DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
1. Applicant's amendment filed on 03/12/26 has been received and entered in the case. The arguments against the previous rejection based on Kasle are not deemed to be persuasive, and therefore the obviousness rejection based on this reference is maintained and repeated, as set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasle, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0037418 in view of any one of Moore et al (USPAP 2010/0177109), Kobayashi et al (USPAP 2025/0292452), Abraham et al (USPAP 2023/0032436) and Chien et al (USPAP 2021/0383659).
As to claim 1, Kasle discloses
an apparatus for producing dynamic lighting for use in conjunction with a musical instrument, said apparatus comprising:
a microphone operable to detect real-time sound levels produced by the musical instrument (see line 7 of the abstract of Kasle);
an LED interface and panel for controllably emitting light using a plurality of LEDs, wherein each LED is discretely activated (see paragraph [0040], lines 5-6; paragraph [0040], line 9; and claim 1, lines 7-8, of Kasle);
a mounting implement operable to secure the LED panel to the musical instrument (see paragraph [0011], lines 1-3, of Kasle);
a microcontroller operable to send control signals to the LED interface to cause the plurality of LEDs to emit light corresponding to lighting sequences; and
a touch screen input device communicatively coupled to the microcontroller (as indicated in the previous office action, although not disclosed by Kasle, it would have been obvious to any person having ordinary skill in the art that the input device referred to throughout Kasle can be a touch screen input device communicatively coupled to Kasle's microcontroller 105, i.e., paragraph [0036] of Kasle discloses that the microcontroller can be a mobile computer and the disclosure of a mobile computer obviously suggests to any person having ordinary skill in the art that a smart phone or tablet could be used to implement the microcontroller 105 taught by Kasle, applicant should also note paragraph [0057] of Kasle which indicates that the user input can be provided using a rotary control knob or a wireless input, i.e., such a disclosure by Kasle of using a wireless input device obviously suggests to any person having ordinary skill in the art that a touch screen input device could be used by the user for entering the lighting sequences using a graphical user interface comprising a display of the touch screen input device, and finally applicant should note the disclosures by Knight in paragraph [0014], Dasan et al in paragraph [0095] and Van Der Brug in paragraph [0045], each of which provides further evidence that it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to use a touchscreen input device so that a user can input control signals which are used for adjusting lighting sequences), wherein the lighting sequences are dynamically adjusted responsive to the real-time sound levels produced by the musical instrument exceeding a predetermined threshold (note that in Kasle the lighting sequences are dynamically adjusted responsive to the real-time sound levels produced by the musical instrument exceeding a predetermined threshold (note, for example, the abstract of Kasle, as well as paragraphs [0005], [0007], [0038], [0040] through [0042], [0048], [0052] and [0055] through [0057], which clearly disclose that the lighting sequences are dynamically adjusted responsive to the real-time sound levels produced by the musical instrument when such real-time sound levels exceed a predetermined threshold). As to the new limitation added to claim 1, i.e., the limitation reciting that colors of the lighting sequences are based on values of user-adjustable color sliders rendered on a graphical user interface comprising a display of the touch screen input device, this does not distinguish patentably over Kasle, the reason being that it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to control R, G and B colors using user-adjustable color sliders rendered on a graphical user interface comprising a display screen of a touch screen input device, four examples of this well-known concept being disclosed by Moore et al (see paragraph [0041]), Kobayashi et al (see figure 23), Abraham et al (see figure 4), and Chien et al (see figure 4B). The motivation for using such a teaching in Kasle is to provide an alternative art-recognized equivalent way of adjusting the light sequence colors, i.e., instead of using control knobs as taught by Kasle or, alternatively, to provide a way of remotely controlling the colors of the light sequences in Kasle, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would obviously recognize that using adjustable color sliders on a touchscreen, as taught by each of the above-noted secondary references, would enable adjustment of the lighting sequence colors remotely via a wireless input from the touchscreen device to the LEDs of the LED panel.
As to claim 2, note the last three lines of paragraph [0006] of Kasle which indicate that the LEDs are disposed within the musical instrument, and also note paragraphs [0010] and [0049] of Kasle which indicate that the surface is substantially transparent.
As to claim 3, note paragraphs [0010] and [0011] of Kasle, and also paragraph [0048], lines 8-11, of this reference.
As to claim 4, note paragraph [0011] of Kasle.
As to claim 5, as noted above, although Kasle does not disclose a touch screen input device communicatively coupled to the microcontroller which is operable to adjust a brightness level of the LEDs, such would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the disclosure by Kasle in paragraph [0036] that a mobile computer can be used to implement device 105, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that two well-known types of mobile computers are smart phones and tablets, both of which inherently include a touchscreen (note also paragraphs [0005], [0008], [0012], [0015] and [0034] of Kasle where this reference indicates that the microcontroller is operable to adjust the brightness level of the LEDs, and also note the illustration of brightness control via a touchscreen slider in Fig. 5 of Rajguru et al and Fig. 4 of Abraham et al).
As to claim 6, as noted above, although Kasle does not disclose a touch screen input device communicatively coupled to the microcontroller which is operable to adjust a brightness level of the LEDs, such would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the disclosure by Kasle in paragraph [0036] that a mobile computer can be used to implement device 105, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that two well-known types of mobile computers are smart phones and tablets, both of which inherently include a touchscreen (note also paragraphs [0005], [0013], [0015] and [0034] of Kasle where this reference indicates that the microcontroller is operable to adjust an animation speed of the lighting sequences), and also note that one of ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that a slider on a touch screen could obviously be used to control other functions of the LEDs, other than the colors and brightness thereof, e.g., the animation speed of Kasle’s lighting sequences, Kalse’s sound threshold value, etc,
As to claim 7, as noted above, although Kasle does not disclose a touch screen input device communicatively coupled to the microcontroller which is operable to adjust a brightness level of the LEDs, such would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the disclosure by Kasle in paragraph [0036] that a mobile computer can be used to implement device 105, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that two well-known types of mobile computers are smart phones and tablets, both of which inherently include a touchscreen (note also paragraphs [0005] through [0008] and [0014] of Kasle where this reference indicates that the microcontroller is operable to adjust the sound threshold) and also note that one of ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that a slider on a touch screen could obviously be used to control other functions of the LEDs, other than the colors and brightness thereof, e.g., the animation speed of Kasle’s lighting sequences, Kalse’s sound threshold value, etc,
As to claim 8, as noted above, although Kasle does not disclose a touch screen input device communicatively coupled to the microcontroller which is operable to adjust a brightness level of the LEDs, such would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the disclosure by Kasle in paragraph [0036] that a mobile computer can be used to implement device 105, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that two well-known types of mobile computers are smart phones and tablets, both of which inherently include a touchscreen. As to the recitation of receiving red, green, and blue color values, note paragraphs [0039] and [0049] of Kasle, and regarding the recitation of storing such color values, note paragraph [0054] of Kasle which indicates that the light sequence patterns are stored in memory, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that the colors of these light sequence patterns could also obviously be stored as part of the stored light sequence patterns.
As to claim 9, Kasle discloses a method of producing LED lighting responsive to sound produced by a musical instrument, the method comprising:
receiving control signals from a graphical user interface comprising a touch screen device operable to receive input that identifies LED animation patterns, wherein the touch screen device is further operable to render a plurality of adjustable color sliders that define a user-defined color based on user interaction with the user-adjustable color sliders, and wherein the control signals are generated automatically based on the LED animation patterns identified by the input and the user-defined color (as noted above, although Kasle does not disclose a touch screen input device communicatively coupled to the microcontroller which is operable to adjust a brightness level of the LEDs, such would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the disclosure by Kasle in paragraph [0036] that a mobile computer can be used to implement device 105, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that two well-known types of mobile computers are smart phones and tablets, both of which inherently include a touchscreen, and the touchscreen will be included as part of an external touchscreen device, i.e., the above-noted smart phone or tablet, and as also noted above, the limitation reciting that colors of the lighting sequences are based on values of user-adjustable color sliders rendered on a graphical user interface does not distinguish patentably over Kasle, the reason being that it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to control R, G and B colors using user-adjustable color sliders rendered on a graphical user interface, four examples of this well-known concept being disclosed by Moore et al (see paragraph [0041]), Kobayashi et al (see figure 23), Abraham et al (see figure 4), and Chien et al (see figure 4B), and the motivation for using such a teaching in Kasle is to provide an alternative art-recognized equivalent way of adjusting the light sequence colors, i.e., instead of using control knobs as taught by Kasle or, alternatively, to provide a way of remotely controlling the colors of the light sequences in Kasle, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would obviously recognize that using adjustable color sliders on a touchscreen, as taught by each of the above-noted secondary references, would enable adjustment of the lighting sequence colors remotely via a wireless input from the touchscreen device to the LEDs of the LED panel);
sending the control signals to an LED interface to cause the LED interface to illuminate a plurality of LEDs (inherently the Kasle method sends control signals to the above-noted LED interface in order to illuminate a plurality of LEDs), disposed in an array (inherently, the light emitting diodes of Kasle are disposed in an array), using an LED animation sequence corresponding to the control signals (inherently in the method of Kasle, an LED animation sequence causes the LED interface to illuminate the plurality of light emitting diodes, wherein the animation sequence is generated in correspondence with the received control signals);
measuring a sound level produced by a musical instrument in real-time using a microphone (see paragraph [0006] of Kasle);
determining that the sound level of the musical instrument is above a sound level threshold (again see paragraph [0006] of Kasle); and
generating updated control signals for the LED interface, wherein the updated control signals dynamically adjust the LED animation sequence responsive to determining that the sound level is above the sound threshold level (see paragraphs [0003] and [0006] of Kasle which disclose generating new dynamic lighting sequences in real-time based on sound output of a musical instrument, and also disclose that the lighting sequence is adjusted in response to real-time sound levels produced by the musical instrument exceeding a predetermined threshold),
wherein the LED interface controls the plurality of LEDs to produce the LED animation sequence in accordance with said sound level produced by said musical instrument and in accordance with the LED animation patterns generated by the graphical user interface (as noted above, paragraphs [0003] and [0006] of Kasle disclose generating new dynamic lighting sequences in real-time based on sound output of a musical instrument, the lighting sequence in Kasle is adjusted in response to real-time sound levels produced by the musical instrument exceeding a predetermined threshold, and Kasle’s LED animation patterns can be obviously generated by a graphical user interface which includes a touch screen input device).
As to claim 10, note the abstract of Kasle, and also paragraphs [0005] and [0034] of this reference.
As to claim 11, note the above rejection of claim 6.
As to claim 12, note the above rejection of claim 8.
As to claim 13, note the above rejection of claim 5, and also note that it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to use a slider on the touch screen of a smart phone or tablet for adjusting a user input, of which fact official notice is taken by the examiner.
As to claim 14, note that the method disclosed by Kasle inherently includes receiving a threshold level, and as noted above, it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to use a slider on the touch screen of a smart phone or tablet for adjusting a user input, of which fact official notice is taken by the examiner.
As to claim 15, note the above rejection of claims 6 and 11 and, as noted above, it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to use a slider on the touch screen of a smart phone or tablet for adjusting a user input, of which fact official notice is taken by the examiner.
As to claim 16, note the above rejection of claim 9.
As to claim 17, this claim is rejected using the same analysis as set forth above with regard to claim 1, and official notice is also taken by the examiner that it was also old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention that a mounting implement typically comprises a base for use in fixing a first object to a second object, and also includes a fastener which is operable to tighten the base of the mounting implement against the second object.
As to claim 18, note paragraphs [0010] and [0049] of Kasle, and also note that the musical instrument, i.e., drum, of Kasle will inherently comprise a cavity that is visible from outside of the musical instrument, and that the LED panel will inherently be disposed within the cavity and be operable to illuminate the cavity.
As to claim 19, as indicated in the previous office actions, one of ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that the LEDs could be disposed on either the inside surface or the outside surface the housing of the musical instrument, i.e., as noted above, when the light emitting diodes are disposed on the inside surface of the drum, Kasle teaches that the housing of the drum is transparent so that the light from the LEDs emits light therethrough, and obviously if the light emitting diodes are disposed on the outside surface of the drum, the housing thereof would not need to be transparent, and note also figure 2A of Kasle which shows the light diodes on the outside surface of the drum.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments filed on 03/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, on lines 21-23 of page 8 of the 03/12/26 response, that the references relied upon by the examiner for a teaching of adjusting the colors of LEDs using a plurality of color sliders rendered on a graphical user interface of a touch screen input device, i.e., paragraph [0041] of Moore et al, figure 4 of Abraham et al, figure 23 of Kobayashi et al and figure 4B of Chien et al, are "unrelated to LED lighting sequences and failed to teach or suggest these limitations whatsoever." This argument is not persuasive because the teachings of these four secondary references are not being relied upon by the examiner for a teaching of controlling LED lighting sequences, but rather just to show that it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to use color sliders rendered on a graphical user interface of a touch screen input device for the purpose of controlling different colored LEDs. The limitations in applicant's claims directed to controlling LED lighting sequences is disclosed by the primary reference Kasle. Applicant should note that the examiner is only relying on the above-noted secondary references to show that it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to use a plurality of adjustable color sliders rendered on a touchscreen input device for the purpose of changing the color outputs of a plurality of different colored LEDs, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the LED lighting sequences in Kasle could obviously be adjusted using a plurality of color sliders such as those disclosed in the secondary references. Moreover, as clearly indicated in the rejection above, there is obvious motivation for one of ordinary skill in the art to use a plurality of color sliders rendered on a touchscreen input device for the purpose of changing the color outputs of a plurality of different colored LEDs, i.e., to provide an alternative art-recognized equivalent way of adjusting the light sequence colors, i.e., instead of using control knobs as taught by Kasle or, alternatively, to provide a way of remotely controlling the colors of the light sequences in Kasle, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would obviously recognize that using adjustable color sliders on a touchscreen, as taught by each of Moore et al, Abraham et al, Kobayashi et al and Chien et al, would enable adjustment of the lighting sequence colors remotely via a wireless input from the touchscreen device to the LEDs of the LED panel. Finally, applicant should note that it has long been held by the courts that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejection is based on the combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant next argues, on lines 4-16 of page 9 of the 03/12/26 response, that "Abraham at Figure 34 [sic] only mentions changing a static background color using different sliders...Abraham fails to mention anything whatsoever with respect to defining colors for a lighting sequence, let alone a lighting sequence that is dynamically adjusted responsive to the real-time sound levels produced by the musical instrument exceeding a predetermined threshold, as claimed. Figure 23 of Kobayashi only mentions sliders for changing the color of a static object (a pancreas) in an operative field image. Figure 4B of Chien describes turning on illumination lights during a video call and processing module to determine the light color and/or the flicker frequency of the indicating lights according to a plurality of usage status corresponding to the plurality of character images. However, similar to Moore, Kobayashi, and Abraham, Chien has nothing to do with defining colors for a lighting sequence, let alone a lighting sequence that is dynamically adjusted responsive to the real-time sound levels produced by the musical instrument exceeding a predetermined threshold, as claimed." This argument is not persuasive for the same reason noted above, i.e., the teachings of these four secondary references are not being relied upon by the examiner for a teaching of controlling LED lighting sequences, but rather just to show that it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to use color sliders rendered on a graphical user interface of a touch screen input device for the purpose of controlling different colored LEDs. The limitation in applicant's claims regarding controlling LED lighting sequences is disclosed by the primary reference Kasle. As indicated above, the examiner is only relying on the above-noted secondary references to show that it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention to use a plurality of adjustable color sliders rendered on a touchscreen input device for the purpose of changing the color outputs of a plurality of different colored LEDs, and it would have been obvious to any person having ordinary skill in the art that the LED lighting sequences in Kasle could obviously be adjusted using a plurality of color sliders such as those disclosed in the secondary references. Moreover, as clearly indicated in the rejection above, there is obvious motivation for one of ordinary skill in the art to use a plurality of color sliders rendered on a touchscreen input device for the purpose of changing the color outputs of a plurality of different colored LEDs, i.e., to provide an alternative art-recognized equivalent way of adjusting the light sequence colors, i.e., instead of using control knobs as taught by Kasle or, alternatively, to provide a way of remotely controlling the colors of the light sequences in Kasle, i.e., one of ordinary skill in the art would obviously recognize that using adjustable color sliders on a touchscreen, as taught by each of Moor et al, Abraham et al, Kobayashi et al and Chien et al, would enable adjustment of the lighting sequence colors remotely via a wireless input from the touchscreen device to the LEDs of the LED panel. As noted above, that it has long been held by the courts that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejection is based on the combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Action is Final
4. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH B WELLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1757. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5pm.
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, REGIS BETSCH, can be reached at (571)270-7101. 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.
/KENNETH B WELLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2842 March 21, 2026