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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS(s)) submitted on 3/30/2023, 9/8/2023, 6/28/2024, 3/28/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) are being considered by the examiner.
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 2 and 14-15 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.
Claim 2 recites the phrase, “based on a position of the current digital score.” The “current digital score” does not have the repertoire position that the claim appears to require. In the interest of advancing prosecution, this phrase will be interpreted as, “based on the position of the matching digital score in the repertoire.”
Claim 14 contains nested structures which are unclear. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the phrase, “changing an avatar preset by the performer into a preset action.” It is unknown what is meant by this phrase in this claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is likewise rejected for depending directly from claim 14.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 8, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Rutledge et al. (US 20160210951 A1, July 21, 2016), hereinafter Rutledge, in view of Dannenberg et al. (US 5521324 A, May 28, 1996), hereinafter Dannenberg, to the extent understood.
Regarding claim 1, Rutledge teaches a method for providing a virtual performance partner (Rutledge ¶0004: "performing real-time accompaniment for musical content included in an audio signal received by a computing device"), the method comprising: collecting audio frame data performed by a performer (Rutledge ¶0005: "The method includes receiving the first audio signal via an audio input device. The method further includes extracting, from the first audio signal, musical information characterizing at least a portion of the musical content."); and for each piece of current audio frame data collected (Rutledge ¶0097: "Within period 815, the system 700 may update the extracted features more or less continuously, or may update the features at one or more discrete time intervals (i.e., times A, B, C)"), performing: converting the piece of current audio frame data collected into a current digital score (Rutledge ¶0057: "In block 365, the musical content of the audio signal is transcribed using the selected musical notation. The transcription may be in any suitable format, digital or analog, visual or computer-readable, etc. The transcription may be provided as a musical score, chord chart, guitar tablature, or any alternative suitable musical representation."); and determining a start time of playing a cooperation part of music in a next bar of the matching digital score in the repertoire for a performance partner (Rutledge ¶0094: "In various embodiments, the first subsequent portion following the initial portion begins corresponding to a subdivision of the musical content of the audio signal, such as synchronized with the next beat, the beginning of the next measure, number of measures, or section, etc.").
Rutledge does not explicitly disclose matching the current digital score with a range of digital scores in a repertoire; determining a matching digital score in the range of digital scores that matches the current digital score; positioning a position of the matching digital score in the repertoire; determining a performance error between the performer and the performance partner based on a performance time of the current digital score and a performance time of the matching digital score; and adjusting a playing speed of the performance partner for the cooperation part in the repertoire based on the performance error.
However, Dannenberg teaches matching the current digital score with a range of digital scores in a repertoire (Dannenberg col. 2, lines 16-20: "The second task of an accompaniment system is tracking the score position of performers in real-time. That involves matching sequences of detected performance parameters to a score. T"); determining a matching digital score in the range of digital scores that matches the current digital score (Dannenberg col. 8, lines 57-61: " All of those techniques can construct matches to the partial input as it becomes available in the course of a vocal performance. The best match up to the current time is output as an estimate of the score location."); positioning a position of the matching digital score in the repertoire (Dannenberg col. 8, lines 57-61: " All of those techniques can construct matches to the partial input as it becomes available in the course of a vocal performance. The best match up to the current time is output as an estimate of the score location."); determining a performance error between the performer and the performance partner based on a performance time of the current digital score and a performance time of the matching digital score (Dannenberg col. 12, lines 15-20: "The rules consider the time difference between the ensemble score position and the current accompaniment score position. If the time difference is less than the pre-determined noise threshold, then only the accompaniment tempo is modified to agree with the ensemble tempo."); and adjusting a playing speed of the performance partner for the cooperation part in the repertoire based on the performance error (Dannenberg col. 12, lines 15-20: "The rules consider the time difference between the ensemble score position and the current accompaniment score position. If the time difference is less than the pre-determined noise threshold, then only the accompaniment tempo is modified to agree with the ensemble tempo.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method for providing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge by adding the tracking and adjustment of Dannenberg to track the score position of performers in real time (Dannenberg col. 2, lines 16-19).
Regarding claim 2, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Dannenberg further teaches that the determining, based on a position of the current digital score, the range within which a next audio frame is matched (Dannenberg col. 9, lines 50-52: "That estimated score position may be used to generate the window centered therearound, which window is input to the matcher 38.").
Regarding claim 3, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Dannenberg further teaches that the determining the start time of playing the cooperation part of music in the next bar of the matching digital score in the repertoire for the performance partner comprises: determining a performance speed of the performer based on the position of the matching digital score and positions of matching digital scores corresponding to first N pieces of audio frame data in the current audio frame data (Dannenberg col. 9, lines 11-15: "Each score position is recorded in a buffer 49 along with a timestamp indicating the real time when that location was reached. In the estimator 40, successive score positions for a given input signal may be plotted versus the corresponding real time."); and identifying the performance speed as a reference playing speed of the repertoire (Dannenberg col. 9, lines 16-19: "The tempo of the performance at any point is given by the slope of the graph because tempo is the amount of score traversed in a unit of real time.").
Rutledge further teaches determining a start time of playing a next bar of music of the matching digital score in the repertoire for the performance partner based on the reference playing speed (Rutledge ¶0094: "In various embodiments, the first subsequent portion following the initial portion begins corresponding to a subdivision of the musical content of the audio signal, such as synchronized with the next beat, the beginning of the next measure, number of measures, or section, etc.").
Regarding claim 8, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Dannenberg further teaches that the performance partner ends the playing of the repertoire (Dannenberg col. 12, lines 34-38: "To prevent the accompaniment from continuing too far ahead of the performers, an input expectation point is maintained. If that point is passed without additional input from any performer, the accompaniment apparatus 10 pauses until additional input arrives.") based on the current digital score not being matched successfully (Dannenberg col. 9, lines 30-35: "If the tracker 28 detects an error or leap in the input signal's score position (i.e., the matcher cannot conclusively identify a score position for the performer), the buffer is emptied and no tempo estimates for that performer are possible until the buffer is replenished.") within a first set time (Dannenberg col. 10, lines 15-19: "If rtime-ltime(i)>TC, then RR(i)=0, where: rtime=Current time for which estimates are made ltime(i)=Time of last match made by tracker 28, TC=Time constant, typically 3 seconds.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method for providing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge by adding the stopping of Dannenberg to prevent the accompaniment from continuing too far ahead of the performers (Dannenberg col. 12, lines 34-36).
Regarding claim 16, Rutledge teaches an apparatus for implementing a virtual performance partner (Rutledge ¶0004: "performing real-time accompaniment for musical content included in an audio signal received by a computing device"), the apparatus comprising: one or more processors (Rutledge ¶0024: "Processors 110 may include any processing elements that are suitable for performing the functions described herein") configured to: collect audio frame data performed by a performer (Rutledge ¶0005: "The method includes receiving the first audio signal via an audio input device. The method further includes extracting, from the first audio signal, musical information characterizing at least a portion of the musical content."); convert, for each piece of current audio frame data collected, the piece of current audio frame data collected into a current digital score (Rutledge ¶0057: "In block 365, the musical content of the audio signal is transcribed using the selected musical notation. The transcription may be in any suitable format, digital or analog, visual or computer-readable, etc. The transcription may be provided as a musical score, chord chart, guitar tablature, or any alternative suitable musical representation."); and determine a start time of playing a cooperation part of music in a next bar of the matching digital score in the repertoire for a performance partner (Rutledge ¶0094: "In various embodiments, the first subsequent portion following the initial portion begins corresponding to a subdivision of the musical content of the audio signal, such as synchronized with the next beat, the beginning of the next measure, number of measures, or section, etc.").
Rutledge does not explicitly disclose: match the current digital score with a range of digital scores in a repertoire, determine a matching digital score in the range of digital scores that matches the current digital score, position, for each piece of the current audio frame data collected, a position of the matching digital score in the repertoire, determine, for each piece of the current audio frame data collected, a performance error between the performer and the performance partner based on a performance time of the current digital score and a performance time of the matching digital score, and adjust a playing speed of the performance partner for the cooperation part in the repertoire based on the performance error.
