity of the input sound signal (represented by the touch data in TORII’s sound field reproducing device). The motivation of such a combination is to prove TORII’s sound generation circuit with the capability for generating output sound in response to different inputs of power/intensity of a sound object and/or any desired gain and delay time of a reflection signal such that a user's 3D video/image experience with stereophonic sound that is in concert with the action being viewed is enhanced (Cho, para. 0004). Specifically, in the scenario of TORII, doing so would allow the listener to experience sufficient depth, creating a sound field that is closer to that of a grand piano (TORII, para. 0008, 0040). It is also deemed that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of such a combination were predictable for sound generation/reproduction since the use of known techniques provides the rationale to arrive at a conclusion of obviousness. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Applicant further argues (REMARKS, p.9-10):
PNG
media_image3.png
158
724
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner respectfully disagrees. With the BRI to the claim, Examiner maintains that Cho’s teaching (e.g., para. 0026, 0028, 0053: “adjusts a phase of a sound object based on sound depth information”; note: the controller selects or obtains the level of intensity of a low-frequency band component of the sound object based on the sound depth information.) does read on or render obvious the limitation in question. Nevertheless, considering that the limitation in question appears a Markush-type limitation that recites alternatives, Examiner removes some claim language to further clarify the ground of rejection from the Cho reference (see detailed response set forth in section 4 below).
Applicant further argues (REMARKS, p.11):
PNG
media_image4.png
344
694
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Examiner respectfully disagrees. With the BRI to the claim, Examiner maintains that Cho’s teaching (e.g., para. para. 0023-0025) does read on or render obvious the limitation in question. Specifically, Examiner considers that at least “a level of intensity of a low-frequency band component of the sound object” encompasses the recited “a quantity of sound processing elements”.
The rest of the Applicant’s arguments are reliant upon the issues discussed above, and are deemed to be unpersuasive for the reasons provided above. The rejection is therefore maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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 of this title, 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.
4. Claims 1, 3-12, 15-17 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TORII (JP 2000122643 A, machine translation) in view of Cho et al. (US 20130010969 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 6 and 7, TORII discloses a sound signal generation method and device, including a computer program for implementing the method, comprising: receiving a pitch and an intensity (para. 0026-0027: by inherency, the touch data corresponding to the key depression speed based on a signal indicating the ON/OFF state of the key switch designates “a pitch and an intensity”); and generating a sound signal corresponding to the pitch (para. 0029-0030).
TORII is silent on: generating said sound signal such that, as the intensity increases, a size of a sound image of the sound signal is made larger so that at least a perceived physical size of a sound source is made at least larger, wherein the sound image corresponds to at least one of a perceived physical location, the perceived physical size, or a perceived physical shape of the sound source; and wherein the perceived physical size of the sound image of the sound signal is adjusted by adjusting, in accordance with the intensity, at least one of: a phase difference between left and right components of the sound signal, and/or a quantity of sound processing elements that alter the sound signal.
Cho discloses a computer implemented sound signal generation method and device, comprising: obtaining an intensity of an input signal (para. 0100); generating a sound signal such that, as the intensity increases, a size of a sound image (i.e., “sound perspective” or “the perceived size of the sound object”) of the sound signal is made larger so that at least a perceived physical size of a sound source is made at least larger (para. 0023, 0025, 0117-0118), wherein the sound image corresponds to at least one of a perceived physical location, the perceived physical size, or a perceived physical shape of the sound source (para. 0041, 0048-0049; see also discussion of parameter calculator 570 in Fig. 5); and wherein the perceived physical size of the sound image of the sound signal is adjusted (e.g., via the level controller 571 in Fig. 5) by adjusting, in accordance with the intensity (i.e., a size of the sound image is in accordance with the obtained intensity), a quantity of sound processing elements (e.g., “a level of intensity of a low-frequency band component of the sound object”) that alter the sound signal (para. 0023-0025).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Cho’s teaching of sound signal generation and adjustment of perceived physical size of the sound image into TORII to achieve the claimed invention. Doing so would allow the listener to experience sufficient depth, creating a sound field that is closer to that of a grand piano (TORII, para. 0008, 0040) and/or to enhance a user's 3D video/image experience with stereophonic sound that is in concert with the action being viewed (Cho, para. 0004).
Regarding claim 3, TORII discloses: wherein the sound signal is generated by adjusting a correlation between left and right sound signals (e.g., LB/RB Fig. 4) in accordance with the intensity (para. 0036-0037).
Regarding claim 4, TORII discloses: wherein the sound signal is generated by adjusting a panning of the sound signal (i.e., adjusting the position of a sound within the stereo or surround sound field, creating the illusion of the sound coming from a specific location, whether left, right, or somewhere in between) in accordance with the intensity (para. 0009, 0039: “a weak touch can cause the sound source to be perceived as being localized near the player P, whereas a strong touch can cause the sound source to be perceived as being localized at a position farther away from the player P in the depth direction”).
Regarding claim 5, TORII does not but Cho teaches: wherein the size of the sound image is adjusted in accordance with a pitch (e.g., a frequency band component) of a sound object/signal (para. 0052, 0065). As such, the combination of TORII and Cho renders the claimed invention obvious.
Regarding claims 8-9, TORII discloses: an outputter (15/16 Fig. 3) that outputs the sound signal generated by the sound signal generation; a performance operator that supplies information in regard to the pitch and the intensity to the designation receiver (para. 0026-0027), and an outputter that outputs the sound signal generated by the sound signal generation device (para. 0022).
Regarding claim 10, TORII discloses: a performance operator comprising a keyboard for supplying information in regard to the pitch and the intensity to the designation receiver (para. 0026-0027); and an outputter that outputs the sound signal generated by the sound signal generation (para. 0022).
Regarding claim 11, TORII discloses: wherein the intensity represents a key depression speed (para. 0027).
Regarding claims 12 and 17, TORII discloses: wherein the sound signal is generated such that as the received intensity regarding one sound increases, a broadness of sound in a right and left direction and a broadness of sound in a front and back direction increases simultaneously (para. 0030, 0034, 0038-0040; see also discussion for claims 1, 6 and 7 above).
Regarding claims 15 and 20, TORII discloses: wherein the perceived physical shape of the sound source includes a distribution including a front and back direction and has a shape imitating a soundboard of an acoustic piano (feature being inherent to the teaching in para. 0010, 0014, 0017, 0038, 0043).
Regarding claim 16, TORII discloses: wherein the intensity represents a key depression speed (para. 0027).
Regarding claim 21, TORII does not but Cho teaches: wherein the size of the sound image of the sound signal is made larger in at least one of a longitudinal direction and/or a transverse direction (see Fig. 6 and related text). As such, the combination of TORII and Cho renders the claimed invention obvious.
Conclusion
5. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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.
Contact Information
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIANCHUN QIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5981. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5:30PM EST M-F.
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached on (571)270-7938. 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.
/JIANCHUN QIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights