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 .
Application Status
This office action is responsive to the Application No.:18/695,327 filed on 03/25/2024 (Foreign Priority Date: 10/25/2021).
Claims 1-19 are pending and presented for examination.
This action has been made NON-FINAL.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Examiner Remarks
In the spirit of compact prosecution, Applicant is requested to contact the Examiner for an interview to discuss the inventive concepts of the instant application. Applicant may optionally amend the claims to further direct the claims toward a particular inventive concept described in the specification without an interview.
Additionally, the prior art rejection (if applicable) cites particular paragraphs, columns, and/or line numbers in the references for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/20/2024 is being considered by the examiner. A signed IDS is hereby attached.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 are (PROVISIONALLY IN VIEW OF THE PENDING REJECTIONS) objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art references failed to disclose the following:
acquiring a deflection angle of the sound effect display interface, which is an angle between a direction perpendicular to the sound effect display interface and the gravity direction; and controlling the first layer, the second layer, the third layer, the fourth layer, and the fifth layer to deflect in corresponding deflection ranges according to the deflection angle, respectively COMBINED WITH wherein the sound effect display interface further comprises: a sixth layer under the fifth layer, a seventh layer under the sixth layer, and an eighth layer under the seventh layer; and the sixth layer is used to display a dot matrix image, the seventh layer is used to display streamer image, the eighth layer is used to display a grid image, the dot matrix image is a projection image of a three-dimensional matrix; the streamer image comprises a plurality of streamer lines propagating along edges of grids in the grid image, and the grid image comprises grids formed by the intersection of a plurality of horizontal lines and a plurality of vertical lines COMBINED WITH wherein the displaying of the sound effect display interface corresponding to the display the target audio file comprises: generating a second sequence of frames corresponding to the streamer image, wherein positions of the streamer lines in various image frames in the second sequences of frames vary sequentially; and playing circularly the second sequence of frames on the seventh layer to display the sound effect display interface corresponding to the target audio file.
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 4, 11-14 and 17-19 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 4 recites “varys sequentially.” It is not clear to the examiner if the terms “varys sequentially” is an optional claim limitation or if "varys sequentially" should be interpreted as a definite statement. Therefore, this claim is rendered as indefinite.
Claim 11 recites “determining the first color, the second color, and a background color of the sound effect display interface based on the basic color.” This claim limitation fails to provide exactly "how" the claim limitation is executed. Therefore, this claim is rendered as indefinite. The examiner suggest for the Applicant to provide more details on exactly how the colors are determined.
Claim 12 recites the following:
determining the first color according to the basic color comprises: determining that a hue of the first color is the same as that of the basic color;
determining that a saturation of the first color is the same as that of the basic color if a saturation of the basic color is greater than or equal to a threshold saturation;
and determining that the saturation of the first color is a sum of the saturation of the basic color and a preset saturation if a saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation;
and determining a value of the first color as a maximum value.
This claim limitation fails to provide exactly "how" the claim limitation is executed. Therefore, this claim is rendered as indefinite. The examiner suggest for the Applicant to provide more details on exactly how the determination is made.
Claim 13 discloses the following:
determining the second color according to the basic color comprises: determining that a hue of the second color is a sum of a hue of the basic color and a preset hue;
determining that a saturation of the second color is the same as that of the basic color if a saturation of the basic color is greater than or equal to a threshold saturation;
and determining that the saturation of the second color is a sum of the saturation of the basic color and a preset saturation if a saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation;
and determining a value of the second color as a maximum value.
This claim limitation fails to provide exactly "how" the claim limitation is executed. Therefore, this claim is rendered as indefinite. The examiner suggest for the Applicant to provide more details on exactly how the determination is made.
Claim 14 discloses the following:
determining the background color according to the basic color comprises:
determining that a hue of the background color is the same as that of the basic color;
determining that a saturation of the background color is the same as that of the basic color if a saturation of the basic color is greater than or equal to a threshold saturation;
and determining that the saturation of the background color is a sum of the saturation of the basic color and a preset saturation if a saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation;
and determining a value of the background color is a difference between a value of the basic color and a target value, wherein the target value is a value corresponding to a value range to which the value of the basic color belongs, and the value corresponding to the value range is positively correlated with the central value of the value range.
This claim limitation fails to provide exactly "how" the claim limitation is executed. Therefore, this claim is rendered as indefinite. The examiner suggest for the Applicant to provide more details on exactly how the determination is made.
Claims 17-19 appears to be dependent claims but are written and structured similar to the preamble of an independent claim. It is not clear to the examiner the Applicant’s intentions for claims 17-19. More specifically, the claims fails to further define the claimed invention. Therefore, these claims are rendered as indefinite. The examiner suggest writing the claims in the correct format.
For example:
If the Applicant intends for the claims to be written as an independent claims, the examiner suggests for the claims 17 (similar to claims 18 and 19) to recite as the following:
An electronic device, comprising:
a memory configured to store a computer program;
a processor configured to enable the electronic device;
receiving a first operation that is input to a target audio file;
and displaying a sound effect display interface corresponding to the target audio file in response to the first operation;
wherein the sound effect display interface comprises: a cover image corresponding to the target audio file, a sound wave display element and a quasi-gyroscope; wherein the sound wave display element is an annular surface arranged along an edge of the cover image, which is used to expand to an area where the cover image is located according to a preset sound attribute of the target audio file to form a sound waveform corresponding to the preset sound attribute of the target audio file; the quasi-gyroscope comprises at least two light rings rotating along rotational axes in preset mode, and the rotational axes of the at least two light rings are all symmetric axes located within a plane where the cover image is located, and the rotational axes of the at least two light rings intersect at a geometric center of the cover image.
For example:
If the Applicant intends for the claims to be written as a dependent claim, the examiner suggests for the claims 17 (similar to claims 18 and 19) to recite as the following:
Claim 17:
The method according to claim 1, further comprises an electronic device, including a memory configured to store a computer program and a processor configured to enable the electronic device to perform the method of displaying the sound effect upon calling and executing the computer program.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of displaying a sound effect, without significantly more.
After Subject Matter Eligibility (SME) analysis, the examiner conclude that,
Step 1:
The claimed invention is a process which falls within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter). The claim(s) goes on to recite(s) the following:
receiving a first operation that is input to a target audio file;
displaying a sound effect
After Subject Matter Eligibility (SME) analysis, the examiner conclude that,
Step 2A Prong One:
The idea of displaying a sound effect is an idea having no particular concrete or tangible form. This concept fall within one of the three grouping mention in the 2019 PEG guidance. This is directed to a mental process.
The limitation of displaying a sound effect, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components.
Nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea. (Step 2A Prong One: Yes)
After Subject Matter Eligibility (SME) analysis, the examiner conclude that,
Step 2A Prong Two:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites one additional elements, such as receiving a first operation that is input to a target audio file. Both steps recited at a high-level of generality, such that, it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. (Step 2A Prong Two: No)
After Subject Matter Eligibility (SME) analysis, the examiner conclude that,
Step 2B:
The claim(s) do not include additional elements, taken individually and as a combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. When examining the limitations, the additional limitations do not amount to a claim as a whole that is significantly more than the abstract idea. (Step 2B: No) Accordingly, the claims are directed to an abstract idea and are rejected as ineligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter because the term "computer readable storage medium" as used herein, can refer to non-statutory subject matter since the medium is not adequately defined by the specification. The question becomes whether non-statutory embodiments would be fairly conveyed to one of ordinary skill given the terminology utilized. In this instance, because the specification fails to limit expressly the term “computer readable storage medium” to exclude signals, carrier waves, etc, the term encompasses transitory propagating signals. Therefore, it would appear to be reasonable to interpret medium for “carrying” as fairly conveying signals and other forms of propagation or transmission media to one of ordinary skill (See Ex parte Mewherteri). To overcome this rejection, the examiner suggests amending claim 18 to recite “a non-transitory computer readable storage medium”.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 10-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lathrop, US 10978033 in view of BOETTCHER, US 20130332843.
