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
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-9 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.
In general, the claims are incomplete for omitting essential elements and steps, amounting to a gap between elements and steps.
In terms of claim 1, lines 11-13, it is recited that an instruction to play the song object is received, and then, in response to receiving, chord audio is automatically calculated. There is a disconnect between the steps, given there is no clear correlation between the instruction and the calculating of the chord audio. The instruction is recited as an instruction for playing, not for calculating. Please clarify how the instruction and calculated chord data are related, or whether the chord data is calculated based on the instruction or the song object itself.
Further in claim 1, starting at line 14, elements and steps included in calculating the chord audio are listed. However, there again is no correlation to the received instruction, and the steps listed for calculating other elements are not disclosed as having any direct correlation with the chord audio (i.e. calculating chord duration for the first chord object, calculating composition data for the first chord object, etc.). All steps cited as included in the calculation of chord audio are directed to the first chord object and not the audio. Please clarify how the chord duration data, composition data, scheduled audio source, etc. are related to the calculated chord audio.
Still further, in the last lines of claim 1, please clarify that the output is based solely on the at least one scheduled audio source. If this is indeed correct, please then explain the intention behind the other calculations (i.e. chord duration, composition data, etc.), if they do not have any influence or function in producing the tangible output (i.e. reasons and purpose within the method for calculating certain data elements if they do not pertain to the output and functionality of the invention).
Similar rejections can be made in claims 8 and 9.
Claim 2., please clarify whether harmonic speed data object and harmonic rhythm data object are related to the previously recited harmony data.
Claim 5, the recitation that the note event data is associated with the first/second track objects is indefinite, given there is no previous correlation mentioned between the style object comprising the track objects and the calculated composition data comprising the note even data. More generally, there is no correlation or indication of shared data between the “one of the first plurality of phrase data objects” (containing the first chord object associated with the composition data) and the “another one of the first plurality of phrase data objects“ (comprising the style object). Please clarify the claimed association across phrase data objects that appear to be completely separate.
Similarly, in claim 6, the recitation that the at least one scheduled audio source comprises an instruction indicative of the first audio sample is indefinite, given there is no previous correlation between the first plurality of phrase data objects containing the calculated scheduled audio source and the another one of the first plurality of phrase data objects comprising the first audio sample. Again, please clarify the relationship between the plurality of phrase data objects.
Further in claim 6, please clarify whether the “playing back” function is related to the previously recited emitting of audio data.
Claim 7, line 3, please clarify whether “a first phrase data object” is related to “one of the first plurality of phrase data objects” or “another one of the first plurality of phrase data objects”.
The remaining claims, not specifically addressed, depend from, and therefore include, the rejected limitations outlined above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 are believed to be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Please make sure all elements and steps are clearly defined and associated with one another to provide a clear and distinct picture of that which the Applicant intends as their invention.
Presently, the closest prior art of record are the US patent application publication to Williams et al. (US 2021/0225340) and the US patent to Silverstein (11,037,541).
Once a better understanding of the present invention is received, a further search and consideration of the prior art will be conducted.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the Notice of References Cited provided by the Examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christina Schreiber whose telephone number is (571)272-4350. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4 PM.
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.
/CHRISTINA M SCHREIBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837 06/12/2026
Prosecution Insights