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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 7/14/2026, with respect to claims 1-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection to claim 4 have been considered and are persuasive. Accordingly, the objection to claim 4 as being substantially duplicative of claim 2 is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US20100162872 (Matahira), hereinafter US’872.
Regarding claim 1, US’872 discloses ‘A sound output system comprising (US’872, ¶[0038]:”The automatic player piano 1 largely comprises a synchronizer 10, a memory system 12, an automatic playing system 20a and an acoustic piano 20b”):
a speaker configured to output a sound according to sound data supplied to the speaker (US’872, ¶[0037]:”… home theater system 3 includes a panel display, audio-visual amplifiers and loud speakers, and … sound through the loud speakers from the audio signal Sa”);
and in operation device (US’872, ¶[0038]: the automatic player piano includes “an automatic playing system 20a and an acoustic piano 20b”) comprising:
one or more operators (US’872, ¶[0039]:”The keyboard 22 includes black keys 22a and white keys 22b …The black keys 22a and white keys 22b are selectively depressed and released”), a drive unit configured to drive the one or more operators (US’872, ¶[0040]:the automatic playing system includes “an array of solenoid-operated key actuators 5; the actuators “move the associated black/white keys 22a and 22b”; ¶[0062]: driving signal DR is supplied to the solenoids, causing the plungers to “push the rear portions of associated keys 22a and 22b”) based on MIDI data supplied to the operation device (US’872, ¶[0041]:”a set of pieces of music data expresses the performance;¶[0043]:”it is necessary timely to supply the MIDI music; ¶¶[0068]-[0069]:the note-event codes are transferred to the motion controller) in synchronization with the sound data supplied to the speaker (US’872, ¶[0043]:”In order to make the automatic performance on the automatic player piano 20b synchronized with the playback through the home theater system 3, it is necessary timely to supply the MIDI music data codes Sc to the automatic playing system 20a”; ¶[0047]), and a drive control unit configured to control the drive unit (US’872, ¶[0067]:the automatic-playing program realizes “a preliminary data processor 21c, a motion controller 21d and a servo controller 21e”; ¶[0072]:the motion controller supplies target key positions to the servo controller, which calculates actual/target key position and velocity and “regulates the amount of mean current of driving signal DR” so the keys travel on their reference trajectories).
Regarding claim 4, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 1, as discussed above.
US’872 further discloses ‘further comprising a supply unit (US’872, ¶[0036]: identifies playback system 2, which reads audio data codes from DVD D1 and supplies resulting signals into the ensemble system; synchronizer 10 within the automatic player piano for controlling transfer of the MIDI event data to the automatic playing system) configured to supply the sound data to the speaker (US’872, ¶[0036]:”an audio signal Sa representative of the read-out audio data codes… [is] supplied from the playback system 2 to the home theater system 3”; ¶[0037]: home theater system 3 includes “loud speakers” and “produces… Sound through the loud speakers from the audio signal Sa”) and supply the MIDI data to the drive control unit (US’872, ¶[0045]:after determining the accurate lapse of time, synchronizer 10 “specifies the event data code or codes to be transferred” such that they are “timely supplied to the automatic player 20a”, which processes the note-event data for automatic performance; ¶[0048]:synchronizer 10 specifies the associated note-event data code and “the associated note event data code is transferred to the automatic playing system 20a”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’872, in view of US20060230911/US7767901 (Contois), hereinafter US’911.
Regarding claim 2, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 1, as discussed above.
US’872 further discloses ‘wherein the operation device further comprises a supply unit (US’872, ¶[0038]:automatic player piano includes synchronizer 10, memory system 12, and automatic playing system 20a, all installed in the acoustic piano; ¶[0041]:playback system 2 supplies the audio signal to the home-theater system, while synchronizer 10 supplies the MIDI/event data toward the automatic player)
US’872 does not expressly disclose ‘configured to supply the sound data to the speaker and supply the MIDI data to the drive control unit.
However, US’911 discloses ‘configured to supply the sound data to the speaker (US’911, ¶¶[0037]-[0038]: MIDI-enabled player-piano system having a control system that handles the composite music data; the piano control unit passes the audio data codes to a sound-producing system which outputs audible sound) and supply the MIDI data to the drive control unit (US’911, ¶[0038]:the piano control unit decodes/extracts the MIDI data codes and outputs the MIDI data codes to the automatic playing system of the player piano, which responds by sending actuation signals to the keyboard mechanism to move the keys).
I would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the automatic player piano system of US’872 to incorporate the player-piano control arrangement taught by US’911, wherein a common control unit supplies associated audio data to the sound-producing system and MIDI data to the automatic playing system, in order to centrally route and coordinate the associated audio and MIDI data used for synchronized playback and automatic key actuation.
Regarding claim 5, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 4, as discussed above.
US’872 further discloses ‘further comprising a memory unit (US’872, [0038]:memory system 12, which is shared between synchronizer 10 and automatic playing system 20a)
US’872 does not expressly disclose a memory unit ‘configured to store the sound data and the MIDI data in association with each other, wherein the supply unit is configured to read out the sound data and the MIDI data from the memory unit.
However, US’911 discloses ‘a memory unit (US’911, ¶[0032]:”The computer system 110 stores a media database that includes recorded data from a composite information storage medium…) configured to store the sound data and the MIDI data in association with each other (US’911, ¶[0032]:”each of the musical works… includes associated audio data codes and MIDI data codes”; “for each musical work, the music data is stored including audio data codes of MIDI data codes relating to the work”), wherein the supply unit is configured to read out the sound data and the MIDI data from the memory unit (US’911, ¶[0034]:”When the iTunes software is requested to play such a composite music data set, it responds by sending the music data, including the audio data codes and the MIDI data codes…”;¶[0037]: the base station outputs audio data codes on the first channel and MIDI data codes on the second channel to piano control unit 240;¶[0038]:control unit 240 outputs the MIDI codes to the automatic playing system and passes the audio codes to the sound-producing system).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify US’872’s system to incorporate the associated storage and retrieval arrangement taught by US’911, such that corresponding audio and MIDI data for a musical work are stored in memory and retrieved for their respective playback and automatic-performance functions, thereby facilitating convenient storage and coordinated retrieval of corresponding audio and MIDI performance data for synchronized reproduction.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’872, in view of US8093484 (Walker), hereinafter US’484.
Regarding claim 3, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 1, as discussed above.
US’872 does not expressly disclose ‘further comprising a performance data generation unit configured to generate the MIDI data based on the sound data.
However, US’484 discloses ‘further comprising a performance data generation unit (US’484, col. 7, lines 53-56:processing musical recordings using computer technology to derive performance information; musical recordings may be “converted back into … keystrokes and pedal motions that would have been used to create them” and that this may be done “in a high-resolution MIDI format”) configured to generate the MIDI data based on the sound data (US’484, col. 23, lines 19-27:”automatic transcription” or “WAV to MIDI” and explains that sound-wave data is examined to extract information representing how the musician originally performed the music; col. 23, lines 49-50:converting musical recordings into a high-resolution MIDI format).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate US’484’s audio-to-MIDI transcription functionality into US’872’s synchronized automatic-player-piano system so that MIDI performance data used to actuate the automatic player piano could be generated from corresponding recorded sound data, thereby enabling existing musical recordings to be converted into MIDI performance data for automatic reproduction, providing increased flexibility in reproducing recorded musical performances on the automatic player piano.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’872, in view of US20210074267 (Higurashi), hereinafter US’267.
Regarding claim 6, US’872 (in view of US’484) discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 3, as discussed above.
US’872 (in view of US’484) does not expressly disclose ‘wherein the sound data corresponds to a performance sound including one or more instrumental sounds, and the performance data generation unit is configured to generate the MIDI data based on sound data corresponding to a predetermined instrumental sound among the one or more instrumental sounds.
However, US’267 discloses ‘wherein the sound data corresponds to a performance sound including one or more instrumental sounds (US’267, ¶¶[0004]-[0006], [0050], [0058]:”sounds from respective musical instruments and a vocal sound are generally mixed in audio signals or audio data”; separating “a certain type of instrumental sound or a vocal sound (a certain audio component) from audio data”; ¶[0058]:”multiple audio components may be a certain type of instrumental sound or a vocal sound”), and the performance data generation unit is configured to generate the MIDI data (US’267, ¶[0086]: extracting the pitch of a separated audio component and performing “digitalization of musical scores”; the digitalization as generating sequence data where “the pitch is made a MIDI note number”, the tone corresponds to the temporal data between “a note-on and note-off” and “SMF” data is generated) based on sound data corresponding to a predetermined instrumental sound (US’267, ¶¶[0050],[0052], [0081]-[0086], [0091]:separating a “certain type of instrumental sound” from audio data ¶[0050]; ¶[0052]: acquiring audio containing multiple audio components and obtaining audio data having “the certain audio component extracted”; ¶¶[0081]-[0084]:acquiring ”mixture audio data including multiple audio components” and using separation unit 230 to “separate the certain audio component”) among the one or more instrumental sounds (US’267, ¶¶[0052], [0058],[0082]-[0084]: the input audio contains “multiple audio components”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the audio-to-MIDI performance-data generation taught by US’484, as applied to US’872, to incorporate US’267’s audio-source-separation technique such that a predetermined instrumental sound among multiple instrumental sounds of a performance is separated and the separated instrumental sound is used to generate the MIDI data, thereby enabling an individual instrumental part of a mixed musical performance to be extracted and converted into MIDI performance data for reproduction by the automatic musical instrument.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’872, in view of US20120063608 (Soulodre), hereinafter US’608.
Regarding claim 7, US’872 (in view of US’484) ‘The sound output system according to claim 3, as discussed above.
US’872 (in view of US’484) does not expressly disclose ‘further comprising a reverb processing unit configured to remove a reverb component from music data having the reverb component to thereby generate the sound data.
However, US’608 discloses ‘further comprising a reverb processing unit (US’608, ¶¶[0041],[0024]:”a method and apparatus for identifying and altering the reverberant component of an audio signal”; ¶[0050]: signal processor 5, which operates on input signal m(t) and decomposes it into an estimate of the original dry signal and an estimate of the reverberant component) configured to remove a reverb component (US’608, ¶[0027]: uses impulse-response estimates “to identify and extract the energy related to the reverberant component of a signal”; ¶[0041]: processing the signal “so as to extract the reverberant component of the signal, thus obtaining an estimate of the dry signal and an estimate of the reverberant signal”; ¶[0049]: the estimated magnitude of the reverberant energy “is subtracted from the input signal”) from music data having the reverb component to thereby generate the sound data (US’608, ¶¶[0004],[0041],[0049]-[0050], [0065]-[0066]:”a mixture of the direct Sound component…and the reverberant component”; ¶[0050]:the signal processor 5 decomposes the input into “an estimate S(t) of the original dry signal s(t)” and an estimate of the reverberant component).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the audio-to-MIDI processing taught by US’484, as applied to US’872, to include the reverberation-removal processing taught by US’608, such that reverberation is removed from music data before the resulting sound data is used for performance-data generation, thereby providing a sound signal having reduced reverberation and improving the suitability of the signal for subsequent audio processing.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’872, in view of US20020178898 (Hagiwara), hereinafter US’898.
Regarding claim 8, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 1, as discussed above.
US’872 further discloses ‘further comprising an adjustment unit (US’872, ¶[0043]: synchronizer 10 controlling the timing at which MIDI music data codes are supplied to the automatic playing system relative to playback of the corresponding audio signal; “In order to make the automatic performance on the automatic player piano 20b synchronized with the playback through the home theater system 3, it is necessary timely to supply the MIDI music data codes Sc to the automatic playing system 20a”) configured to perform delay processing such that the MIDI data is supplied to the operation device in synchronization with the sound data being supplied to the speaker (US’872, ¶[0045]:synchronizer determines the accurate lapse of time and specifies MIDI event data codes so that they are timely supplied to the automatic player; ¶¶[0103]-[0105]: the automatic player then uses the MIDI note-event codes to operate the keys in the ensemble with the sound reproduced through the home theater system) .
US’872 does not expressly disclose ‘by delaying the sound data relative to the performance data.
However, US’898 discloses ‘by delaying the sound data relative to the performance data (US’898, ¶[0013]:”The musical tone data are different from musical performance information comprising event information (including MIDI data etc.)”; ¶[0015]:“with such a delay so as to conform to a sound production timing of the other automatic performance part…”; ¶[0052]:”100-ms mechanical lag; ¶[0063]-[0064]:” the musical performance information … converted into the musical tone data, and the musical tone data are outputted with a delay by that certain period of time under the operation of the DSP 10”; ¶[0097])It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify US’872 to incorporate US’898’s delay processing such that the sound data supplied to the speaker is delayed relative to the MIDI data supplied to the automatic player piano, thereby compensating for the mechanical response time of the automatically driven piano and synchronizing the reproduced sound with the physical operation of the automatic musical instrument and reducing perceptible timing discrepancies between the mechanically produced performance and the electronically reproduced sound.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’872, in view of US20120240743 (Jones), hereinafter US’743.
Regarding claim 9, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 1, as discussed above.
US’872 further discloses ‘wherein the operation device is a keyboard device comprising a plurality of keys as the one or more operators (US’872, ¶¶[0038]-[0040]:operation device is automatic player piano 1, including keyboard 22 with black and white keys 22a, 22b and solenoid-operated key actuators 5), the keyboard device comprises:
[and]
‘while the drive unit drives the plurality of keys in synchronization with the output of the sound, according to the sound data, by the speaker (US’872, ¶¶[0040], [0043], [0045], [0103]-[0105]: solenoid-operated key actuators drive the keys, while MIDI music data codes are timely supplied to the automatic playing system so that automatic piano performance is synchronized with playback through the home-theater loudspeakers)
US’872 does not expressly disclose ‘a plurality of hammers respectively interlocked with the plurality of keys; a stopper that prevents the plurality of hammers from striking a string; a stopper drive unit that drives the stopper; and a stopper drive control unit that controls the stopper drive unit, and the stopper drive control unit controls the stopper drive unit to drive the stopper to prevent the plurality of hammers from striking the string.
However, US’743 discloses ‘a plurality of hammers respectively interlocked with the plurality of keys (US’743, ¶[0038]:”a series of keys 110 and corresponding key actions 120” and that “a series of rotatable hammers 130… are driven by corresponding key actions 120, which transfer forces from corresponding pressed keys 110”);
a stopper that prevents the plurality of hammers from striking a string (US’743, ¶[0038]:”a stopper rail 210 disposed between the hammers 130 and the strings 140” movable to “a second position stopping at least one hammer 130 from the striking its corresponding string (s) 140; the second position used “for silent play”);
a stopper drive unit that drives the stopper (US’743, ¶¶[0038]-[0040]: rail actuator assembly 220 configured to move stopper rail 210 between the acoustic and silent positions; [0039]:”first (non-stopper) position and its second (stopper) position”);
and a stopper drive control unit that controls the stopper drive unit (US’743, ¶[0071]: “The controller 400 may include circuitry that controls switching between play modes (e.g. via the rail actuator assembly 220, 220A, 220B)” and controller 400 “may be in communication with the drive shaft rotator 250 or the drive arm rotator 255 actuating the rail actuator assembly 220”), and the stopper drive control unit controls the stopper drive unit to drive the stopper to prevent the plurality of hammers from striking the string (US’743 ¶¶[0071]-[0072] in view of ¶[0038]: controller 400 controlling switching between play modes via rail actuator assembly 220, “In its second position, the mode selection switch 150A causes the rail actuator assembly 220 to hold the stopper rail 210 in its second position stopper at least one piano hammer 130 from striking any corresponding strings 140”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the claimed invention to modify the automatic player piano of US’872 to incorporate the controllable hammer-stopper system taught by US’743, such that the stopper is driven to prevent the hammers from striking the strings while the keys are automatically driven in synchronization with the sound reproduced through the speaker, thereby allowing automatic key movement while suppressing acoustic string sound, so that synchronized speaker output can provide the audible performance without competing acoustic tones from the piano strings.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’872, in view of US20180033407 (Ohnishi), hereinafter US’407, and in further view of US20120247309 (Matsuda), hereinafter US’309.
Regarding claim 10, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 1, as discussed above.
US’872 further discloses ‘the speaker is configured to output the sound according to the sound data supplied to the speaker (US’872, ¶¶[0037], [0047]: home-theater system/loudspeakers reproduce the supplied audio while the automatic player piano performs synchronously from MIDI data).
