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 .
Drawings
Figure 21 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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.
In Figures 15, 17 and 18, the Guitar is designated with referenced number 30, when it was formerly designated with reference character G.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “30” has been used to designate both the pickup device and Guitar (see Figures 1A, 15, 17 and 18).
Please make sure the Specification also correctly designates each part.
Corrected drawing sheets (and any designation within the Specification) 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
In Figure 15, reference numbers 12a1, 12b1, 12a2 and 12b2 are shown, but fail to be mentioned in the Specification.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 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 5-8 and 12-15 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.
Claim 5, please clarify whether the independent performance information is related to the previously acquired performance information.
Claim 6, the recitation of “the number of tone generation parts” is indefinite and lacks antecedent basis. Preceding claim 1 only mentions a singular tone generation part and there is no previous mention of a number of tone generation parts.
Claim 7, the recitation of acquiring a pitch of each string is indefinite. Please clarify whether this pitch is related to the previously recited pitch in claim 2.
Claim 8, please clarify the relationship between the string of the stringed instrument and the keyboard, and how the operation of the keyboard corresponds to the performance information corresponding to the stringed instrument.
Claims 12-15 are rejected for similar reasons as claims 5-8.
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.
Claims 1-8, 10-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the US patent to Yamauchi et al. (5,167,179).
In terms of claim 1, Yamauchi et al. teaches a control device, comprising: an acquisition part configured to acquire performance information (see column 1, lines 45-46); a string number acquisition part configured to acquire a string number of a string of a stringed instrument corresponding to the performance information acquired by the acquisition part (see column 2, lines 23-25 and column 11, lines 23-51); a tone generation management part configured to manage a tone generation state or a non- tone generation state in the performance information acquired by the acquisition part in association with the string number acquired by the string number acquisition part (see column 1, lines 47-53, column 2, lines 23-25 and 34-42, and column 11, lines 23-51); and a tone generation control part configured to control generation of a corresponding musical tone from a tone generation part, on the basis of the tone generation state or a non-tone generation state of each string managed by the tone generation management part (see column 2, lines 23-25 and 34-42 and column 11, lines 23-51). (See also Abstract).
As for claim 2, Yamauchi et al. teaches a pitch acquisition part as claimed (see column 1, lines 59-61 and column 2, lines 23-25), wherein the tone generation management part manages as claimed, and the tone generation control part controls as claimed (see references cited above I claim 1).
As for claims 3 and 4, As for claim 3, Yamauchi et al. teaches multiple tone generation parts (see column 2, lines 23-25, plurality of string sound generation means; column 4, lines 51-54, multiple linear circuits), wherein the tone generation management part manages as claimed and is included for each tone generation part (see references cited above and column 1, lines 47-53, string sound generator means managed on the basis of a preceding tone state).
As for claim 5, Yamauchi et al. teaches the acquisition part acquiring independent performance information for each string (see column 7, lines 49-50, strings have different tone ranges).
As for claim 6, Yamauchi et al. teaches that the number of tone generation parts can be smaller than the number of strings (see references cited above).
As for claim 7, Yamauchi et al. teaches acquiring string information (see column 7, lines 46-53) and pitch (see claim 1).
As for claim 8, Yamauchi et a. teaches an operation of a keyboard (26) correlating with the performance information (see column 3, lines 45-48, column 8, lines 53-56 and column 9, lines 38-42).
Claim 10 is rejected for similar reasons as outlined above in claim 3.
Claim 11 is rejected for similar reasons as outlined above in claim 4.
Claim 12 is rejected for similar reasons as outlined above in claim 5.
Claim 13 is rejected for similar reasons as outlined above in claim 6.
Claim 14 is rejected for similar reasons as outlined above in claim 7.
Claim 15 is rejected for similar reasons as outlined above in claim 8.
In terms of claims 17-20, the same reasoning applied in the rejection of apparatus claims 1 and 2, mutatis mutandis, applies to the subject-matter of method claims 17 and 18, and executable program claims 19 and 20, given the apparatus is considered inseparable from the method of using the apparatus and the instructions for implementing the method.
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 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamauchi et al. in view of that which is well-known in the art.
Yamauchi et al. teaches a storage for the performance information (ROM 23), from which the acquisition device acquires the performance information, but fails to explicitly teach such a storage as an external storage. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to provide a similar storage means as an external storage means, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. Further, the use of external databases, connected through a network, is well-known and widely used in the art, to allow a user to download preferred information not easily accessible locally.
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, in particular, the US patents to Iba et al. (4,817,484), Matsumoto (5,094,137) and West (7,935,876).
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 08/20/2026
Prosecution Insights