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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendment filed July 13, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Objection to the specification has been withdrawn.
Objection to claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 7, 13 and 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 7 includes the limitation “a recessed groove portion … provided in the side surface on a lower side of the top plate”. However the claims previously describe the side surface to be on the top surface support portion. It is unclear whether applicant intends the groove portion to be provided on the top plate, or the top surface support portion. For examining purposes, this limitation is interpreted as stating “a recessed groove portion … provided on a lower side of the top plate”.
Claim 13 is directed to a “keyboard instrument according to claim 13, wherein”. However a claim cannot depend from itself. It is unclear whether applicant intends claim 13 to be an independent claim, or be dependent on another claim. For examining purposes, this claim is interpreted as being directed to a “keyboard instrument according to claim 12, wherein”.
Claim 15 is directed to a “keyboard instrument according to claim 12, wherein”, and further includes the limitation “one of the pair of recessed portions”. However there is a lack of antecedent basis for “the pair of recessed portions”, as this limitation was introduced in claim 14. It is unclear whether applicant intends claim 15 to depend from claim 14, or introduce a new element into the claims. For examining purposes, this claim is interpreted as being directed to a “keyboard instrument according to claim 14, wherein”.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Takata et al. (US 9,646,578 B2).
Claim 1: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument comprising: a key shown in FIG. 9A to comprise: a key base (base member 2130D) comprising a top plate (upper plate 131) and a top surface support portion (side plate 132) provided as to be suspended perpendicularly from a lower surface of the top plate, with a first groove portion (concave groove 134) provided along the lower surface of the top plate as shown in FIGS. 9A and 9B. An attachment (wood member 140S) is disposed on a side surface (sticking surface 132a) of the top surface support portion (column 15 lines 6-10), as shown in FIG. 9B. The top surface support portion is shown in FIG. 9B to comprise a thick portion (portion between concave grooves 134 and 2134) of a first thickness which is a thickness defined in a key alignment direction (direction of arrow R-L) and a thin portion (concave grooves 134 and 2134) of a second thickness which is thinner than the first thickness in different positions (vertical heights) along a longitudinal direction (direction of arrow F-B) of the key base at top and bottom of top surface support portion (column 26 lines 19-28), as shown in FIG. 9A. A contact area of the top surface support portion with the attachment at the thick portion then is larger than a contact area of the top surface support portion with the attachment at the thin portion due to the flat surface at the thick portion contacting the attachment, as shown in FIG. 9B. This embodiment fails to disclose the top surface support portion to comprise a lower open portion which is opened in a lower side thereof, and a starting point of a bifurcation of the lower open portion to be situated under the first groove portion.
However Takata et al. teaches a different embodiment shown in FIG. 13B, where the top surface support portion comprises a lower open portion defined by protruding portion (9135b) which is opened in a lower side thereof. A starting point of a bifurcation of the lower open portion is situated under the top plate (column 30 lines 46-50).
Given the teachings of the different embodiment of Takata et al., 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 keyboard instrument disclosed in Takata et al. with providing the top surface support portion to comprise a lower open portion which is opened in a lower side thereof, and a starting point of a bifurcation of the lower open portion to be situated under the top plate, and therefore the first groove portion. Doing so would suppress “defamation of or damage to the [key] base member when the key is strongly tapped” by effectively dispersing “stress at the boundary between the wide-width portion and the narrow-width portion of [key] base member … throughout the key” as taught in Takata et al. (column 5 lines 54-59).
Claim 2: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the thin portion is shown in FIG. 9A to form a rectangular shape on the top surface support portion (column 26 lines 19-28), such that the thick portion and thin portion (vertical concave grooves 134, 2134) are provided alternately on a same line in a front-back direction (direction of arrow F-B) of the key in a lower side of the top plate and an upper side of the lower open portion.
Claim 3: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the thin portion is shown in FIG. 9B to comprise a thickness removing portion which is provided into a recessed shape from the side surface.
Claim 4: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the thin portion is shown in FIG. 9A to form a rectangular shape on the top surface support portion (column 26 lines 19-28), such that the thickness removing portion (vertical concave grooves 134, 2134) is provided intermittently along a front-back direction (direction of arrow F-B) of the key.
Claim 5: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument where the thin portion forms a rectangular shape on the top surface support portion, as stated above. The thickness removing portion is shown in FIG. 9A to be provided on a same line in the front-back direction of the key.
Claim 6: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument where the thin portion forms a rectangular shape on the top surface support portion, as stated above.
The thickness removing portion is shown in FIG. 9 to be provided in plural (vertical and horizontal concave grooves 134, 2134) having different lengths in the front-back direction of the key.
Claim 7: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, but fails to disclose the key base to comprise a recessed groove portion provided in the front-back direction of the key, provided on a lower side of the top plate.
However Takata et al. teaches a different embodiment shown in FIG. 11, where the key base (base member 6130D) comprises a recessed groove portion to fit rigid member (6150) provided in the front-back direction of the key, provided on a lower side of the top plate (column 28 lines 3-8, 17-18).
Given the teachings of the different embodiment of Takata et al., 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 keyboard instrument disclosed in Takata et al. with providing the key base to comprise a recessed groove portion provided in the front-back direction of the key, provided on a lower side of the top plate. Doing so would “improve rigidity [such that] vibration of the [top surface] at the time the touching surface is touched by the player’s fingernail can be prevented. As a result …occurrence of unpleasant noise can be effectively prevented” as taught in Takata et al. (column 28 lines 8-16).
Claim 8: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the key base is shown in FIG. 7A to comprise a broad portion (wide-width portion WK) in which a width of the top plate is broad and a narrow portion (narrow-width portion NK) in which the width of the top plate is narrow. The top surface support portion is shown to correspond to a majority of the narrow portion.
Claims 9 and 10: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument where a thick portion is a portion between concave grooves (134 and 2134) and a thin portion corresponds to concave grooves (134 and 2134), as stated above. The contact area defined from a lower edge of the first groove portion to the starting point of the bifurcation of the lower open portion then is made into the thin portion (vertical concave grooves) at at least one of the different positions along the longitudinal direction of the key base due to the position of the protruding portion (9135b), and into the thick portion at at least one other of the different positions along the longitudinal direction of the key base, as can be seen from FIGS. 9A and 13B.
Claim 11: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the first groove portion is shown in FIG. 9A to be on an upper side of the thick portion at at least one of the different positions along the longitudinal direction of the key base and on an upper side of a vertical groove of the thin portion at at least one other of the different positions along the longitudinal direction of the key base such that the thick portion and the thin portion are both between the first groove portion and the bifurcation of the lower open portion, as can be seen from FIG. 13B.
Claim 12: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument where the thin portion corresponds to concave grooves (134 and 2134), as stated above. The thin portion then is defined alongside a recessed portion (vertical concave groove) of the top surface support portion, as shown in FIG. 9A.
Claim 13: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the recessed portion of the top surface support portion is between the bifurcation of the lower open portion and the first groove portion, as can be seen from FIGS. 9B and 13B.
Claim 14: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the thin portion is defined between a pair of recessed portions (horizontal concave grooves 134, 2134) of the top surface support portion, as shown in FIG. 9A.
Claim 15: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where one of the pair of recessed portions (lower horizontal concave groove) of the top surface support portion is near the bifurcation of the lower open portion and below the first groove portion, as can be seen from FIGS. 9A and 13B. This reference fails to disclose the one recessed portion of the top surface support portion to be between the bifurcation of the lower open portion and the first groove portion.
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 protruding portion (9135b) to be taller, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). The one recessed portion of the top surface support portion then would be between the bifurcation of the lower open portion and the first groove portion. Doing so would restrict the amount of vertical movement of the key, thereby suppressing “defamation of or damage to the [key] base member” as taught in Takata et al. (column 5 lines 57-59) due to the limited vertical movement.
Claim 16: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the thick portion and thin portion are shown in FIG. 9A to be provided alternately on a same line in a front-back direction (direction of arrow F-B) of the key.
Claim 17: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the contact area of the top surface support portion with the attachment at the thin portion (lower horizontal groove) is shown in FIG. 9B to include an area above the thin portion. This reference fails to disclose the contact area of the top surface support portion with the attachment at the thin portion to include an area below the thin portion such that the attachment is in contact with the side surface of the top surface support portion at two separated locations with a recessed portion therebetween alongside the thin portion.
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 attachment to extend an entire height of the key, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). The contact area of the top surface support portion with the attachment at the thin portion then would include an area below the thin portion such that the attachment is in contact with the side surface of the top surface support portion at two separated locations with a recessed portion therebetween alongside the thin portion. Doing so would provide a uniform look to the key, while ensuring the exterior surface does not separate or otherwise rub against an adjacent key due to its uniform construction.
Claim 18: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the top surface support portion is shown in FIG. 9 to include two recessed portions (horizontal concave grooves 134, 2134) that defined therebetween the thin portion (vertical concave grooves 134, 2134).
Claim 19: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument as stated above, where the top surface support portion is shown in FIG. 9A to include side surfaces and two recessed portions (horizontal concave grooves) between the side surfaces, wherein each of the recessed portions is defined in part by the thin portion.
Claim 20: Takata et al. discloses a keyboard instrument where a thick portion is a portion between concave grooves (134 and 2134) and a thin portion corresponds to concave grooves (134 and 2134), as stated above. This reference fails to disclose the bifurcation of the lower open portion to be under the thin portion and the thick portion. 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 bifurcation of the lower open portion to be under both the thing portion and the thick portion, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Doing so would restrict the amount of vertical movement of the key, thereby suppressing “defamation of or damage to the [key] base member” as taught in Takata et al. (column 5 lines 57-59) due to the limited vertical movement.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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 September 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights