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 Objections
Claims 4, 9 and 14 are objected to because the following elements lack proper antecedent basis in the claim(s):
Claims 4, 9 and 14 line 3: “the phrase (that is one before or one after)”
Claims 4, 9 and 14 line 8: “the phrase (that includes the operation”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3, 4, 8, 9, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 4, 8, 9, 13 and 14 include the limitation “determine a/the phrase that is one before (or one after) the first phrase to be the recommended phrase”. However the recommended phrase was described in previous claims as corresponding to a second phrase, and the independent claims, from which these claims depend, describe a step to “determine a set of phrases from the first phrase to a second phrase”. The claimed “set of phrases” requires multiple phrases as a set that is between the first phrase and the second phrase. It is therefore unclear how the second phrase can be a phrase that is one before (or one after) the first phrase, since the phrase adjacent to the first phrase would inhibit a set of phrases from being between the first phrase and second phrase, as required by the independent claims.
Claims 4, 9 and 14 include limitations describing “determine the phrase that is one before or one after the first phrase … [including] an operation of a musical performance … and determine the phrase that includes the operation of the musical performance … when the phrase that is one before or one after the first phrase does not include an operation of a musical performance. However the term “and” renders the claim indefinite, as it is unclear how both scenarios can occur at the same time since the phrase one before or one after the first phrase cannot both include the operation of a musical performance, and not include it. For examining purposes, these limitations are interpreted as being alternative scenarios, separated by the term “or”.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tabata et al. (US 10,354,630 B2).
Claims 1, 6 and 11: Tabata et al. discloses musical performance apparatus comprising at least one processor, musical performance phrase determining method executed by a computer, and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a program stored thereon for controlling a computer to perform a process configured to: determine any phrase (musically-determined time interval or period) as a first phrase (start measure) that is to be a performance target (sectional performance information D1) corresponding to performance information (32) performed by a user from among a plurality of phrases included in a musical piece (column 6 line 64 through column 7 lines 1, 10-18, 25-35, 40-45), and determine a set of additional phrases from the first phrase to a second phrase (end measure) to be phrases that are to be the performance target performed by the user according to operation by the user on an input apparatus (dial) in order to adjust a time length (threshold value Zt) and thereby select the second phrase from the plurality of phrases (column 15 lines 19-26).
Claims 2, 7 and 12: Tabata et al. discloses musical performance apparatus, musical performance phrase determining method, and storage medium as stated above, where from the plurality of phrases, a determined recommended phrase is recommended as the second phrase based on a predetermined time period of a performance section Z (column 7 lines 10-18). A display would be controlled to display information, e.g. length of time period, of the determined recommended phrase in order to give a user feedback during adjustment of the time length, as is recognized in the art.
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 3-5, 8-10 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tabata et al. (US 10,354,630 B2) in view of Haruyama (US 6,211,452 B2).
Claims 3, 4, 8, 9, 13 and 14: Tabata et al. discloses musical performance apparatus, musical performance phrase determining method, and storage medium as stated above, but fails to disclose the at least one processor to determine a phrase that is one before the first phrase to be the recommended phrase when the first phrase starts from a middle of a measure, when there is an operation of a musical performance that the user should perform in the phrase that is one before or one after the first phrase, or determine the phrase that includes the operation of the musical performance that the user should perform and that is closest to the first phrase as the recommended phrase when the phrase that is one before or one after the first phrase does not include the operation of the musical performance that the user should perform.
However Haruyama teaches a musical performance apparatus, musical performance phrase determining method, and storage medium, where a phrase that is one before a first phrase is determined to be a recommended phrase to be inserted when a read pointer indicates data pointed to by the pointer is not end data of a phrase, or immediately before a phrase (column 20 lines 23-48). The phrase is inserted then when the first phrase starts from a middle of a measure or when there is an operation of a musical performance that the user should perform in the phrase that is one before the first phrase
Given the teachings of Haruyama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the musical performance apparatus, musical performance phrase determining method, and storage medium disclosed in Tabata et al. with providing the at least one processor to determine a phrase that is one before the first phrase to be the recommended phrase when the first phrase starts from a middle of a measure, or when there is an operation of a musical performance that the user should perform in the phrase that is one before or one after the first phrase. Doing so would allow “the entire phrase (from the beginning to end of the phrase) [to be] obtained by the phrase division” when the first phrase begins with an “erroneous key depression”, as taught in Haruyama (column 53 lines 30-39).
Claims 5, 10 and 15: Tabata et al. discloses musical performance apparatus, musical performance phrase determining method, and storage medium as stated above, but fails to disclose the at least one processor to be configured to, score musical performance data based on a comparison between musical performance data of the first phrase based on operation of a musical performance and musical piece data of a portion of the first phrase, and control a display to display a suggestion of a recommended phrase recommended as the second phrase when a scored result reaches a threshold.
However Haruyama teaches a musical performance apparatus, musical performance phrase determining method, and storage medium, where a score musical performance data is determined corresponding to key-off/key-on timings based on a comparison between musical performance data of a first phrase based on operation of a musical performance and musical piece data of a portion of the first phrase (column 32 lines 33-46), and control a display to display a suggestion of a recommended phrase recommended as the second phrase when a scored result reaches a threshold (column 30 lines 38-42).
Given the teachings of Haruyama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the musical performance apparatus, musical performance phrase determining method, and storage medium disclosed in Tabata et al. with providing the at least one processor to be configured to, score musical performance data based on a comparison between musical performance data of the first phrase based on operation of a musical performance and musical piece data of a portion of the first phrase, and control a display to display a suggestion of a recommended phrase recommended as the second phrase when a scored result reaches a threshold. Doing so would “advantageously allow the player to readily know or recognize where to position his or her hands and fingers along the keyboard … [and] allow the player to know keys to be depressed now and next, and thereby the player can carry out a music performance very smoothly with ease” as taught in Haruyama (column 31 lines 46-52) according to notes/chords contained in previously determined performance section (Z) as shown Tabata et al. (column 7 lines 25-35).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER UHLIR whose telephone number is (571)270-3091. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/Christopher Uhlir/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 December 27, 2025