DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 4-7 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.
Regarding Claim 4, the antecedent basis for “a plurality of timbres appropriate for a plurality of pieces of music” is unclear, as the parent claim seems to indicate there is only one appropriate timbre. Correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1,8-11,18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being fully met (to the extent understood) by Sobierajski et al (USPGP 20210217396).
Regarding Claims 1,11, Sobierajski discloses an information processing system comprising:
at least one memory configured to store instructions; and
at least one processor configured to implement the instructions to:
acquire first audio data indicative of audio of a target piece of music 101 (para. 0022); and
cause a trained model (deep learning, para. 0025) to output first timbre data (basic synthesizer patch) indicative of a timbre appropriate for the target piece of music by inputting input data into the trained model (timbre analysis, para. 0022), the input data including the first audio data, wherein the trained model is trained to learn a relationship between second audio data indicative of audio and second timbre data indicative of a timbre for each reference piece of a plurality of reference pieces of music (deep learning model trained, inherently, para. 0025).
Regarding Claims 8,18 Sobierajski discloses the first audio data includes data indicative of a time series of frequency characteristics related to the audio of the target piece of music (FFT, para. 0039).
Regarding Claim 9, Sobierajski (applied here in a similar manner as to claim 1 above) discloses all features claimed and a sound emitting device to emit sound with a timbre corresponding to the first timbre data in accordance with playing of a piece of music (para. 0026).
Regarding Claim 10, Sobierajski discloses a keyboard (para. 0081) with a plurality of keys corresponding to different pitches, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to implement the instructions to cause the sound emitting device to emit the sound with both the timbre corresponding to the first timbre data and a pitch corresponding to a played key among the plurality of keys.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2,3,12-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 4-7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited show related teachings in the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY DONELS whose telephone number is (571)272-2061. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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 at (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.
JEFFREY . DONELS
Examiner
Art Unit 2837
/JEFFREY DONELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights