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
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
In paragraphs [0074] and [00117], reference number 36 is mentioned, but fails to be shown in the Drawings.
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. 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 5A, reference number 74 is shown, but fails to be mentioned in the Specification.
In Figure 7, reference number 700 is shown, but fails to be mentioned in the Specification.
In Figure 8, reference number 800 is shown, but fails to be mentioned in the Specification.
In Figure 9, reference number 900 is shown, but fails 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “200” has been used to designate two separate elements in Figure 3.
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. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph [0074], number 57 is used to reference the foot switch, while in paragraph [00109], number 57 is used to reference a port (as shown in Figures 1B and 1D)
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.
Claims 1-20 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 terms of claim 1, please clarify whether “a main MIDI sequence” and “a fill MIDI sequence” are related to the previously mentioned MIDI sequence.
Claim 2, the recitation “the sequence of depressions is analyzed based on a duration and a frequency associated with the sequence of depressions” is indefinite, given it is unclear how a sequence can be analyzed based on data already associated with said sequence.
Further, in said recitation, please clarify whether the duration and frequency are accolated with the sequence of depressions as a whole (i.e. an average over the whole sequence) or whether the duration and frequency are associated with each depression in the sequence.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the looper module associated with the main midi sequence" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, given there is no previous mention of a looper module associated with the main midi sequence.
Further, “midi” should be - - MIDI - - to correlate with the previous recitation.
Claim 7, please clarify whether “manipulation of the signal” relates to, or is a completely different step from, the modification of the signal.
Claim 9, please clarify whether “a tempo” is different from the previously modified tempo.
Further, please clarify whether the two recitations of “a tempo” in line 3 are related to each other or the previous tempo of claim 1.
Similarly, please clarify whether “a beat” in lines 7 and 9, are related to “a beat” recited in line 5.
Still further, line 9, please clarify whether “a recorded signal” is related to the recordation recited in the preceding lines.
Claim 11 is rejected for similar reasons as outlined above in claim 1.
Further in claim 11, please clarify the claim intends to recite that all three (instrument input, looper muddle and MIDI sequence) are received/ provided, but only one may be associated with the controlled signal.
Claim 12 is rejected for similar reasons as outlined above in claim 2.
Claims 14 and 15, please clarify how a looper module can have a playback (i.e. you can playback a sequence, but how can you playback a module).
Claim 16, the recitation “the playback of the main MIDI sequence” is indefinite, given there is no previous mention of playing back the main MIDI sequence, only the MIDI sequence.
Claims 17 and 19 are rejected for similar reasons as outlined above in claims 7 and 9.
The remaining claims, not specifically addressed, depend from, and therefore include, the rejected limitations discussed above.
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, 3, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 15, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the Japanese publication to Sugita et al. (JP H01250998 A) (English Translation provided by the Examiner, JP1989250998).
In terms of claim 1, Sugita et al. teaches an apparatus (see Figure 11) comprising: one or more foot-operated switches (15-2) for controlling a signal associated with at least one of the following: an instrument input (electronic instrument), a looper module, and a MIDI sequence (see fourth paragraph under “Second Embodiment”); and one or more selectors (15-1) to modify the signal, wherein the one or more selectors modify at least one of the following: a tempo of the signal, a volume of the signal (see paragraph starting “Figure 4 shows” to paragraphs starting “Furthermore”, and first paragraph under “Sixth Embodiment”), a first parameter associated with a main MIDI sequence, and a second parameter associated with a fill MIDI sequence (i.e. musical characteristics, see references cited above); wherein a sequence of depressions of the one or more foot-operated switches controls the signal (see references cited above).
As for claim 3, Sugita et al. teaches recording the signal (data set in data storage when 15-2 is pressed, see third paragraph under “Sixth embodiment”; writing of data, see “Operation” and “Sixth Embodiment” sections).
Claims 7 and 8, Sugita et al. teaches outside transmission means (see first paragraph under “Key Points” and Effects of the Invention”), wherein the MIDI sequence is transmitted from outside (see fourth paragraph under “Second Embodiment”).
As for claim 10, Sugita et al. teaches a display indicating progression (LEF status display 15-6).
In terms of claims 11, 13, 17, 18 and 20, the same reasoning applied in the rejection of apparatus claims 1, 3, 7, 8 and 10, mutatis mutandis, applies to the subject matter of method claims 11, 13, 17, 18 and 20, given the apparatus is considered inseparable from the method of using the apparatus
As for claim 15, Sugita et al. teaches the one or more selectors being operational during playing operation of the instrument (i.e. operational during performance) (see references cited above).
Claims 1, 3, 7, 11, 13, 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the US patent application publication to Krumins et al. (US 2019/0266986).
In terms of claim 1, Krumins et al. teaches an apparatus comprising: one or more foot-operated switches (2) for controlling a signal associated with at least one of the following: an instrument input (musical instrument, see Abstract), a looper module (see Abstract and paragraphs [0013] and [0143]), and a MIDI sequence; and one or more selectors (3, 4, 5, 6) to modify the signal, wherein the one or more selectors modify at least one of the following: a tempo (speed, see paragraphs [0085] and [0158]) of the signal, a volume of the signal (see paragraphs [0087], [0089] and [0103]), a first parameter associated with a main MIDI sequence, and a second parameter associated with a fill MIDI sequence (i.e. adjustable parameters, see paragraph [0086]); wherein a sequence of depressions of the one or more foot-operated switches controls the signal (see references cited above).
As for claim 3, Krumins et al. teaches recording the signal (see Abstract and paragraph [0018]).
As for claim 7, Krumins et al. teaches the use of external devices (see paragraph [0095]) and an external memory (see paragraph [0144]).
In terms of claims 11, 13 and 17, the same reasoning applied in the rejection of apparatus claims 1, 3 and 7, mutatis mutandis, applies to the subject-matter of method claims 11, 13 and 17, given the apparatus is considered inseparable from the method of using the apparatus
As for claim 15, Krumins et al. teaches operation of selectors during playback of a loop (see paragraphs [0031], [0112] and [0144]).
At least claims 1 and 11 can further be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the US patent to Packouz (8,324,494) (foot operated switch (65), selectors (44, 46, 48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 59).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-6, 9, 12, 14, 16 and 19 are believed to 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.
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, in particular the US patent application publication to Mapleston et al. (US 2005/0056142) and the US patents to LaMarra (5,700,966 and 5,576,507).
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 09/01/2026
Prosecution Insights