However, Dannenberg teaches: match the current digital score with a range of digital scores in a repertoire (Dannenberg col. 2, lines 16-20: "The second task of an accompaniment system is tracking the score position of performers in real-time. That involves matching sequences of detected performance parameters to a score. T"), determine a matching digital score in the range of digital scores that matches the current digital score (Dannenberg col. 8, lines 57-61: " All of those techniques can construct matches to the partial input as it becomes available in the course of a vocal performance. The best match up to the current time is output as an estimate of the score location."), position, for each piece of the current audio frame data collected, a position of the matching digital score in the repertoire (Dannenberg col. 8, lines 57-61: " All of those techniques can construct matches to the partial input as it becomes available in the course of a vocal performance. The best match up to the current time is output as an estimate of the score location."), determine, for each piece of the current audio frame data collected, a performance error between the performer and the performance partner based on a performance time of the current digital score and a performance time of the matching digital score (Dannenberg col. 12, lines 15-20: "The rules consider the time difference between the ensemble score position and the current accompaniment score position. If the time difference is less than the pre-determined noise threshold, then only the accompaniment tempo is modified to agree with the ensemble tempo."), and adjust a playing speed of the performance partner for the cooperation part in the repertoire based on the performance error (Dannenberg col. 12, lines 15-20: "The rules consider the time difference between the ensemble score position and the current accompaniment score position. If the time difference is less than the pre-determined noise threshold, then only the accompaniment tempo is modified to agree with the ensemble tempo.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus for implementing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge by adding the tracking and adjustment of Dannenberg to track the score position of performers in real time (Dannenberg col. 2, lines 16-19).
Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Rutledge in view of Dannenberg, and further in view of Smith et al. (US 20030094093 A1, May 22, 2003), hereinafter Smith.
Regarding claim 4, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 3 as discussed above.
Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) does not explicitly disclose that the adjusting the playing speed of the performance partner for the repertoire based on the performance error comprises: based on the performance error being less than one beat, adjusting the playing speed of the performance partner within a current bar of music according to the performance error based on the reference playing speed, to make the performance partner consistent with the performer in a performance end time of the current bar of music; and based on the performance error being greater than one beat, pausing playing, by the performance partner, at the current bar, and playing a next bar of music based on a playing time of the next bar of music.
However, Smith teaches that the adjusting the playing speed of the performance partner for the repertoire based on the performance error comprises: based on the performance error being less than one beat (Smith ¶0330: "The current location of the sequence has already moved into the next beat, and therefore slightly less than a beat 2216 needs to be stretched so that the arrival of beat 3 information will coincide with the predicted third beat 2212."), adjusting the playing speed of the performance partner within a current bar of music according to the performance error based on the reference playing speed (Smith ¶0330: "Note that since less than a beat must fill the time of an entire beat, the tempo for this region 2216 must be even slower than the established tempo would be, and therefore a tempo multiplier must be calculated which compensates for this difference."), to make the performance partner consistent with the performer in a performance end time of the current bar of music (Smith ¶0330: "The current location of the sequence has already moved into the next beat, and therefore slightly less than a beat 2216 needs to be stretched so that the arrival of beat 3 information will coincide with the predicted third beat 2212."); and based on the performance error being greater than one beat, pausing playing, by the performance partner, at the current bar (Smith ¶0315: "In this case, the system pauses at the tick before the next beat 2010, and waits for the arrival of another tap event. The timer continues to count, even though metrical playback has paused. Any currently active note will continue to play. The system will wait at location 2010 indefinitely, unless a tap or other event is received." Smith's waiting indefinitely reasonably suggests waiting longer than one beat.), and playing a next bar of music (Smith ¶0352: "NEXT BAR key 2718 provides a quick way to jump to the first beat of the next measure in the score in play mode. Pressing NEXT BAR key several times advances the user though the score bar by bar. NEXT BAR key can be used when the user is getting behind and wants to jump immediately a bar ahead.") based on a playing time of the next bar of music (Smith ¶0315: "Eventually, at some later time, a second tap 2008 is received. The timer now has a duration value which can be used to determine the correct tempo for the next beat. The appropriate calculation is made, the tempo multiplier is offset, and the song continues at the newly adjusted tempo.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method for providing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge (as modified by Dannenberg) by adding the timing adjustments of Smith to permit the system to adjust in different ways depending on the type beat event, to be at the correct location (Smith ¶0309).
Regarding claim 5, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Dannenberg further teaches identifying the performance segment as the range (Dannenberg col. 6, lines 27-29: "By using a 'window' centered around the expected score location, the work performed per note is further reduced to a constant.").
Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) does not explicitly disclose: based on repeated segments being contained in the repertoire, receiving an inputted set performance segment.
However, Smith teaches: based on repeated segments being contained in the repertoire, receiving an inputted set performance segment (Smith ¶0406: "In step 3602, the user can select an action to be executed. For example, add new field 3702 in repeat, cut, vamp edits window 3700 can be selected to display the user options. Preferably, the user options include a repeat, cut or vamp. The user can select the action to be executed from the user options. In step 3604, the user can identify the section of a song to be edited.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method for providing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge (as modified by Dannenberg) by adding the input performance segments of Smith to help prevent the matcher from losing track of the performer (Dannenberg col. 9, lines 55-56).
Regarding claim 6, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) does not explicitly disclose: based on the repertoire starting from a performance of the performance partner, playing, by the performance partner, a part of the repertoire prior to the performance of the performer based on a set playing speed.
However, Smith teaches: based on the repertoire starting from a performance of the performance partner (Smith ¶0346: "GO key 2706 places the music system in play mode. GO key 2706 allows music to be played at an established tempo. If tempo has not been set with either TAP key 2702 or CRUISE key 2704, the music is performed on autopilot at a preprogrammed tempo."), playing, by the performance partner, a part of the repertoire prior to the performance of the performer (Smith ¶0295: "At this point, music system 106 is ready and the system waits until it receives a start command. There are a variety of different types of start commands, whichever command is used, for example, hitting a "play" command, will begin operation and a clock will start.") based on a set playing speed (Smith ¶0346: "If tempo has not been set with either TAP key 2702 or CRUISE key 2704, the music is performed on autopilot at a preprogrammed tempo.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method for providing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge (as modified by Dannenberg) by adding the preprogrammed performance tempo of Smith to perform without an input performance tempo (Smith ¶0346).
Regarding claim 7, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) does not explicitly disclose: based on the repertoire transitioning from a solo part of the performer to a performance part of the performance partner: based on a performance speed of the performer changing, starting to play, by the performance partner, the repertoire based on a performance speed at an end of the solo part; and based on the performance speed of the performer staying constant, starting to play, by the performance partner, the repertoire according to a set playing speed.
However, Smith teaches: based on the repertoire transitioning from a solo part of the performer to a performance part of the performance partner (Smith ¶0165: "An example of a dynamic group would be a group called "solo," which would contain all the instruments which are currently playing the main melody. This would change during performance. So, if at the beginning of a song there is a clarinet solo, the clarinet would be the member of this group. When its solo is completed, it would then be removed from the group, and whichever instrument was soloing next would be added."): based on a performance speed of the performer changing, starting to play, by the performance partner, the repertoire based on a performance speed at an end of the solo part (Smith ¶0346: "If a desired tempo is established with TAP key or CRUISE key, GO key 2706 causes music to continue playing at the established tempo. To change the tempo, the user can tap at any time."); and based on the performance speed of the performer staying constant (Smith ¶0322: "However, when it does occur, the current tempo matches the desired tempo, and therefore no calculation needs to be made. Or, the calculation can be made with the timer at the same value. Then 1/1=1 and therefore the tempo multiplier equals 1."), starting to play, by the performance partner, the repertoire according to a set playing speed (Smith ¶0346: " If tempo has not been set with either TAP key 2702 or CRUISE key 2704, the music is performed on autopilot at a preprogrammed tempo.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method for providing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge (as modified by Dannenberg) by adding the performance partner speed adjustments of Smith to allow the accompaniment system to accommodate interpretative tempo changes by a performer (Dannenberg col. 3, lines 7-9).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Rutledge in view of Dannenberg, and further in view of Hawthorne et al. (Onsets and Frames: Dual-Objective Piano Transcription, June 5, 2018, retrieved 8/8/2026 from https://arxiv.org/pdf/1710.11153), hereinafter Hawthorne.
Regarding claim 9, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) does not explicitly disclose that the converting the piece of current audio frame data collected into the current digital score comprises: processing the piece of current audio frame data collected using a pre-trained neural network model; and outputting the current digital score corresponding to the piece of current audio frame data collected, and wherein the current digital score is represented using a binary saliency map, and the pre-trained neural network model is trained using a binary classification cross entropy loss function.
