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 Claim s 1, 13 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1, 13 and 18 include the limitation “wherein the harmonic frequency and the other frequencies”. This limitation should be changed to state “wherein the variable harmonic frequency and the other frequencies” for consistency 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim 12 is 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. Claim 12 is directed to “The one or more data storage devices of claim 8, wherein” and includes limitations pertaining to “the sound asset”. However there is a lack of antecedent basis for the sound asset as this was introduced in claim 11. It is unclear whether applicant intends claim 12 to depend from claim 11 or introduce a new element into the claim. For examining purposes, claim 12 is interpreted as being directed to “The one or more data storage devices of claim 11, wherein”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 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. Claim s 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claims 1, 8 and 15 recite receiving various parameter inputs corresponding to a selected harmonic class, detecting whether one or more frequencies satisfy a regulation condition, changing an intensity of the detected one or more frequencies , each of a plurality of variable harmonic frequencies being variable based on a change in fundamental frequency, and frequencies being unmodified unless the regulation condition is satisfied . These limitations are considered processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind , and falls within the “Mental Process” grouping of abstract ideas. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claimed additional elements, e.g., one or more data storage devices, a plurality of computer readable instructions, one or more processors, an d monophonic sound asset are recited at a high-level of generality, i.e., generic computer components performing generic computer functions, and a generic sound . These additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea . The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional element of the data storage devices, computer readable instructions, and processors amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component, and the monophonic sound asset amount to no more than mere audio signals . Therefore the claims are not patent eligible. Claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20 are further not patent eligible as they merely further define the abstract idea without integration into a practical application and any additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception . 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 s 1 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taub et al. (US 8,290,769 B2) in view of Daido (US 2022/0084492 A1) . Claim 1: Taub et al. discloses an intensity (gain) regulation (adjustment) system (column 5 lines 59-66) comprising: one or more data storage devices comprising a plurality of computer readable instructions configured to direct one or more processors to perform steps (column 5 lines 13-16) , where an interface used to receive inputted parameters for operation (column 4 lines 45-49) is shown in FIG. 13 (column 23 lines 1-3). The interface is shown to be able to receive a harmonic class input via a slider corresponding to a selection of one of a plurality of different harmonic classes (Harmony Degree) , wherein each of the harmonic classes is associated with a variable harmonic frequency , e.g. an interval of a third above, selected by a user (column 23 lines 41-48) ; receive a frequency range input via a slider associated with the selected harmonic class, wherein the frequency range input specifies a frequency range (Pitch Window) great enough to bound the variable harmonic frequency of the selected harmonic class and a plurality of other frequencies (column 11 lines 27-35) ; receive an intensity threshold input via a slider associated with the selected harmonic class, wherein the intensity threshold input corresponds to an intensity threshold (Harmony Gain) ; and receive an intensity change input in real time associated with the selected harmonic class (column 5 lines 59 -66) , wherein the intensity change input corresponds to an amount of an intensity change comprising an intensity reduction , an intensity elimination or an intensity increase based on movement of a corresponding slider (column 16 lines 14-18) . It is detected whether one or more frequencies of a frequency spectrum satisfy a regulation conditio n compris ing : a first requirement for the one or more frequencies to be within the frequency range (column 13 lines 39-51) and change an intensity of the detected one or more frequencies by at least part of the amount in real time ( column 5 lines 59-66 ). T he frequency spectrum is based on a monophonic sound asset (column 15 lines 57-59) , wherein the intensity change occurs within the specified frequency range (column 13 lines 39-51), and therefore before reaching an end of the frequency spectrum . Since each harmonic frequency is dependent on a fundamental frequency, e ach of the variable harmonic frequencies is variable based on a change in a fundamental frequency, as is recognized in the art. T he variable harmonic frequency and the other frequencies within the frequency range are unmodified by any change in intensity unless the regulation condition is satisfied (column 11 lines 17-2 6, 60-63 ). This reference fails to disclose the regulation condition to include a second requirement for the one or more frequencies compris ing a designated relationship to the intensity threshold to choose additional frequencies . However Daido teaches a regulation (adjustment) system (page 5 paragraph [0054[) where a regulation condition include s a requirement for one or more frequencies (harmonic frequency Fn) compris ing a designated relationship to an intensity (amplitude) threshold to choose additional frequencies (page 5 paragraph [0055]). Given the teachings of Daido, 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 intensity regulation system disclosed in Taub et al. with providing the regulation condition to include a second requirement for the one or more frequencies compris ing a designated relationship to the intensity threshold to choose additional frequencies . Doing so would make “it possible to reduce a processing load of the adjustment processing” “since the adjustment processing is performed for the harmonic bands in the reference band” as taught in Daido (page 6 paragraph [0060]). Claim s 2 and 3 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses an intensity system as stated above, where the designated relationship is shown in Daido to comprise the one or more frequencies being greater than the intensity threshold (page 5 paragraph [0055]). The intensity change is inputted via a slider on the interface, as shown in FIG. 13 of Taub et al. and includes an intensity elimination (silence) associated with a mute effect when the intensity is set to zero (column 16 lines 17-18). T he slider then allows for the intensity change to include an intensity reduction before the intensity elimination , as is known in the art. Claim 4 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses an intensity system as stated above, where the designated relationship is shown in Daido to comprise the one or more frequencies being greater than the intensity threshold (page 5 paragraph [0055]). The intensity change is inputted via a slider on the interface, as shown in FIG. 13 of Taub et al. and allows for the intensity change to include an intensity increase , as is known in the art. These references fail to disclose the designated relationship to comprise the one or more frequencies to be less than the intensity threshold. However it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the designated relationship to comprise the one or more frequencies to be less than the intensity threshold , since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller , 105 USPQ 233. Doing so would lesser heard harmonics to be reproduced, thereby increasing “variations in envelope (e.g., amplitude), timbre, etc.” as taught in Taub et al. (column 7 lines 43-46). Claim 5 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses an intensity system where the intensity change is input ted in real time and the sound is a monophonic sound asset , as stated above . T he intensity change then is operable during a performance session while a performer generates the monophonic sound asset as shown in Taub et al. (column 4 lines 49-52) . Claim 6 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses an intensity system as stated above, where the monophonic sound asset is at least partially modified as a result of the intensity change as shown in Taub et al. (column 5 lines 59-66) . Claim 7 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses an intensity system where he frequency spectrum is based on a monophonic sound asset , as stated above . The frequency spectrum then is based on a monophonic audio signal related to the monophonic sound asset, as is recognized in the art. Claims 8 and 15: Taub et al. discloses one or more data storage devices comprising a plurality of computer readable instructions configured to direct one or more processors to perform steps (column 5 lines 13-16), where an interface used to receive inputted parameters for operation (column 4 lines 45-49) is shown in FIG. 13 (column 23 lines 1-3). The interface is shown to be able to receive a harmonic class input via a slider corresponding to a selection of one of a plurality of different harmonic classes (Harmony Degree) , wherein each of the harmonic classes is associated with a variable harmonic frequency , e.g. an interval of a third above, selected by a user (column 23 lines 41-48) ; receive a frequency range input via a slider associated with the selected harmonic class, wherein the frequency range input specifies a frequency range (Pitch Window) great enough to bound the variable harmonic frequency of the selected harmonic class and a plurality of other frequencies (column 11 lines 27-35) ; receive an intensity threshold input via a slider associated with the selected harmonic class, wherein the intensity threshold input corresponds to an intensity threshold (Harmony Gain) ; and receive an intensity change input in real time associated with the selected harmonic class (column 5 lines 59-66) , wherein the intensity change input corresponds to an amount of an intensity change comprising an intensity reduction , an intensity elimination or an intensity increase based on movement of a corresponding slider (column 16 lines 14-18). It is detected whether one or more frequencies of a frequency spectrum satisfy a regulation conditio n compris ing : a first requirement for the one or more frequencies to be within the frequency range (column 13 lines 39-51) and change an intensity of the detected one or more frequencies by at least part of the amount in real time (column 5 lines 59-66). This reference fails to disclose the regulation condition to include a second requirement for the one or more frequencies compris ing a designated relationship to the intensity threshold to choose additional frequencies. However Daido teaches a regulation (adjustment) system (page 5 paragraph [0054[) where a regulation condition includes a requirement for one or more frequencies (harmonic frequency Fn) compris ing a designated relationship to an intensity (amplitude) threshold to choose additional frequencies (page 5 paragraph [0055]). Given the teachings of Daido, 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 intensity regulation system disclosed in Taub et al. with providing the regulation condition to include a second requirement for the one or more frequencies compris ing a designated relationship to the intensity threshold to choose additional frequencies. Doing so would make “it possible to reduce a processing load of the adjustment processing” “since the adjustment processing is performed for the harmonic bands in the reference band” as taught in Daido (page 6 paragraph [0060]). Claims 9 and 16 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses one or more data storage devices and method as stated above, where the designated relationship is shown in Daido to comprise the one or more frequencies being above the intensity threshold (page 5 paragraph [0055]). The intensity change is inputted via a slider on the interface, as shown in FIG. 13 of Taub et al. and includes an intensity elimination (silence) associated with a mute effect when the intensity is set to zero (column 16 lines 17-18). Claim 10 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses one or more data storage devices as stated above, where the designated relationship is shown in Daido to comprise the one or more frequencies being greater than the intensity threshold (page 5 paragraph [0055]). The intensity change is inputted via a slider on the interface, as shown in FIG. 13 of Taub et al. and allows for the intensity change to include an intensity increase, as is known in the art. These references fail to disclose the designated relationship to comprise the one or more frequencies to be below than the intensity threshold. However it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the designated relationship to comprise the one or more frequencies to be below than the intensity threshold, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller , 105 USPQ 233. Doing so would lesser heard harmonics to be reproduced, thereby increasing “variations in envelope (e.g., amplitude), timbre, etc.” as taught in Taub et al. (column 7 lines 43-46). Claim s 11 and 17 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses one or more data storage devices and method where he frequency spectrum is based on a monophonic sound asset , as stated above. The frequency spectrum then is associated with a monophonic audio signal related to a sound asset, as is recognized in the art. Claim 1 2 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses one or more data storage devices as stated above, where each of the variable harmonic frequencies is shown in Taub et al. to correspond to a relative scale degree (column 23 lines 41-48) . A change in a fundamental frequency then would case the variable harmonic frequency to change accordingly, as is recognized in the art. The variable harmonic frequencies then are variable due to a change in a fundamental frequency caused by variation in the sound asset . Claims 13 and 1 8 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses one or more data storage devices and method where the harmonic frequency and the other frequencies within the frequency range are free of any change in intensity , unless the regulation condition is satisfied , as stated above . Such change in intensity includes intensity reduction , as is recognized in the art. Claim 1 4 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses one or more data storage devices as stated above, where the intensity change is shown in Taub et al. to occur within the specified frequency range (column 13 lines 39-51), and therefore before reaching an end of the frequency spectrum . Claim 19: Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses method as stated above, where each of the variable harmonic frequencies is shown in Taub et al. to correspond to a relative scale degree (column 23 lines 41-48). A change in a fundamental frequency then would case the variable harmonic frequency to change accordingly, as is recognized in the art. The variable harmonic frequencies then are variable due to a change in a fundamental frequency caused by variation in the sound asset. Claim 20 : Taub et al. modified by Daido discloses a method where he frequency spectrum is based on a monophonic sound asset , as stated above . The computer readable instructions are configured to direct the one or more processors to programmatically track the selected harmonic class while the one or more processors process the monophonic audio signal according to a closest time of a detected input as shown in Taub et al. (column 17 lines 47-51). T he variable harmonic frequenc y is further shown to correspond to a relative scale degree (column 23 lines 41-48). A change in a fundamental frequency then would case the variable harmonic frequency to change accordingly, as is recognized in the art. The variable harmonic frequenc y then is variable during the tracking due to a change in a fundamental frequency caused by variation in a sound asset related to the monophonic audio . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 8,219,390 B1 and 8,759,661 B2 corresponding to changing an audio input using harmonics of pitches. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CHRISTOPHER UHLIR whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3091 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Anita Coupe can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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 March 20, 2026