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 9/13/2023 and 12/3/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the keyboard including keys each of which has a light emitter therein recited in claim 13 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 3-4, "prescribed number of a measure" should read, "prescribed number of measures.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 5-6, "different for each of the repetition" should read, "different for each repetition." Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 6, "prescribed number of a measure" should read, "prescribed number of measures.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2, "prescribed number of a measure" should read, "prescribed number of measures.” Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 3 is 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 3 recites the limitation "the quotient" in line 4. The phrase, “the quotient” in claim 4 has ambiguous antecedent basis because claim 2, from which claim 3 depends, recites two separate quotients, and claim 4 makes no distinction as to which quotient is further limited in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
Claims 1, 7, 9, 12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Smith et al. (US 20030094093 A1, May 22, 2003), hereinafter Smith.
Regarding claim 1, Smith discloses an electronic device comprising at least one processor that controls reproduction of a piece of music based on music data (Smith ¶0240: "An Action is an instruction that explains to the processor how to interpret, manipulate and/or modify the pristine digital bit stream 102. As stated above, these actions can reside in a number of different places. They may live within the MIDI stream 102, live within the show or song files 108, or they may be split out into separate types of actions into map files 122."), wherein the processor determines a performance section falling under a condition defined in advance in the piece of music as a first section (Smith ¶0175-0176: "Each modification can be either tied to a metric location or tagged as extra-metrical, and therefore subject to being used arbitrary by other processes. Multiple maps modifying the same parameter can be superimposed within map groups. This can provide even more flexibility to the modification procedures. In addition there may be higher level maps which are responsible for manipulating more than one parameter, and meta-maps, which define and modify other maps. This entire structure of maps would be stored within predefined data structures, and could be dynamically changed or recorded in performance or rehearsal situations.") and determines a section not falling under the condition as a second section (Smith ¶0199: "Map 2 1320 contains an instruction that Instrument 1 should be unmuted from measure 1 1324 to measure 6 1332. In addition to these maps, Map 1 1318 includes an instruction for instrument 1 to be muted from measure 2 1326 to measure 4 1328 and from measure 5 1330 to measure 7 1334."), and in reproducing of the piece of music based on the music data, controls to output music sound of the first section and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Smith ¶0200: "The masking priority rule makes this decision simple, and the results can be seen in the final output line 1312. As the song moves through the measures, we see that the instrument will play in measure 1, where the result is unmuted 1314. Map 1 1304 overrides this command in measure 2 1326, and the instrument becomes muted 1316. When map 1 no longer contains information, the command associated with Map 2 1306 is now the highest priority, and therefore the instrument is now playing again 1316.").
Regarding claim 7, Smith discloses an electronic device comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Smith further discloses that based on a plurality of measure patterns (Smith ¶0198: "In this example, a map group 1302 contains three maps: Map 1 1318, Map 2 1320, and Map 3 1322. Map hierarchy can be defined or established in many different ways. One way is by list order.") in each of which a combination of a measure constituting the first section and a measure constituting the second section is defined in advance (Smith ¶0199: "However, Map 2 1320 contains an instruction that Instrument 1 should be unmuted from measure 1 1324 to measure 6 1332. In addition to these maps, Map 1 1318 includes an instruction for instrument 1 to be muted from measure 2 1326 to measure 4 1328 and from measure 5 1330 to measure 7 1334."), the processor selects one of the plurality of measure patterns each time a prescribed number of a measure is repeated (¶0280: "Pattern permits a user to program a sequence of values for a particular action or meta event. The system 100 remembers the sequence of values and every time the meta event is encountered, system 100 uses the next value.").
Regarding claim 9, Smith discloses an electronic device comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Smith further discloses that the processor determines a prescribed number of a measure at beginning of the piece of music as the first section (Smith ¶0200: "As the song moves through the measures, we see that the instrument will play in measure 1, where the result is unmuted 1314. Map 1 1304 overrides this command in measure 2 1326, and the instrument becomes muted 1316.").
Regarding claim 12, Smith discloses an electronic device comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Smith further discloses that the processor of the electronic device controls output of the music sound in the electronic musical instrument based on the music data (Smith ¶0289: "In an exemplary embodiment, first output 126 provides a MIDI bit stream that conforms to the MIDI 1.0 specification protocol. This output can be used to control any MIDI compliant device.").
Regarding claim 14, Smith discloses a reproduction control method comprising: determining, by a computer that controls reproduction of a piece of music based on music data (Smith ¶0240: "An Action is an instruction that explains to the processor how to interpret, manipulate and/or modify the pristine digital bit stream 102. As stated above, these actions can reside in a number of different places. They may live within the MIDI stream 102, live within the show or song files 108, or they may be split out into separate types of actions into map files 122."), a performance section falling under a condition defined in advance in the piece of music as a first section (Smith ¶0175-0176: "Each modification can be either tied to a metric location or tagged as extra-metrical, and therefore subject to being used arbitrary by other processes. Multiple maps modifying the same parameter can be superimposed within map groups. This can provide even more flexibility to the modification procedures. In addition there may be higher level maps which are responsible for manipulating more than one parameter, and meta-maps, which define and modify other maps. This entire structure of maps would be stored within predefined data structures, and could be dynamically changed or recorded in performance or rehearsal situations.") and determining a section not falling under the condition as a second section (Smith ¶0199: "Map 2 1320 contains an instruction that Instrument 1 should be unmuted from measure 1 1324 to measure 6 1332. In addition to these maps, Map 1 1318 includes an instruction for instrument 1 to be muted from measure 2 1326 to measure 4 1328 and from measure 5 1330 to measure 7 1334."), and in reproducing of the piece of music based on the music data, controlling to output music sound of the first section and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Smith ¶0200: "The masking priority rule makes this decision simple, and the results can be seen in the final output line 1312. As the song moves through the measures, we see that the instrument will play in measure 1, where the result is unmuted 1314. Map 1 1304 overrides this command in measure 2 1326, and the instrument becomes muted 1316. When map 1 no longer contains information, the command associated with Map 2 1306 is now the highest priority, and therefore the instrument is now playing again 1316.").
Regarding claim 15, discloses a computer-readable non-transitory recording medium having recorded thereon a program for causing a computer that controls reproduction of a piece of music based on music data (Smith ¶0240: "An Action is an instruction that explains to the processor how to interpret, manipulate and/or modify the pristine digital bit stream 102. As stated above, these actions can reside in a number of different places. They may live within the MIDI stream 102, live within the show or song files 108, or they may be split out into separate types of actions into map files 122.") to execute processing of: determining a performance section falling under a condition defined in advance in the piece of music as a first section (Smith ¶0175-0176: "Each modification can be either tied to a metric location or tagged as extra-metrical, and therefore subject to being used arbitrary by other processes. Multiple maps modifying the same parameter can be superimposed within map groups. This can provide even more flexibility to the modification procedures. In addition there may be higher level maps which are responsible for manipulating more than one parameter, and meta-maps, which define and modify other maps. This entire structure of maps would be stored within predefined data structures, and could be dynamically changed or recorded in performance or rehearsal situations.") and determining a section not falling under the condition as a second section (Smith ¶0199: "Map 2 1320 contains an instruction that Instrument 1 should be unmuted from measure 1 1324 to measure 6 1332. In addition to these maps, Map 1 1318 includes an instruction for instrument 1 to be muted from measure 2 1326 to measure 4 1328 and from measure 5 1330 to measure 7 1334."); and in reproducing of the piece of music based on the music data, controlling to output music sound of the first section and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Smith ¶0200: "The masking priority rule makes this decision simple, and the results can be seen in the final output line 1312. As the song moves through the measures, we see that the instrument will play in measure 1, where the result is unmuted 1314. Map 1 1304 overrides this command in measure 2 1326, and the instrument becomes muted 1316. When map 1 no longer contains information, the command associated with Map 2 1306 is now the highest priority, and therefore the instrument is now playing again 1316.").
Claims 1, 8, 10-11, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Sinichi et al. (JP 2006195022 A, July 27, 2006), hereinafter Shinichi.
Regarding claim 1, Shinichi discloses an electronic device comprising at least one processor (Shinichi 0014: "The electronic music device that forms the core of this performance practice system uses a personal computer (PC) or electronic musical instrument, which is a music information processing device (computer) equipped with performance controls and music information processing functions.") that controls reproduction of a piece of music based on music data (Shinichi ¶0065: "Regarding the playback process shown in Figure 7, the first step R1 involves selecting the measure to be played back. In other words, when this review playback process begins, the first measure of the song data is selected, and then when it returns to step R1, the next measures are selected sequentially."), wherein the processor determines a performance section falling under a condition defined in advance in the piece of music as a first section (Shinichi ¶¶0065-0066: "In the next step, R2, the clear information CL in the lesson history file for the song is examined to determine whether or not a clear mark is set for the selected measure. If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17.") and determines a section not falling under the condition as a second section (Shinichi ¶0066: "If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17. Additionally, when the clear mark is set (R2 → YES), the playback of the lesson part is muted and other parts are played."), and in reproducing of the piece of music based on the music data, controls to output music sound of the first section (Shinichi ¶0066: "If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17.") and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Shinichi ¶0066: "Additionally, when the clear mark is set (R2 → YES), the playback of the lesson part is muted and other parts are played.").
Regarding claim 8, Shinichi discloses an electronic device comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shinichi further discloses a display (Shinichi ¶0018: "The display circuit 7 includes a display 15 such as an LCD that displays various screens, a guide indicator 16 for guiding playback operations, and various indicators (not shown). It controls the display/lighting content of these according to commands from the CPU 1 and provides display assistance for the operation of each control element 13, 14."), wherein the processor causes the display to display information indicating the first section and the second section in the piece of music (Shinichi ¶0031: "Next, for the clear sections, as shown in the right column of Figure 2, measures in which a clear mark is set for any of the lesson levels K1 to K3 in the clear information CL are designated as clear measures, and each clear measure is colored with a predetermined color (for example, pink) as shown in Figure 3(1) for the display block of these measures.").
Regarding claim 10, Shinichi discloses an electronic device comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shinichi further discloses that the music data contains music data for each of a plurality of parts (Shinichi ¶0037: "For example, if the song being practiced consists of a melody part and an accompaniment part, and is composed of a phrase A with an introductory playing pattern, a phrase A' with a playing pattern similar to phrase A, a phrase B with a playing pattern that forms the chorus of the song, and a phrase C with a different playing pattern."), and the processor controls to output music sound of the first section (Shinichi ¶0066: "If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17.") and not to output music sound of the second section for music of a first part among the plurality of parts (Shinichi ¶0066: "Additionally, when the clear mark is set (R2 → YES), the playback of the lesson part is muted and other parts are played."), and controls to output music sound for all the sections for music of at least one part different from the first part among the plurality of parts (Shinichi ¶0066: "If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17. Additionally, when the clear mark is set (R2 → YES), the playback of the lesson part is muted and other parts are played.").
Regarding claim 11, Shinichi discloses an electronic device comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shinichi further discloses a display (Shinichi ¶0018: "The display circuit 7 includes a display 15 such as an LCD that displays various screens, a guide indicator 16 for guiding playback operations, and various indicators (not shown). It controls the display/lighting content of these according to commands from the CPU 1 and provides display assistance for the operation of each control element 13, 14."), wherein the processor causes the display to display a guide of a pitch in the second section (Shinichi ¶0071: "While the user is trying, the generation of musical tones based on musical tone information is muted. For lesson steps 1 and 2, the system provides level-appropriate key-pressing guidance in the same display format as during example playback. ") at timing of performing in the second section of the piece of music (Shinichi ¶0042: "In response to this, the immediate lamp L2 provides immediate guidance by indicating which key should be pressed immediately at the timing of the performance.").
Regarding claim 13, Shinichi discloses an electronic device comprising the features of claim 12 as discussed above.
Shinichi further discloses that the electronic musical instrument includes a keyboard (Shinichi ¶0019: "In the following example, a keyboard is used as the performance control 13, and a guide display 16 provides different key-pressing guidance with different display modes for each key on the keyboard 13.") including keys each of which has a light emitter therein (Shinichi ¶0046: "The lesson method shown in Figure 4 can be summarized as follows: In this system, each key on the keyboard that is played is provided with two types of indicator lights, L1 and L2, which can be displayed in different ways (e.g., different colors, different display locations, etc.) (A)."), and wherein the processor of the electronic device causes a key in the keyboard of the electronic musical instrument that corresponds to a pitch in the second section (Shinichi ¶0020: "For example, the first lamp (e.g., a blue LED) L1 is used as a 'preview guide' to indicate which key to press in the measure currently being played and is called the 'preview lamp,' while the second lamp (e.g., a red LED) L2 is used as an 'immediate guide' to indicate which key to press at the present moment and is called the 'immediate lamp.'") to emit light at timing of performing in the second section of the piece of music (Shinichi ¶0044: "The basic principle of the performance practice guide (navigation) in this system is as follows: as shown on the left side of Figure 4(A), a preview lamp (first guide indicator) L1 illuminates the keys to be pressed in the next measure in a predetermined display manner to provide a preview guide, and an immediate lamp (second guide indicator) L2 illuminates the keys to be pressed at the present time in a different display manner to provide an immediate guide.").
Regarding claim 14, Shinichi discloses a reproduction control method comprising: determining, by a computer (Shinichi 0014: "The electronic music device that forms the core of this performance practice system uses a personal computer (PC) or electronic musical instrument, which is a music information processing device (computer) equipped with performance controls and music information processing functions.") that controls reproduction of a piece of music based on music data (Shinichi ¶0065: "Regarding the playback process shown in Figure 7, the first step R1 involves selecting the measure to be played back. In other words, when this review playback process begins, the first measure of the song data is selected, and then when it returns to step R1, the next measures are selected sequentially."), a performance section falling under a condition defined in advance in the piece of music as a first section (Shinichi ¶¶0065-0066: "In the next step, R2, the clear information CL in the lesson history file for the song is examined to determine whether or not a clear mark is set for the selected measure. If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17.") and determining a section not falling under the condition as a second section (Shinichi ¶0066: "If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17. Additionally, when the clear mark is set (R2 → YES), the playback of the lesson part is muted and other parts are played."), and in reproducing of the piece of music based on the music data, controlling to output music sound of the first section and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Shinichi ¶0066: "If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17.") and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Shinichi ¶0066: "Additionally, when the clear mark is set (R2 → YES), the playback of the lesson part is muted and other parts are played.").
Regarding claim 15, Shinichi discloses a computer-readable non-transitory recording medium having recorded thereon a program for causing a computer that controls reproduction of a piece of music based on music data (Shinichi 0014: "The electronic music device that forms the core of this performance practice system uses a personal computer (PC) or electronic musical instrument, which is a music information processing device (computer) equipped with performance controls and music information processing functions.") to execute processing (Shinichi ¶0065: "Regarding the playback process shown in Figure 7, the first step R1 involves selecting the measure to be played back. In other words, when this review playback process begins, the first measure of the song data is selected, and then when it returns to step R1, the next measures are selected sequentially.") of: determining a performance section falling under a condition defined in advance in the piece of music as a first section (Shinichi ¶¶0065-0066: "In the next step, R2, the clear information CL in the lesson history file for the song is examined to determine whether or not a clear mark is set for the selected measure. If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17.") and determining a section not falling under the condition as a second section (Shinichi ¶0066: "If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17. Additionally, when the clear mark is set (R2 → YES), the playback of the lesson part is muted and other parts are played."); and in reproducing of the piece of music based on the music data, controlling to output music sound of the first section and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Shinichi ¶0066: "If no clear mark is set for the measure in question (R2 → NO), the process proceeds to step R3, where all parts, including the lesson part, are played back through the sound generation section 8-9-17.") and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Shinichi ¶0066: "Additionally, when the clear mark is set (R2 → YES), the playback of the lesson part is muted and other parts are played.").
Claims 1, 4, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Tsutomu et al. (JP 2002091443 A, March 27, 2002), hereinafter Tsutomu.
Regarding claim 1, Tsutomu discloses an electronic device comprising at least one processor (Tsutomu ¶¶0127-0128: "This embodiment may also be implemented using a commercially available computer or the like on which a computer program corresponding to this embodiment is installed. In that case, the computer program corresponding to this embodiment may be provided to the user in a state where it is stored on a computer-readable storage medium such as a CD ROM or a floppy disk.") that controls reproduction of a piece of music based on music data (Tsutomu ¶0082: "In step SD1, normal playback processing is started, and the playback mode data SQ to be used this time (playback mode data SQ created in step SA3 in Figure 3) is started to be read, and the music data MD is started to be read from the beginning."), wherein the processor determines a performance section falling under a condition defined in advance in the piece of music as a first section (Tsutomu ¶0064: "Figure 5(C) is playback mode data SQ3 for controlling the playback mode during performance practice using normal playback as shown in Figure 10, and records the part designation, repeat section, number of times the repeat section is played, and events (playback mode) SE from each location L1 to Ln.") and determines a section not falling under the condition as a second section (Tsutomu ¶0116: "In this way, playback proceeds sequentially by repeating the process of steps SD2 to SD7 in Figure 7. According to the event SE at each location of the playback mode data SQ3, playback proceeds from location L2 to location L3 in a playback mode with mute off and tempo restored (initial setting playback mode), and from location L3 to location L4 in a playback mode with mute on and evaluation performed."), and in reproducing of the piece of music based on the music data, controls to output music sound of the first section (Tsutomu ¶0086: "In step SD4, processing such as sound output and mute is performed based on the event MEs of the parts that were not muted among the event MEs read in step SD2.") and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Tsutomu ¶0115: "In step SD3 of Figure 7, according to the mute-on and tempo deceleration event SE read in step SD2, the designated part (in this case, the drum part) is muted and the playback tempo is set to be slowed down.").
Regarding claim 4, Tsutomu discloses an electronic device comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Tsutomu further discloses that the condition is set such that, for the piece of music that includes repetition of content of a prescribed number of a measure (Tsutomu ¶0010: "According to one aspect of the present invention, an automatic performance device includes a storage means for storing musical data including multiple parts, a reading means for reading only a specific section of the musical data from the storage means, a playback means for repeatedly playing the musical data of the specific section read by the reading means, and a playback mode changing means that can change the playback mode of the playback means each time it is repeated."), a measure constituting the first section and a measure constituting the second section are different for each of the repetition (Tsutomu ¶0098: "In this way, by repeating the process from step SC3 to step SC11 in Figure 6, playback proceeds sequentially, and according to the event SE at each timing of the playback mode data SQ1, in the third repeated playback starting from timing C, playback proceeds with the playback mode settings of mute off, tempo restored, and evaluation canceled, in the fourth repeated playback starting from timing D, playback proceeds with the playback mode settings of mute on, tempo slowed down, and evaluation performed, and the same processing is carried out in repeated playback from timing E onward.").
Regarding claim 14, Tsutomu discloses a reproduction control method comprising: determining, by a computer (Tsutomu ¶¶0127-0128: "This embodiment may also be implemented using a commercially available computer or the like on which a computer program corresponding to this embodiment is installed. In that case, the computer program corresponding to this embodiment may be provided to the user in a state where it is stored on a computer-readable storage medium such as a CD ROM or a floppy disk.") that controls reproduction of a piece of music based on music data (Tsutomu ¶0082: "In step SD1, normal playback processing is started, and the playback mode data SQ to be used this time (playback mode data SQ created in step SA3 in Figure 3) is started to be read, and the music data MD is started to be read from the beginning."), a performance section falling under a condition defined in advance in the piece of music as a first section (Tsutomu ¶0064: "Figure 5(C) is playback mode data SQ3 for controlling the playback mode during performance practice using normal playback as shown in Figure 10, and records the part designation, repeat section, number of times the repeat section is played, and events (playback mode) SE from each location L1 to Ln.") and determining a section not falling under the condition as a second section (Tsutomu ¶0116: "In this way, playback proceeds sequentially by repeating the process of steps SD2 to SD7 in Figure 7. According to the event SE at each location of the playback mode data SQ3, playback proceeds from location L2 to location L3 in a playback mode with mute off and tempo restored (initial setting playback mode), and from location L3 to location L4 in a playback mode with mute on and evaluation performed."), and in reproducing of the piece of music based on the music data, controlling to output music sound of the first section and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Tsutomu ¶0086: "In step SD4, processing such as sound output and mute is performed based on the event MEs of the parts that were not muted among the event MEs read in step SD2.") and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Tsutomu ¶0115: "In step SD3 of Figure 7, according to the mute-on and tempo deceleration event SE read in step SD2, the designated part (in this case, the drum part) is muted and the playback tempo is set to be slowed down.").
Regarding claim 15, Tsutomu discloses a computer-readable non-transitory recording medium having recorded thereon a program (Tsutomu ¶¶0127-0128: "This embodiment may also be implemented using a commercially available computer or the like on which a computer program corresponding to this embodiment is installed. In that case, the computer program corresponding to this embodiment may be provided to the user in a state where it is stored on a computer-readable storage medium such as a CD ROM or a floppy disk.") for causing a computer that controls reproduction of a piece of music based on music data (Tsutomu ¶0082: "In step SD1, normal playback processing is started, and the playback mode data SQ to be used this time (playback mode data SQ created in step SA3 in Figure 3) is started to be read, and the music data MD is started to be read from the beginning.") to execute processing of: determining a performance section falling under a condition defined in advance in the piece of music as a first section (Tsutomu ¶0064: "Figure 5(C) is playback mode data SQ3 for controlling the playback mode during performance practice using normal playback as shown in Figure 10, and records the part designation, repeat section, number of times the repeat section is played, and events (playback mode) SE from each location L1 to Ln.") and determining a section not falling under the condition as a second section (Tsutomu ¶0116: "In this way, playback proceeds sequentially by repeating the process of steps SD2 to SD7 in Figure 7. According to the event SE at each location of the playback mode data SQ3, playback proceeds from location L2 to location L3 in a playback mode with mute off and tempo restored (initial setting playback mode), and from location L3 to location L4 in a playback mode with mute on and evaluation performed."); and in reproducing of the piece of music based on the music data, controlling to output music sound of the first section and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Tsutomu ¶0086: "In step SD4, processing such as sound output and mute is performed based on the event MEs of the parts that were not muted among the event MEs read in step SD2.") and not to output at least a part of music sound of the second section (Tsutomu ¶0115: "In step SD3 of Figure 7, according to the mute-on and tempo deceleration event SE read in step SD2, the designated part (in this case, the drum part) is muted and the playback tempo is set to be slowed down.").
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 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Smith in view of Saito et al. (US 5478967 A, December 26, 1995), hereinafter Saito, and further in view of Minamitaka (US 4982643 A, January 8, 1991), to the extent understood.
Regarding claim 2, Smith discloses an electronic device comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Smith further teaches that the processor determines, as the first section, a measure of the piece of music (Smith ¶0199: "Map 2 1320 contains an instruction that Instrument 1 should be unmuted from measure 1 1324 to measure 6 1332. In addition to these maps, Map 1 1318 includes an instruction for instrument 1 to be muted from measure 2 1326 to measure 4 1328 and from measure 5 1330 to measure 7 1334."), and determines, as the second section, a measure of the piece of music (Smith ¶0200: "As the song moves through the measures, we see that the instrument will play in measure 1, where the result is unmuted 1314. Map 1 1304 overrides this command in measure 2 1326, and the instrument becomes muted 1316. When map 1 no longer contains information, the command associated with Map 2 1306 is now the highest priority, and therefore the instrument is now playing again 1316.").
Smith does not explicitly disclose that a measure of the first section for which a quotient obtained by dividing a measure number provided for the measure by a predetermined reference measure number falls under the condition, and a measure of the second section for which a quotient obtained by dividing a measure number provided for the measure by the reference measure number does not fall under the condition.
However, Saito teaches that a measure of the first section for which a quotient obtained by dividing a measure number provided for the measure by a predetermined reference measure number falls under the condition (Saito col. 15, lines 26-32: "At step 244 in order to change the rhythm style and start the new rhythm style during the accompaniment, in the same manner as step 216, accumulated bar number BBACC is divided by loop bar number T1LB in rhythm track TR1. Based on the remainder bar number resulting from the division the present pointer T1PNT of rhythm track TR1 is determined.").
Furthermore, Minamitaka teaches that a measure of the second section for which a quotient obtained by dividing a measure number provided for the measure by the reference measure number does not fall under the condition (Minamitaka col. 18, lines 26-33: "The duration of a block shown by barno (number of bars) per block is converted into block length of elementary time expression 1 (step 45-2), and the music duration SUM is divided by the block length to obtain the number m of blocks contained in the music (step 45-3). An i counter for the reference block number is initialized to "0" (step 45-4).").
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 electronic device of Smith by adding the first section of Saito and the second section of Minamitaka to quickly obtain the bar to be reproduced (Saito col. 4, lines 65-67).
Regarding claim 3, Smith (in view of Saito and further in view of Minamitaka) teaches an electronic device comprising the features of claim 2 as discussed above.
Minamitaka further teaches that the processor determines the first section and the second section in accordance with the condition as to which of an odd number and an even number an integer portion of the quotient is (Minamitaka col. 24, lines 16-21: "If the header indicates a two-bar motif, comparison is made between the modulo 2's remainder of the bar count and the bar number in the header. If match, pattern data following the header is loaded as arpeggio pattern for the bar under consideration.").
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Smith in view of Saito, and further in view of Minamitaka and Sano (US 4344345 A, August 17, 1982).
Regarding claim 5, Smith (in view of Saito and further in view of Minamitaka) teaches an electronic device comprising the features of claim 2 as discussed above.
Smith (in view of Saito and further in view of Minamitaka) does not explicitly disclose an input receiver, wherein the processor determines the first section and the second section using information about a value of the reference measure number input with the input receiver.
However, Sano teaches an input receiver, wherein the processor determines the first section and the second section using information about a value of the reference measure number input with the input receiver (Sano col. 3, lines 32-37: "variation control switch 22 designates the number of measures, i.e. one measure, two measures or another even number of measures, for filling the variation rhythm pattern in the musical piece being performed when the program tempo/variation switch 18 is operated in the play mode.").
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 electronic device of Smith (as modified by Saito and Minamitaka) by adding the input receiver of Sano so that even a beginner can easily perform a complex musical piece when he makes a melody performance in harmony with varied rhythm accompaniment (Sano col. 1, lines 58-60).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Smith in view of Sato (US 5350880 A, September 27, 1994).
Regarding claim 6, Smith discloses an electronic device comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Smith does not explicitly disclose that the processor changes the condition each time the piece of music is reproduced.
However, Sato teaches that the processor changes the condition each time the piece of music is reproduced (Sato col. 3, lines 54-64: "The parameters PARA1 to PARAm are data, such as timbre data and rhythm data, which can affect the image of the music, like the quantize number and the envelope data. In the claims that follow, the quantize number, envelope data, and parameters PARA1 to PARAm are collectively and generically referred to as "parameter information." As stated earlier, it is the variation in these parameters that causes a change in the mental image created by the music each time a musical piece is re-played so that the listeners do not become bored.").
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 electronic device of Smith by adding the changing conditions of Sato to prevent the user from becoming bored (Sato col. 3, lines 63-64).
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