Claim 1:
A method of displaying a sound effect (See Lathrop Abstract; Column 5, Lines 55-65). Lathrop failed to disclose the following:
“the quasi-gyroscope comprises at least two light rings rotating along rotational axes in preset mode, and the rotational axes of the at least two light rings are all symmetric axes located within a plane where the cover image is located, and the rotational axes of the at least two light rings intersect at a geometric center of the cover image.”
However, BOETTCHER discloses the following:
the quasi-gyroscope (See BOETTCHER Paragraphs 0003;0006; 0015; 0017-0018; 0022; 0024; 0028) comprises
at least two light rings rotating along rotational axes in preset mode (See BOETTCHER Figure 2; Paragraphs 0036-0038),
and the rotational axes of the at least two light rings are all symmetric axes located within a plane where the cover image is located (See BOETTCHER Figure 2; Paragraphs 0036-0038),
and the rotational axes of the at least two light rings intersect at a geometric center of the cover image (See BOETTCHER Figure 2; Paragraphs 0036-0038).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Lathrop by the teachings of BOETTCHER to enable improved graphical user interface experience, thereby allowing a user to feel more natural interacting with the GUI (See BOETTCHER Abstract; Field of the Disclosure; Summary of the Disclosure). In addition, both of the references teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as, visualization of music. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
The combination of Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses the following:
receiving a first operation that is input to a target audio file (See Lathrop Column 2, Lines 17-63; Column 3, Lines 59-67; Column 6, Lines 55-631);
and displaying a sound effect display interface (See Lathrop Column 6, Lines 45-632) corresponding to the target audio file in response to the first operation (See Lathrop Column 2, Lines 17-63; Column 3, Lines 59-67; Column 6, Lines 55-633);
wherein the sound effect display interface (See Lathrop Column 6, Lines 45-634) comprises: a cover image (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038) corresponding to the target audio file (See Lathrop Column 2, Lines 17-63; Column 3, Lines 59-67; Column 6, Lines 55-635), a sound wave display element (See Column 18, Lines 25-356) and a quasi-gyroscope (See BOETTCHER Paragraphs 0003;0006; 0015; 0017-0018; 0022; 0024; 0028); wherein the sound wave display element (See Column 18, Lines 25-357) is an annular surface (See BOETTCHER Figure 2; Paragraphs 0036-0038) arranged along an edge of the cover image (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038), which is used to expand to an area where the cover image (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038) is located according to a preset sound attribute of the target audio file (See Lathrop Column 2, Lines 17-63; Column 3, Lines 59-67; Column 6, Lines 55-638) to form a sound waveform (See Lathrop Column 18, Lines 25-359) corresponding to the preset sound attribute of the target audio file (See Lathrop Column 2, Lines 17-63; Column 3, Lines 59-67; Column 6, Lines 55-6310); the quasi-gyroscope (See BOETTCHER Paragraphs 0003;0006; 0015; 0017-0018; 0022; 0024; 0028) comprises at least two light rings rotating along rotational axes in preset mode (See BOETTCHER Figure 2; Paragraphs 0036-0038), and the rotational axes of the at least two light rings are all symmetric axes located within a plane where the cover image is located (See BOETTCHER Figure 2; Paragraphs 0036-0038), and the rotational axes of the at least two light rings intersect at a geometric center of the cover image (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038).
Claim 2:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses wherein the quasi-gyroscope (See BOETTCHER Paragraphs 0003;0006; 0015; 0017-0018; 0022; 0024; 0028) is displayed on a first layer (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”) of the sound effect display interface (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038), the sound wave display element (See Lathrop Column 18, Lines 25-35) is displayed on a second layer (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”) of the sound effect display interface (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038), and the cover image (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038) is displayed on a third layer of the sound effect display interface (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038); and the first layer is located on the second layer, and the second layer is located on the third layer (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”).
Claim 3:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses fuzzifying the sound wave display element (See Lathrop Column 46, Lines 40-45).
Claim 4:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses wherein the display of the sound effect display interface (See Lathrop Column 18, Lines 25-35) corresponding to the display the target audio file (See Lathrop Column 2, Lines 17-63; Column 3, Lines 59-67; Column 6, Lines 55-63) comprises: generating a first sequence of frames (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67; Column 41, Lines 30-67) corresponding to the quasi-gyroscope (See BOETTCHER Paragraphs 0003;0006; 0015; 0017-0018; 0022; 0024; 0028), wherein rotation positions of the light rings (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038) in various image frames in the first sequences of frames varys sequentially (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67; Column 41, Lines 30-67); playing circularly (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038) the first sequence of frames (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67; Column 41, Lines 30-67) on the first layer (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”) to display the sound effect display interface (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038) corresponding to the target audio file (See Lathrop Column 2, Lines 17-63; Column 3, Lines 59-67; Column 6, Lines 55-63).
Claim 5:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses wherein the sound effect display interface (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038) further comprises: a fourth layer (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”) under the third layer and a fifth layer under the fourth layer (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”); wherein the fourth layer is used to display a border of a first pattern (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 12, Lines 50-67; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”), the fifth layer is used to display a border of a second pattern (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 12, Lines 50-67; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”); both the first pattern and the second pattern (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 12, Lines 50-67; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”) are similar patterns to the cover image (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038), and geometric centers of the first pattern and the second pattern (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 12, Lines 50-67; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”) and the geometric center of the cover image (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038) are located at the same point, an area of the first pattern (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 12, Lines 50-67; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”) is greater than an area of the cover image (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038), and an area of the second pattern is greater than the area of the first pattern (See Lathrop Figure 8; Column 12, Lines 50-67; Column 29, Lines 25-40 Note: The examiner is interpreting the Applicant’s “layer” as being the same as Lathrop’s “levels”).
Claim 6:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses fuzzifying a border (See Lathrop Column 46, Lines 40-45) of the first pattern and a border of the second pattern (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67; Column 46, Lines 40-45).
Claim 10:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses wherein a color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) in a first position of the sound wave display element (See Lathrop Column 18, Lines 25-35) is a first color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67), and a color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) in a second position of the sound wave display element (See Lathrop Column 18, Lines 25-35) is a second color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); and a color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) of the sound wave display element (See Lathrop Column 18, Lines 25-35) varies gradually from the first color to the second color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) between the first position and the second position of the sound wave display element (See Lathrop Column 18, Lines 25-35).
Claim 11:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses wherein, before the displaying of the sound effect display interface (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038) corresponding to the target audio file (See Lathrop Column 2, Lines 17-63; Column 3, Lines 59-67; Column 6, Lines 55-63), the method further comprises: acquiring an average color value of various pixels of the cover image (See BOETTCHER Figure 3; Paragraphs 0036-0038); converting the average color value into a color in an HSV color space to obtain a basic color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); and determining the first color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67), the second color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67), and a background color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) of the sound effect display interface based on the basic color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67).
Claim 12:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses wherein the determining the first color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) according to the basic color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) comprises: determining that a hue of the first color is the same as that of the basic color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); determining that a saturation of the first color is the same as that of the basic color if a saturation of the basic color is greater than or equal to a threshold saturation (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); and determining that the saturation of the first color is a sum of the saturation of the basic color and a preset saturation if a saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); and determining a value of the first color as a maximum value (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67).
Claim 13:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses wherein the determining the second color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) according to the basic color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) comprises: determining that a hue of the second color is a sum of a hue of the basic color and a preset hue (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); determining that a saturation of the second color is the same as that of the basic color if a saturation of the basic color is greater than or equal to a threshold saturation (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); and determining that the saturation of the second color is a sum of the saturation of the basic color and a preset saturation if a saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); and determining a value of the second color as a maximum value (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67).
Claim 14:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses wherein the determining the background color according to the basic color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) comprises: determining that a hue of the background color is the same as that of the basic color (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); determining that a saturation of the background color is the same as that of the basic color if a saturation of the basic color is greater than or equal to a threshold saturation (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); and determining that the saturation of the background color is a sum of the saturation of the basic color and a preset saturation if a saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67); and determining a value of the background color is a difference between a value of the basic color and a target value (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67), wherein the target value is a value corresponding to a value range to which the value of the basic color belongs, and the value corresponding to the value range is positively correlated with the central value of the value range (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67).
Claim 15:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses wherein the first position and the second position are two respective intersection positions of a target line (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67) and the sound wave display element (See Lathrop Column 18, Lines 25-35); the target line is a line in a first plane (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67), which passes through the geometric center of the sound wave display element (See Lathrop Column 18, Lines 25-35) and has a preset angle with a horizontal direction (See Lathrop Column 12, Lines 50-67).
Claim 16:
Claim 16 is rejected on the same basis as claim 1.
Claim 17:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses an electronic device, comprising: a memory configured to store a computer program and a processor configured to enable the electronic device to perform the method of displaying the sound effect in claim 1 upon calling and executing the computer program (See Lathrop Abstract & Figure 12; Column 34, Lines 40-67; Column 35, Lines 1-30).
Claim 18:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer- readable storage medium has a computer program stored thereon, and the computer program enables a computing device to perform the method of displaying the sound effect in claim 1 upon the computer program being executed by the computing device (See Lathrop Abstract & Figure 12; Column 34, Lines 40-67; Column 35, Lines 1-30).
Claim 19:
Lathrop and BOETTCHER discloses a computer program product, which enables a computer to perform the method of displaying the sound effect in claim 1 upon the computer program product being executed in the computer (See Lathrop Abstract & Figure 12; Column 34, Lines 40-67; Column 35, Lines 1-30).
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20220093082 discloses a method and apparatus for automatically adding sound effects into an audio file.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEREE N BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-4229. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00 PM EST.
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, SAID BROOME can be reached at (571) 272-2931. 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.
/SHEREE N BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612 March 12, 2026
i
http://www.uspto.gov/ip/boards/bpai/decisions/prec/fd2012007692.pdf
1 Lathrop teaches “The device starts by extracting audio cues from musical data, such as a music source file” in Column 6, Lines 55-63.
2 Lathrop teaches “The instant technology is directed to the visualization of music, such as the translation, or mapping, of music into a corresponding visual form that can be displayed on a screen. The technology enables synchronization of an audio signal with a video display such that a person, or group of persons, hears a segment of music and perceives the visualization of that music simultaneously. The invention supplements the information processing tasks that the human perceptual system carries out as a person listens to music” in Column 6, Lines 45-63.
3 Lathrop teaches “The device starts by extracting audio cues from musical data, such as a music source file” in Column 6, Lines 55-63.
4 Lathrop teaches “The instant technology is directed to the visualization of music, such as the translation, or mapping, of music into a corresponding visual form that can be displayed on a screen. The technology enables synchronization of an audio signal with a video display such that a person, or group of persons, hears a segment of music and perceives the visualization of that music simultaneously. The invention supplements the information processing tasks that the human perceptual system carries out as a person listens to music” in Column 6, Lines 45-63.
5 Lathrop teaches “The device starts by extracting audio cues from musical data, such as a music source file” in Column 6, Lines 55-63.
6 Lathrop teaches “The music source file can be a WAV (Waveform Audio File format) file” in Column 18, Lines 25-35.
7 Lathrop teaches “The music source file can be a WAV (Waveform Audio File format) file” in Column 18, Lines 25-35.
8 Lathrop teaches “The device starts by extracting audio cues from musical data, such as a music source file” in Column 6, Lines 55-63.
9 Lathrop teaches “The music source file can be a WAV (Waveform Audio File format) file” in Column 18, Lines 25-35.
10 Lathrop teaches “The device starts by extracting audio cues from musical data, such as a music source file” in Column 6, Lines 55-63.