However, Hawthorne teaches that the converting the piece of current audio frame data collected into the current digital score comprises: processing the piece of current audio frame data collected using a pre-trained neural network model (Hawthorne abstract: "We advance the state of the art in polyphonic piano music transcription by using a deep convolutional and recurrent neural network which is trained to jointly predict onsets and frames."); and outputting the current digital score corresponding to the piece of current audio frame data collected (Hawthorne § 1: "Automatic music transcription (AMT) aims to create a symbolic music representation (e.g., MIDI) from raw audio."), and wherein the current digital score is represented using a binary saliency map (Hawthorne § 3: "where Iframe(p,t) is 1 when pitch p is active in the ground truth in frame t and Pframe(p,t) is the probability output by the model for pitch p being active at frame t."), and the pre-trained neural network model is trained using a binary classification cross entropy loss function (Hawthorne § 3: "Our loss function is the sum of two cross-entropy losses: one from the onset side and one from the note side.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method for providing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge (as modified by Dannenberg) by adding the symbolic-form conversions and processing of Hawthorne to make information retrieval easier to accomplish (Hawthorne § 1).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Rutledge in view of Dannenberg, and further in view of Maezawa. (US 20200134297 A1, April 30, 2020).
Regarding claim 10, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) does not explicitly disclose that the matching is implemented using a neural-network processor.
However, Maezawa teaches that the matching is implemented using a neural-network processor (Maezawa ¶0036: " For example, the analysis processor 544 matches the sound represented by the audio signal A against the content of playback of the piece for playback indicated by the music data M, to identify the playback position T. Furthermore, the analysis processor 544 according to the present embodiment estimates a playback speed R (tempo) of the piece for playback by analyzing the audio signal A. For example, the analysis processor 544 identifies the playback speed R from temporal changes in the playback positions T (i.e., changes in the playback position T in the time axis direction). For estimation of the playback position T and playback speed R by the analysis processor 544, a known audio analysis technique (score alignment or score following) can be freely employed. For example, analysis technology such as that disclosed in Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open Publication No. 2015-79183 can be used for the estimation of playback positions T and playback speeds R. ").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method for providing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge (as modified by Dannenberg) by adding the analysis neural network processing of Maezawa to implement score alignment and score following (Maezawa ¶0036).
Claims 11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Rutledge in view of Dannenberg, and further in view of Kay et al. (US 20090104956 A1, April 23, 2009), hereinafter Kay, to the extent understood.
Regarding claim 11, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) does not explicitly disclose determining a current scene based on the position determined by the positioning; and synthesizing, corresponding to the current scene, a virtual performance animation corresponding to the current scene using an avatar pre-selected by the performer.
However, Kay teaches determining a current scene based on the position determined by the positioning (Kay ¶0079: "In some embodiments, the camera angles may be selected to display an avatar of a player who is performing a distinctive portion of a song. In other embodiments the camera angles may be selected to display an avatar of a player who is performing particularly well or poorly."); and synthesizing, corresponding to the current scene, a virtual performance animation corresponding to the current scene (Kay ¶0084: "Animation may be achieved by displaying a series of two-dimensional views in rapid succession, similar to motion picture films that display multiple still photographs per second.") using an avatar pre-selected by the performer (Kay ¶0314: "After the game has detected a local player using a simulated instrument, the game may allow the player to select or create a character to represent the player in the game").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method for providing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge (as modified by Dannenberg) by adding the avatars of Kay to mimic the actual playing of the song (Kay ¶0079).
Regarding claim 13, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg and further in view of Kay) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 11 as discussed above.
Kay further teaches that based on there being a plurality of performance users, an avatar pre-selected by each user is stored (Kay ¶0314: "In some embodiments, a player may save a character so that it can be accessed later. In other embodiments, the character may be erased after a use. In some embodiments, character data may be uploaded and/or saved on a server so that other players may view the character."); and based on the virtual performance animation being displayed, a virtual performance animation synthesized using an avatar pre-selected by a current performer is displayed (Kay ¶0079: "In some embodiments, the camera angles may be selected to display an avatar of a player who is performing a distinctive portion of a song. In other embodiments the camera angles may be selected to display an avatar of a player who is performing particularly well or poorly."), and based on the performer being switched, the virtual performance animation is switched to a virtual performance animation synthesized using an avatar pre-selected by a performer switched to (Kay ¶0079: "In other embodiments, a game display may alternate the display of one or more avatars and/or the display of the band as a whole."); or, avatars pre-selected by all the performance users are displayed simultaneously (Kay ¶0079: "In other embodiments, a game display may alternate the display of one or more avatars and/or the display of the band as a whole."), and a desired virtual performance animation is synthesized (Kay ¶0084: "Animation may be achieved by displaying a series of two-dimensional views in rapid succession, similar to motion picture films that display multiple still photographs per second.").
Regarding claim 14, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg and further in view of Kay) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 11 as discussed above.
Kay further teaches that the synthesizing, corresponding to the current scene, the virtual performance animation corresponding to the current scene using the avatar pre-selected by the performer comprises: pre-setting an animation switching position in the repertoire, and based on a performance progress of the repertoire by the performance partner reaching the animation switching position, changing the virtual performance animation (Kay ¶0079: "In some embodiments, the avatars motions may be choreographed to mimic the actual playing of the song. For example, if a song contains a section where the drummer hits a cymbal crash, the drummer avatar may be shown to hit a cymbal crash at the correct point in the song."); and/or based on the current digital score not being matched successfully and/or the performance error corresponding to the current digital score being greater than a set threshold (Kay ¶0295: "In still other embodiments, a player may fail a song if their performance is at the bottom of a meter in excess of a predetermined amount of time. A player may be determined to fail a song at any point during a song."), changing an avatar preset by the performer into a preset action (Kay ¶0297: "In some embodiments, the failed players avatar may become dejected, stop playing the instrument, and/or be removed from the stage."), and synthesizing the virtual performance animation (Kay ¶0084: "Animation may be achieved by displaying a series of two-dimensional views in rapid succession, similar to motion picture films that display multiple still photographs per second.").
Regarding claim 15, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg and further in view of Kay) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 14 as discussed above.
Kay further teaches that the animation switching position is a position of switching between different musical instruments within the cooperation part in the repertoire (Kay ¶0207: "In some embodiments, the at least one percussion cue may be displayed during a portion of the song with no lead vocals. For example, a song may have an instrumental section in the middle of the song where no lead vocals (or no vocals at all) are present."), and wherein the changing the virtual performance animation comprises displaying a virtual performance animation preset corresponding to a performance of a musical instrument switched to corresponding to the switching position between the different musical instruments (Kay ¶0210: "The screen also depicts the avatar of the vocalist holding a tambourine. In other embodiments, a vocalist avatar may be depicted holding or using any other percussion instrument the player vocalist is asked to mimic. Although no vocal cues are shown in FIG. 6C, vocal cues may be displayed before and/or after the shown section of the song.").
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Rutledge in view of Dannenberg, and further in view of Klitsner et al. (US 20010009866 A1,July 26, 2001), hereinafter Klitsner.
Regarding claim 12, Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 3 as discussed above.
Rutledge (in view of Dannenberg) does not explicitly disclose that based on there being a plurality of performance users, the performer is a preset performance user among the plurality of performance users; and based on the matching being unsuccessful within a preset time, the performer is switched to a next preset performance user among the plurality of performance users.
However, Klitsner teaches that based on there being a plurality of performance users, the performer is a preset performance user among the plurality of performance users (Klitsner ¶0036: "One player of the group is chosen by the group to be the active player (step 410) and must actuate input devices 120, 122, 124, 126, and 130 when they are de-actuated by signals sent from processor 210 (step 420)."); and based on the matching being unsuccessful within a preset time, the performer is switched (Klitsner ¶0053: "If the player actuates the wrong switch or does not respond within the time period given, the game pauses and an error message or prompt is output by the speaker 56 in response to an error signal output by the processor 50. The player who commits the error is out, and the game 30 is passed to the next player.") to a next preset performance user among the plurality of performance users (Klitsner ¶0044: " At the end of a player's turn, indicated by a voice instruction to "pass it", the game is passed the next player; such as to the player to the left, during a measure of pass it music.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method for providing a virtual performance partner of Rutledge (as modified by Dannenberg) by adding the automatic switching of Klitsner to handle performers who are presumably lost (Dannenberg col. 2, lines 65-66).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP SCOLES whose telephone number is (703)756-1831. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:30 ET.
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.
/PHILIP G SCOLES/
Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/DEDEI K HAMMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights