Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/512,121

SOUND GENERATION METHOD AND SOUND GENERATION DEVICE USING A MACHINE LEARNING MODEL

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Nov 17, 2023
Priority
May 18, 2021 — JP 2021-084180 +1 more
Examiner
SCHREIBER, CHRISTINA MARIE
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Yamaha Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
787 granted / 991 resolved
+19.4% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1005
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§103
31.0%
-9.0% vs TC avg
§102
33.0%
-7.0% vs TC avg
§112
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 991 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 1-20 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. Claim 1, please clarify whether “a desired time point” (line 5) and “a specific time point” (line 7) are related time points, or separate. Claim 1, please clarify whether the mandatory instruction has any effect on the other method steps or is only present to base the updating steps on. Claim 1, lines 9-11 and 14-16, please considering amending the language “updating the acoustic feature value sequence … as the mandatory instruction has (not) been received” to either - - updating the acoustic feature value sequence … if the mandatory instruction has (not) been received - - or - - updating the acoustic feature value sequence … when the mandatory instruction has (not) been received - - . Claim 1, line 10, please clarify whether “using a generated acoustic feature value that has been generated” is related to the previously recited acoustic feature value that was generated, or is a different acoustic feature value, either generated by the claimed method or by another method. Claim 1, lines 10-11 and 15-16, the recitation that the mandatory instruction has (not) been received for the specific time point” is indefinite, given the mandatory instruction is previously recited as accepted at a desired time point. Please clarify. Claim 3, please clarify, if the trained model estimates the acoustic feature value based on the unknown control value (claim 2), how then can the estimated acoustic feature value include a value in accordance with the unknown control value. Claim 14 is rejected for the same reasons discussed above in claim 1. The remaining claims, not specifically addressed, depend from, and therefore include, the rejected limitations outlined above. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 are believed to be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Once a better understanding of the present invention is received, a further search and consideration of the prior art will be conducted. At the present time, the closest prior art of record are: The US patent application publications to Saino et al. (US 2023/0098145), Tachibana et al. (US 2020/0135171), Danjyo et al. (US 2019/0392798) and Daido et al. (US 2021/0256960). The Japanese publications to Daido (JP 2021-051251 A) and Tokuda et al. (JP 2017-107228 A). The Chinese publication to Liu et al. (CN 112466313 A). Conclusion 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 08/21/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 17, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12725591
Computer-Implemented Method, System, and Non-Transitory Computer-Readable Storage Medium for Inferring Evaluation of Performance Information
3y 11m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12718784
Parameter Inference Method, Parameter Inference System, and Parameter Inference Program
3y 11m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12715735
SETTING A RESCUE TIME PERIOD
3y 9m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12718785
SYSTEM, METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM FOR COLLABORATING ON A MUSICAL COMPOSITION OVER A COMMUNICATION NETWORK
3y 0m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12694857
SELECTIVE TONE SHIFTING DEVICE
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+15.5%)
2y 2m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 991 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month