Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/976,883

INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, TERMINAL, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND COMPUTER-READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 31, 2022
Examiner
UHLIR, CHRISTOPHER J
Art Unit
3619
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Roland Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
529 granted / 849 resolved
+10.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
54 currently pending
Career history
903
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
45.9%
+5.9% vs TC avg
§102
21.8%
-18.2% vs TC avg
§112
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 849 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Objections Claims 10 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 10 and 18 include the limitation “receiving, from an information processing device receiving operation information”. This limitation should be changed to state “receiving, from an information processing device, operation information”. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-6 and 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Katou (US 7,626,109 B2). Claims 1 and 17: Katou discloses an information processing device and method, comprising a control part which executes: receiving operation information corresponding to a played key of an electronic musical instrument (100) from the electronic musical instrument; and transmitting operation associated information (keyboard image) of the electronic musical instrument corresponding to whether the operation information was an incorrect or correct key played (column 15 lines 19-27) to a terminal (television receiver 200) of a user of the electronic musical instrument via communication unit (11) (column 4 lines 57-59), wherein the terminal is different from the electronic musical instrument, as shown in FIG. 1. Claim 2: Katou discloses an information processing device as stated above, where the control part transmits, to the terminal, information based on the operation associated information of the electronic musical instrument corresponding to each of one or more steps constituting an operation procedure (notes to be played in sequence) of the electronic musical instrument (column 15 line 57 through column 16 line 11). Claim 3: Katou discloses an information processing device as stated above, where the control part transmits, to the terminal, the operation associated information comprising an instruction for displaying an operator (key) of the electronic musical instrument to be operated in each of the one or more steps and an operation method of the operator (column 15 line 57 through column 16 line 11). Claim 4: Katou discloses an information processing device as stated above, where the control part transmits, to the terminal, the operation associated information comprising an instruction for displaying a current state of the operator to be operated in each of the one or more steps (column 15 line 57 through column 16 line 11). Claims 5 and 6: Katou discloses an information processing device as stated above, where in each of the one or more steps, in a case where operation information indicating a correct or erroneous operation of the operator has been received from the electronic musical instrument, the control part transmits, to the terminal, the operation associated information comprising an instruction for displaying on the display device an operator to be operated in a next step and an operation method of the operator or information indicating an operation error, respectively (column 15 line 66 through column 16 line 24). Claim 8: Katou discloses an information processing device as stated above, where the control part transmits, to the terminal, a result (music title selected) of an information search using the operation information corresponding to a music search process (column 8 lines 26-35). Claim 9: Katou discloses an information processing device as stated above, where in each of the one or more steps, in a case where operation information indicating a correct operation of the operator has been received from the electronic musical instrument, the control part transmits, to the terminal, the operation associated information comprising an instruction for displaying on the display device an operator to be operated in a next step and an operation method of the operator (column 15 line 66 through column 16 line 11). Claims 10 and 18: Katou discloses a terminal (television receiver 200) of a user of an electronic musical instrument (100), wherein the terminal is different from the electronic musical instrument as shown in FIG. 1, and comprises a control part which executes: receiving, from an information processing device (CPU 5) via communication unit (11) (column 4 lines 57-59) operation information corresponding to a played key of the electronic musical instrument from the electronic musical instrument, operation associated information (keyboard image) of the electronic musical instrument corresponding to whether the operation information was an incorrect or correct key played; and displaying, on a display device, information (incorrect mark, correct mark) based on the operation associated information (column 15 lines 19-30). Claim 11: Katou discloses an information processing method as stated above, where the control part displays, on the display device, information based on the operation associated information of the electronic musical instrument corresponding to each of one or more steps constituting an operation procedure (notes to be played in sequence) of the electronic musical instrument according to the operation information (column 15 line 57 through column 16 line 11). Claim 12: Katou discloses an information processing method as stated above, where the control part displays, on the display device, the operation associated information comprising an instruction for displaying an operator (key) of the electronic musical instrument to be operated in each of the one or more steps and an operation method of the operator based on the operation associated information (column 15 line 57 through column 16 line 11). Claim 13: Katou discloses an information processing method as stated above, where the control part transmits/displays, to/on the terminal/device, the operation associated information comprising an instruction for displaying a current state of the operator to be operated in each of the one or more steps based on the operation associated information (column 15 line 57 through column 16 line 11). Claims 14 and 15: Katou discloses an information processing method as stated above, where in each of the one or more steps, in a case where operation information indicating a correct or erroneous operation of the operator has been received from the electronic musical instrument, the control part transmits, from the information processing device, the operation associated information comprising an instruction for displaying on the display device an operator to be operated in a next step and an operation method of the operator or information indicating an operation error, respectively (column 15 line 66 through column 16 line 24). Claim 16: Katou discloses an information processing method as stated above, where in each of the one or more steps, in a case where operation information indicating a correct operation of the operator has been received from the electronic musical instrument, the control part transmits, from the information processing device, the operation associated information comprising an instruction for displaying on the display device an operator to be operated in a next step and an operation method of the operator (column 15 line 66 through column 16 line 11). Claims 19 and 20: Katou discloses an information processing method as stated above, where a computer-readable recording medium records a program causing an information processing device/terminal to execute the information processing method (column 2 lines 18-27). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katou (US 7,626,109 B2) in view of Kim (US 7,289,768 B2). Claim 7: Katou discloses an information processing device where the control part transmits, to the terminal, the operation associated information, as stated above. This reference fails to disclose the operation associated information to comprise an instruction for displaying an operation manual corresponding to the operation information. However Kim teaches an information processing device, where operation associated information includes an instruction for displaying an operation manual (user manual) corresponding to operation information (column 7 lines 42-43). Given the teachings of Kim, 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 information processing device disclosed in Katou with providing the operation associated information to comprise an instruction for displaying an operation manual corresponding to the operation information. Doing so would allow “users slow in learning the manual in text form [to] easily access functions of the [electronic musical instrument] through visual or audible guiding. As a result, the [electronic musical instrument] is further utilized and is user-friendly enough to attract a wider range of users” as taught in Kim (column 4 lines 39-43). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 4,378,720, US 2005/0257667 A1, US 10,176,791 B2 pertaining to displaying information regarding playing of an instrument while playing said instrument. 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 9, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 31, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595152
PRECISE ELEVATOR CAR SPEED AND POSITION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595154
ELEVATOR BRAKE DEVICE DETERIORATION PREDICTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589971
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DYNAMICALLY MODIFYING A CAPACITY LIMIT OF AN ELEVATOR CAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583711
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DETERMINING ELEVATOR LOADS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12562073
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LEARNING TO PLAY A MUSICAL INSTRUMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+9.4%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 849 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month