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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
2. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 101 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
3. Claims 1-2, 4, 6-11, 13, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Under the 2019 PEG (now been incorporated into MPEP 2106), the revised procedure for determining whether a claim is "directed to" a judicial exception requires a two-prong inquiry into whether the claim recites: (1) any judicial exceptions, including certain groupings of abstract ideas (i.e., mathematical concepts, certain methods of organizing human interactions such as a fundamental economic practice, or mental processes); and (2) additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP § 2106.05(a)-(c), (e)-(h)).
Only if a claim (1) recites a judicial exception and (2) does not integrate that exception into a practical application, do we then look to whether the claim: (3) adds a specific limitation beyond the judicial exception that is not "well-understood, routine, conventional" in the field (see MPEP § 2106.0S(d)); or (4) simply appends well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-11, 13, and 15-18 are directed to an abstract idea of changing a pitch of the musical tone of a target musical instrument.
Specifically, representative claim 1 recites:
An information processing device, comprising:
an input interface; and
at least one processor, configured to perform the following:
(S1) selecting an instrument, a musical tone of which is to be digitally synthesized based on corresponding musical tone data, via the input interface;
(S2) acquiring a parameter value that has been set for the selected instrument;
(S3) generating a random number based on a random function; and changing a pitch of the musical tone of the selected instrument based on the generated random number and the acquired parameter value.
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements”.
The highlighted portion of the claim constitutes an abstract idea under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance and the additional elements are NOT sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exceptions, as analyzed below:
Step
Analysis
1. Statutory Category ?
Yes.
Apparatus/Device
2A - Prong 1: Judicial Exception Recited?
Yes.
See the bolded portion listed above.
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), the combination of the limitations S1 and S2 encompasses mental processes, i.e. data selection, evaluation and/or judgment, that can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper.
Nothing in the bolded portion precludes the claimed mental process from practically being performed in the mind and/or with the aid of pen/paper. Note, the courts consider a mental process (thinking) that "can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper" to be an abstract idea. See CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1372, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1695 (Fed. Cir. 2011). See also to MPEP 2106.04(a)(2).III
Under the BRI, the limitation S3 encompasses mathematical concepts, namely a series of calculations leading to one or more numerical results or answers, which can also be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper.
As such, the bolded portion of instant claim 1 falls within a combination of the “Mathematical Concepts” and “Mental Process” Groupings of Abstract Ideas defined by the 2019 PEG.
2A - Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application?
No.
The claim is merely analyzing and/or manipulating the existing data using mental process and meth concepts, and outputting the results.
The generic recitation of “an input interface” (e.g., computer keyboard or touchscreen) and “at least one processor, configured to perform” do not amount the abstract idea to be significantly more. It has been held that performing an abstract algorithm using a general-purpose computer/circuitry would not amount to significantly more than the abstract algorithm itself. See, for example, Whitserve LLC v. Dropbox, Inc.
In general, the claim as a whole does not meet any of the following criteria to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application:
An additional element reflects an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field;
an additional element that applies or uses a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition;
an additional element implements a judicial exception with, or uses a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim;
an additional element effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and
an additional element applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
Various considerations are used to determine whether the additional elements are sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. However, in all of these respects, the claim fails to recite additional elements which might possibly integrate the claim into a particular practical application. Instead, based on the above considerations, the claim would tend to monopolize the algorithm across a wide range of applications.
2B: Claim provides an Inventive Concept?
No.
As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claim amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component or post-solution activities which can be viewed as an attempt to link the use of the judicial exception to the relevant technological environment or field of use. The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception on a generic computer and/or post-solution activities linking the use of the judicial exception to the relevant technological environment cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
The claim is therefore ineligible under 35 USC 101.
The dependent claims 2, 4, 6-8 inherit attributes of the independent claim 1, but do not add anything which would render the claimed invention a patent eligible application of the abstract idea. These claims merely extend (or narrow) the abstract idea which do not amount for "significant more" because they merely add details to the algorithm which forms the abstract idea as discussed above.
Claim 9 recites a speaker that emits sound of the musical tone. Under the BRI to the claim, this additional element encompasses an insignificant extra-solution activity and/or a field of use limitation generally attached to the identified judicial exception, thus it does not amount to be meaningful to integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d) and 2106.05(g).
Claims 10-11, 13, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 USC 101 for the same reasons as for claims 1-2, 4, and 6-9 set forth above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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; or
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
5. Claims 1-4, 6-13 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ISOZAKI (JP 3704842 B2, machine translation).
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 18, ISOZAKI discloses a device and a method for practicing the device, including computer programs encoded on a storage device for implementing the method, comprising: an input interface (para. 0036); and at least one processor (Fig. 1), configured to perform the following: selecting an instrument, a musical tone of which is to be digitally synthesized based on corresponding musical tone data, via the input interface (para. 0235, 0243); acquiring a parameter value that has been set for the selected instrument (para. 0033, 0066, 0260); generating a random number (velocity randomization, also see para. 0192: the ratio value can be arbitrarily set by the user) based on a random function (para. 0133, 0192, 0211, 0230-0234); and changing (bending) a pitch (i.e., a frequency value of a sound) of the musical tone of the selected instrument based on the generated random number and the acquired parameter value (para. 0191-0210, see also discussion of step S182 of Fig. 26).
Regarding claims 2 and 11, ISOZAKI discloses: a memory storing characteristic data indicating characteristics of pitch shifts of musical tones of the selected instrument relative to a reference pitch, wherein the at least one processor is configured to acquire a value (e.g., pitch bend event data, etc.) indicating a pitch shift of the musical tone of the selected instrument from the characteristic data, and changes the pitch of the musical tone of the selected instrument based on the acquired parameter value and the acquired value indicating the pitch shift (para. 0118, 0121, 0125, 0179, 0182, 0185).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, ISOZAKI discloses: further comprising at least one performance element (e.g., a string of the guitar), wherein the characteristic data include first characteristic data () indicating a pitch shift of the musical tone in accordance with a first elapsed time that has elapsed until an operation of the at least one performance element since an immediately prior operation of the at least one performance element (para. 0055, 0059-0060, 0078-0079, 0082), and wherein the at least one processor is configured to acquire a first value indicating a pitch shift of the musical tone of the selected instrument from the first characteristic data, and changes the pitch of the musical tone of the selected instrument based on the acquired parameter value and the acquired first value indicating the pitch shift (para. 0055, 0059-0060, 0078-0079, 0082, 0118, 0121, 0125, 0179, 0182).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, ISOZAKI discloses: wherein the characteristic data include second characteristic data indicating a pitch shift of the musical tone in accordance with a pitch (see discussion of step S162), and wherein the at least one processor is configured to acquire a second value indicating a pitch shift of the musical tone of the selected instrument from the second characteristic data, and changes the pitch of the musical tone of the selected instrument based on the acquired parameter value and the acquired second value indicating the pitch shift (para. 0118, 0121, 0125, 0179, 0182, 0185, 0191).
Regarding claims 6-9 and 15-17, ISOZAKI discloses: wherein the at least one processor is configured to change the pitch of the musical tone of the selected instrument based on at least one of played speed (velocity) and played pitch (para. 0133, 0142, 0161-0165); wherein the at least one processor is configured to multiply the generated random number and the acquired parameter value together and change the pitch of the musical tone of the selected instrument based on a value obtained by the multiplication (see discussion of step S96; see also para. 0192); wherein the at least one processor determines a range in which the random number is generated in accordance with a type of the instrument selected, and generates the random number within said range (para. 0133: “velocity randomization processing is performed as expression conversion processing. Is set, it is determined whether or not the process has progressed to the final phrase after executing the velocity randomization processing subroutine for randomly changing the velocity of the performance data”); further comprising a speaker (17 Fig, 1) that emits sound of the musical tone.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 5 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for Allowance
7. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The primary reason for the allowance of claims 5 and 14 is the inclusion of the limitation: the information processing device according to claim 2 or 11, further comprising at least one performance element, wherein the characteristic data include third characteristic data indicating a pitch difference of a first musical tone produced by a first operation of one of the at least one performance element and a second musical tone produced by a second operation of the same one of the at least one performance element that occurs successively from the first operation, the pitch difference being dependent upon a second elapsed time that has elapsed since the first operation until the second operation, and wherein the at least one processor is configured to acquire a third value indicating said pitch difference from the third characteristic data, and changes the pitch of the musical tone of the selected instrument based on the acquired parameter value and the acquired third value. It is this limitation found in each of the claims, in combination with the rest of the limitations as recited in independent claim 1 or 10, that has not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes claims 5 and 14 distinguish over the prior art.
Contact Information
8. 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