US’872 does not expressly disclose ‘wherein the operation device is operable in a manual performance mode and an auto play performance mode different from the manual performance mode, in a case where a first setting is applied to the operation device operating in the manual performance mode, a sound source unit of the operation device is configured to generate and output an audio signal corresponding to an operation of the one or more operators, and in a case where the first setting is applied to the operation device operating in the auto play performance mode, and the sound source unit of the operation device is configured to not generate and output the audio signal corresponding to the operation of the one or more operators.
However, US’ 407 discloses ‘wherein the operation device is operable in a manual performance mode and an auto play performance mode different from the manual performance mode (US’407, ¶¶[0059]-[0063]:four selectable operation modes including “a manual performance mode” and “an automatic performance mode”; “instead of the player operating the keys”), in a case where a first setting is applied to the operation device operating in the manual performance mode (US’407, ¶¶[0064]-[0070], [0090]:the manual and automatic performance modes have the same four available settings: normal, soft sound, loud sound and silent), a sound source unit of the operation device is configured to generate and output an audio signal corresponding to an operation of the one or more operators (US’407, ¶¶[0091]-[0094]:based on detection signals, control signal output unit 120 provides performance information including key-on, key number, velocity, and key-off, “the sound source unit 115 generates an audio signal and outputs the audio signal),
and in a case where the first setting is applied to the operation device operating in the auto play performance mode (US’407, ¶¶[0095]-[0098]:automatic-performance mode uses the same normal/soft/loud/silent settings; ¶[0096]: the setting information is changed to one of those setting as applied to the automatic-performance mode),
US’309 discloses ‘and the sound source unit of the operation device is configured to not generate and output the audio signal corresponding to the operation of the one or more operators (US’309, ¶[0024]: When the headphone 102 is inserted into the terminal, the switch 206 is turned off, and the vibrator 103 does not input the musical sound signal therein from the normal sound generator 201 and does not give vibration to the soundboard 112, resulting in that the soundboard 112 does not generate a sound)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify US’872 to incorporate US’407’s manual/automatic performance modes and sound-source control and US’309’s selective suppression of internally generated sound, thereby allowing separately supplied sound data to be reproduced during automatic performance without duplicative internal sound reproduction.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’872, in view of US’407, and in further view of US20140150623 (Fujiwara), hereinafter US’623.
Regarding claim 11, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 1, as discussed above.
US’872 further discloses ‘the speaker is configured to output the sound according to the sound data supplied to the speaker (US’872, ¶¶[0037], [0047]: home-theater system/loudspeakers reproduce the supplied audio while the automatic player piano performs synchronously from MIDI data).
US’872 does not expressly disclose ‘wherein the operation device is operable in a first auto play mode and a second auto play mode different from the first auto play mode, in a case where the operation device operates in the first auto play mode, a sound source unit of the operation device is configured to generate and output an audio signal corresponding to the MIDI data supplied to the operation device,
and in a case where the operation device operates the second auto play mode, and the sound source unit of the operation device is configured to not generate and output the audio signal corresponding to the MIDI data supplied to the operation device.
However, US’623 discloses ‘wherein the operation device is operable in a first auto play mode and a second auto play mode different from the first auto play mode, in a case where the operation device operates in the first auto play mode (US’623, ¶[0032]: “The above-mentioned automatic performance mode includes a mode in which electronic sound generation is executed, ad a mode in which sound generation by the sound board is executed”),
and in a case where the operation device operates the second auto play mode (US’623, ¶[0032]:”a mode in which sound generation by the sound board is executed”), and the sound source unit of the operation device is configured to not generate and output the audio signal corresponding to the MIDI data supplied to the operation device (US’632, ¶¶[0031]-[0032]:the string-striking-preventive mode executes sound generation by the soundboard “without executing electric sound generation”, and identifies automatic performance as including the alternative electronic-sound-generation and soundboard-generation modes).
US’407 discloses ‘a sound source unit of the operation device is configured to generate and output an audio signal corresponding to the MIDI data supplied to the operation device (US’407, ¶¶[0091]-[0094]:based on detection signals, control signal output unit 120 provides performance information including key-on, key number, velocity, and key-off, “the sound source unit 115 generates an audio signal and outputs the audio signal).
