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 § 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) 1-5,9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being fully met by Wissmuller (USP 8785758).
Regarding Claim 1, Wissmuller discloses an electronic hi-hat cymbal controller apparatus for use with a cymbal pull rod 22 movable along an axis of motion and a cymbal clutch securable to the pull rod, the apparatus comprising:
A) a controller housing 106a defining a central interior;
B) a carriage member 116 movable mounted along an axis of motion within the central interior of the controller housing 106a and defining an aperture for accommodating a pull rod,
C) a compressible member 124 disposed within the controller housing proximate the carriage member 116;
D) a sensor 126/128 disposed within the controller housing 106a configured for generating a signal associated with an amount of compression of the compressible member 124 (compression directly related to movement of cymbal).
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that Wissmuller “does not disclose a movable carriage that both travels along the axis and carries the shaft aperture and that Wissmuller's moving element is a plunger linked to an optical shutter, whereas the claim recites a moving carriage that structurally defines the pull-rod aperture inside the housing-these are different mechanical architectures and interfaces.”
However, the claimed carriage member only requires it be “movable mounted along an axis of motion within the central interior of the controller housing (plunger 116 is within housing 106; Fig. 7; and moves up and down along an axis; col. 4 lines 21-49) and defining an aperture for accommodating a pull rod (plunger 116 has a lower aperture surrounding shaft 22, Fig. 7).” Applicant’s arguments are not deemed persuasive.
Applicant argues that Wissmuller does not teach that the sensor “generates a signal associated with an amount of compression of the compressible member," as recited in claim 1.
However, Applicant acknowledges that the spring compression does correlate with the plunger position, and the sensor measures the position of the plunger, so in the broadest reasonable interpretation of the word “associated,” the sensor signal is “associated with an amount of compression.” Applicant’s arguments are not deemed persuasive.
Regarding Claim 2, the carriage member 116 reads on a base member.
Regarding Claim 3, Wissmuller discloses the base member 116 has a cylindrically-shape neck extending outwardly therefrom with the aperture disposed at one end of the neck (Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 4, Wissmuller discloses the compressible member 124 comprises a partial or complete ring of resilient material (spring, Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 5, Wissmuller discloses the axis of motion of the carriage member 116 within the central interior of the controller housing 106a is parallel to the axis of motion of the pull rod 22 (Figs. 6,7).
Regarding Claim 9, Wissmuller discloses the carriage member 116 has a cylindrically-shape neck extending outwardly and defining a cylindrical bore for accommodating one of the pull rod 22 or the base member neck (Figs. 6,7).
Regarding Claim 10, Wissmuller discloses a clutch (Figs. 6,7, not numbered) securable to the pull rod 22, a surface of the clutch strikable against the neck of the carriage member 116 with movement of the pull rod 22.
Regarding Claim 11, Wissmuller discloses in combination with an electronic cymbal securable to the pull rod 22, a surface of the cymbal strikable against the neck of the carriage member 116 with movement of the pull rod 22 (cymbal closes when pedal activated).
Claim(s) 1,6-8,12-14,17,18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being fully met by Shemesh (USPGP 20200312285).
Regarding Claim 1, Shemesh discloses an electronic hi-hat cymbal controller apparatus for use with a cymbal pull rod 12 movable along an axis of motion and a cymbal clutch 200 securable to the pull rod 12, the apparatus comprising:
A) a controller housing 1 defining a central interior;
B) a carriage member 18 movable mounted along an axis of motion within the central interior of the controller housing 1 and defining an aperture for accommodating a pull rod 12,
C) a compressible member 9 disposed within the controller housing 1 proximate the carriage member 18;
D) a sensor 4 disposed within the controller housing 1 configured for generating a signal associated with an amount of compression of the compressible member (compression related to movement of cymbal).
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that the carriage member 18 does not move within housing 1 and define the shaft 12 aperture.
However, the claim recites that the carriage member is movably mounted along an axis within (emphasis added) the central interior of the housing 1, not that it is within the housing. Shemesh further teaches that the carriage member 18 does in fact have an aperture through which shaft passes (Fig. 1). Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not deemed persuasive.
Regarding Claim 6, Shemesh teaches the carriage member 18 has an electromagnetic field source 10 disposed thereon.
Regarding Claim 7, Shemesh teaches the sensor 4 is responsive to variations in the electromagnetic field caused by movement of the electromagnetic field source 10.
Regarding Claim 8, Shemesh discloses the variations in the electromagnetic field are caused by movement of the electromagnetic field source 10 relative to the sensor.
Regarding Claim 12, Shemesh discloses an electronic hi-hat cymbal controller apparatus for use with a cymbal pull rod 12 and a cymbal clutch 200 securable to the pull rod, the apparatus comprising:
A) a controller housing 1 defining an aperture extending through the controller housing 1 for accommodating a pull rod 12,
B) an electromagnetic field source 10 disposed within the controller housing 1 and movable along an axis of motion by contact with the cymbal clutch 200;
C) a sensor 4 responsive to a position of the electromagnetic field source 10 over a length portion of the axis of motion for generating a signal at least partially corresponding to the position of the electromagnetic field source 4 (Fig. 6).
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that Shemesh does not teach a movable "field source" within a controller housing that is driven along the axis by clutch contact.
However, Shemesh teaches core 10, the source of an electromagnetic field (para. 0037), is within the controller housing 1 (Fig. 1), and “the core 10, being part of the high hat clutch 200, is moved up and down (para. 0037).” Applicant’s arguments are not deemed persuasive.
Applicant argues that the sensor of Shemesh is responsive to coil-core overlap (core 10 position relative to the coil 4) rather than position of the core 10 (“field source”).
However, core 10 position relative to the coil 4 results in the sensor being “responsive to a position” of the core. The claim language does not require that the position be relative or not. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not deemed persuasive.
Regarding Claim 13, Shemesh discloses the electromagnetic field source 4 is a permanent magnet and the sensor 10 is Hall Effect sensor.
Regarding Claim 14, Shemesh discloses the sensor 10 is substantially uniformly responsive to positions of the electromagnetic field source 4 over the length portion of the axis of motion (Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 17, Shemesh discloses in combination with a clutch 200 securable to the pull rod 12, a surface of the clutch 200 strikable against a surface of the controller housing 1 with movement of the pull rod 12 (Fig. 7).
Regarding Claim 18, Shemesh discloses in combination with an electronic cymbal securable to the pull rod 12, a surface of the cymbal strikable against a neck of the controller housing 1 with movement of the pull rod 12 (Fig. 7).
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 15,16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shemesh in view of Arimoto (USPGP 20050257672).
Regarding Claim 15, Shemesh (applied here in a similar manner as claim 12 above) discloses all features claimed but does not explicitly teach a device capable of playback of a plurality of audio samples in response to the signal.
Arimoto discloses an electronic hi-hat cymbal which comprises a device capable of playback of a plurality of audio samples 8 in response to a signal (para. 0043).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt the teachings of Shemesh with those of Arimoto, as using samples is well-known and desirable in the art of musical instruments.
Regarding Claim 16, Arimoto discloses a characteristic of the signal is used by the device to determine when to trigger playback of an audio sample (Figs. 2-6).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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