It would have been obvious to modify US’872 to incorporate US’407’s electronic sound generation during automatic performance and US’036’s alternative automatic-performance sound-generation modes, thereby selectively providing or suppressing internal electronic sound generation during automatic performance depending on the desired sound source and avoiding duplicative sound reproduction.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’872, in view of US20070221036 (Fujiwara), hereinafter US’036.
Regarding claim 12, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 1, as discussed above.
US’872 discloses ‘wherein the MIDI data includes performance event information (US’872, ¶¶[0041]-[0042]: music data is coded according to MIDI protocols and that MIDI music data codes include note event data codes together with duration data codes; ¶[0002]:”note event data code [s]”)
[and]
‘defined on a time axis (US’872, ¶¶[0045], [0048]-[0051], [0068]-[0069]:the synchronizer determines an accurate lapse of time and specifies which MIDI event data code is to be processed at that point based on the duration data codes, so that the event is timely supplied to the automatic player) determined depending on a tempo (US’036, ¶¶[0043]-[0045], [0051]:synchronizing the automatic piano performance with progression of the corresponding audio-playback and determining the accurate lapse of time of the performance)
US’872 does not expressly disclose ‘including note-on and note-off defined on a time axis determined depending on a duration.
However, US’036 discloses ‘information including note-on and note-off (US’036, ¶¶[0075]-[0078]: “The key events, i.e., the key-on event and key-off event are stored in a note-on event code and a note-off event code”) defined on a time axis determined depending on a duration (US’036, ¶¶[0077], [0079], “the lapse of time … between a key event and the previous key event is stored in a duration data code: and that this lapse of time is “a delta time”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the MIDI music data of US’872 using the Standard MIDI event structure taught by US’036, including note-on and note-off event codes and associated duration/delta-time information, thereby providing a standardized and temporally ordered representation of musical performance for controlling the automatic player in synchronization with the corresponding sound playback.
Regarding claim 13, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 1, as discussed above.
US’872 does not expressly disclose ‘wherein the MIDI data includes pitch information indicating a pitch of a sound content, and the pitch information corresponds to a key number.
However, US’036 discloses ‘wherein the MIDI data includes pitch information indicating a pitch of a sound content (US’036, ¶[0078]:”express a note number kk, i.e., the pitch of a tone to be produced”), and the pitch information corresponds to a key number (US’036, ¶[0078]:”the note number kk is s specified with the key numbers respectively assigned to the black and white keys 1b/1c, and the word "key number [kk]" is used as a synonym of "note number””).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the MIDI musica data of US’872 using the note-number/key-number representation taught by US’036, such that pitch performance information in the MIDI data identifies the corresponding piano key, thereby providing a standardized and direct mapping between MIDI pitch data and the keys to be actuated during automatic performance.
Regarding claim 14, US’872 discloses ‘The sound output system according to claim 1, as discussed above.
US’872 further discloses ‘wherein the MIDI data is control data (US’872, ¶¶[0002],[0041]-[0042]: MIDI protocols).
[and]
‘and includes period information defining a sound generation period (US’872, ¶[0002]: note-on as an instruction to generate a tone, note-off as an instruction to decay the tone, and a duration data code specifying the time interval between successive note events).
US’872 does not expressly disclose ‘in which the performance content is defined by sound generation/stop control according to time progress.
However, US’036 discloses ‘in which the performance content is defined by sound generation/stop control according to time progress (US’036, ¶¶[0077]-[0079]:key-on/key-off events are stored as MIDI note-on/note-off event codes and their timing progresses according to duration/delta-time values, with elapsed performance time obtained by accumulating the delta times)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the MIDI music data of US’872 using the MIDI note-event and duration/delta-time structure taught by US’036, such that the performance content is represented by timed note-on and note-off control events and associated duration information, thereby providing a standardized temporal representation of tone generation and termination for accurately controlling the automatic musical performance.
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 NICOLE K GILLESPIE whose telephone number is (571)482-4187. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5pm.
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, Dedei K Hammond can be reached at (571)270-3819. 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.
/NICOLE K GILLESPIE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/DEDEI K HAMMOND/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights