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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed 02/09/2026 which has
been entered and made of record. Claims 1, 3-8, 11-14, 16-17 and 19-20 have been amended. Claims 21-23 have been newly added. Claims 2, 15 and 18 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 3-14, 16-17 and 19-23 are pending in the application. Applicant’s
amendments to the Specification and Claims have overcome each and every objection
previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed November 7th 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to claims 1, 3-14, 16-17 and 19-23 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to the applicant’s arguments that “It can be understood that the calculated difference disclosed in Ryan is between the focal distance and a corresponding particle, not the focal distance and a distance from the particle in the depth map to a virtual camera. Thus, the cited reference Ryan at least fails to teach or suggest "wherein the blur parameter of the particle dot is an absolute difference between a distance from the particle dot to a virtual camera and a focal length of the virtual camera," as defined in amended claim 1 of the present application.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. As recited in claim 1 now, these limitations are taught by the combination Kreative, Grapher and Ryan. Specifically, on top of paragraph 27 of Ryan cited in the rejection below, Ryan paragraph 24 teaches "particles which are rendered to their position on a depth map. The rendered particles may be updated as the pose of the camera changes with respect to the environment"; this shows that the depth map and particles thereof directly depend on virtual camera positioning meaning it is depth (direct distance) from particle to the virtual camera which is being referred to later in paragraph 27 of Ryan. In other words, when Ryan paragraph 27 mentions “calculate a distance from the particle in the depth map to a focal distance… The calculated difference between the focal distance and a corresponding particle can correspond to the blur or focus level for that particle”, corresponding particle here is referring to the depth map (and distance of particle to camera thereof), which as cited above further supports the examiner's interpretation because depth map encodes distances from virtual camera to particle.
In addition, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that particle would have spatial distance from camera and to take difference in distance and another element would typically require both quantities having the same kinds of units (which in this case would both be of distances since particle must be a distance from the camera as well); also, particle itself has a position in space which allows you to calculate various distances inclusive of the distance from particle dot to virtual camera.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 10 be found allowable, claim 19 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Applicant is advised that should claim 11 be found allowable, claim 20 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection for claims 5-9 have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Previous 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection for claim 18 has been withdrawn.
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, 3, 10, 16-17, 19 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kreative (3D Abstract Particles Audio Visualizer in AE | Noplugins) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vC6GndwmP-Q], hereinafter referenced as Kreative, in view of Grapher (Album cover animation After Effects) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8yC0_5xRzk], hereinafter referenced as Grapher and Ryan (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0115700), hereinafter referenced as Ryan.
Regarding claim 1, Kreative teaches a method of displaying a sound effect, comprising: (title and 0:00-0:22 teaches a tutorial for 3D abstract particles audio visualizer in After Effects); acquiring a blur parameter of each particle dot in the particle dot matrix, (Kreative, 5:47-5:59 [see fig. 8 of this action] teaches applying a blur); this means blur parameter must exist for blur to be applied and it is applied to each particle dot since as shown, applied to whole screen; receiving a first operation that is input to an audio file (4:04-4:35 [see fig. 1 of this action] teaches having audio and adding audio file); this shows displaying sound effects and the adding audio is done in response to user clicking/first operation [which is consistent with applicant's disclosure paragraph 26, "The first operation can specifically be a click operation to target audio file"];
PNG
media_image1.png
1014
1461
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1
and displaying a sound effect display interface corresponding to the audio file in response to the first operation (4:35-4:45 [see fig. 2 of this action] teaches the audio being visualized and a sound effect display interface/editing screen being displayed corresponding to the audio file); the editing interface here also acts as sound effect display interface and brings more options as the audio is imported;
PNG
media_image2.png
912
1442
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2
and a background image which is an image obtained by shooting a particle dot matrix at a shooting angle, (7:09-7:19 [see fig. 3 of this action] teaches a image with particle look and some particles shot up from the particle dot matrix); since the particles move up when the music plays (in before and later instances), that is the preset shooting angle and this whole project can be considered a background because in the description, Kreative mentions "Related Tutorials ...3D Futuristic Abstract Data Background Animation in AE", so one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that After Effect projects (inclusive of all layers in certain projects) can be used as a background for another project;
PNG
media_image3.png
958
1431
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 3
wherein the particle dot matrix comprises a plurality of dots with initial positions on a first plane, (7:20-7:26 [see fig. 4 of this action] teaches particle dots starting in a lined up manner on a plane prior to moving); the particle dots starting in a lined up manner acts as the initial positions of the particle dot matrix and it is on a same plane (which is the rectangular shape shown from the particle arrangement);
PNG
media_image4.png
1014
1455
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Figure 4
and each particle dot in the particle dot matrix moves in a direction perpendicular to the first plane according to a sound attribute of the audio file so that the particle dot matrix fluctuates according to the sound attribute of the audio file (7:28-7:39 [see fig. 5 of this action] teaches particle dots in the matrix fluctuating by moving up and down to align with audio loudness); particles moving up from initial arrangement shows perpendicular direction to the first plane, and this is according to preset sound attribute/loudness (consistent with applicant's disclosure paragraph 30 definition "the preset sound attribute of the target audio file in the embodiment of the present application can be a loudness"), since for example as the audio gets louder at 7:38 and 7:39 in the screenshot provided, the particles move higher, thus particles fluctuate accordingly to the preset sound attribute/loudness of the audio file.
PNG
media_image5.png
951
1460
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Figure 5
However, Kreative fails to teach wherein the sound effect display interface comprises: a foreground image comprising a cover image corresponding to the audio file,
However, Grapher teaches wherein the sound effect display interface comprises: a foreground image comprising a cover image corresponding to the audio file, (Grapher, 0:00-0:11 teaches a foreground image alongside a square album cover and 8:30-12:30 [see fig. 6 of this action] shows this in the sound effect display interface and actual editing occuring to arrive at that final image); the text, disk and design act as foregound and the square picture is the cover image, both of which would correspond to a target audio file since of an album for music/audio.
PNG
media_image6.png
839
1203
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Figure 6
Grapher is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of foreground image having cover image and corresponding to an audio file. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kreative's invention with the foreground and album cover techniques of Grapher to animate album cover, create rotating cd-disk and animate time using after effects (Grapher, description). This would increase user engagement and experience due to more interactive and adaptive foreground as well as cover.
However, the combination of Kreative and Grapher fails to teach wherein the blur parameter of the particle dot is an absolute difference between a distance from the particle dot to a virtual camera and a focal length of the virtual camera, wherein a blur degree of the particle dot is positively related to the blur parameter of the particle dot; blurring each particle dot according to the blur parameter of each particle dot.
However, Ryan teaches wherein the blur parameter of the particle dot is an absolute difference between a distance from the particle dot to a virtual camera and a focal length of the virtual camera (Ryan, paragraph 27 teaches "The calculated difference between the focal distance and a corresponding particle can correspond to the blur or focus level for that particle."); this shows blur level/blur parameter of particle acquired from difference between focal distance (which is focal length of virtual camera) and particle (particle location includes distance from particle dot to virtual camera), and one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a difference here would need to be absolute to ensure a positive value and avoid errors; wherein a blur degree of the particle dot is positively related to the blur parameter of the particle dot (Ryan, paragraph 63 teaches "The textures configured such that when applied to a visual element, a corresponding amount of blur will be introduced into the 3D representation. That amount of blur corresponds to the focus level. In this way, as the focus level increases, so will the amount of blur applied to the visual element (e.g., up to the focal limit). In the present example, the size of the blur effect also increases with the focus level"); amount of blur of particle acts as blur degree of the particle dot and it is positively related since it increases along with focus/blur level increasing ("focus/blur" because calculated difference from above corresponds to blur or focus level of that particle); blurring each particle dot according to the blur parameter of each particle dot (Ryan, paragraph 28 teaches "the system selects at least one texture, from the textures representing different levels of blur or focus, based on the determined blur level for a particle (e.g., the texture corresponding to that blur level). This texture can be applied to the particle such that the particle is rendered to indicate the blur level." and paragraph 29 teaches "Thus, each particle may be rendered to visually indicate its corresponding blur level, resulting in an illusion of depth of field"); this shows blurring each particle according to blur level/blur parameter; Ryan is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of calculating blur of each particle in specific efficient ways. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kreative and Grapher with the blur calculation techniques of Ryan to ensure resulting in a better reconstruction (Ryan, paragraph 20). This would be due to the realistic effect imposed by the blurring.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan teaches wherein a focus of the virtual camera is located at a first position on the first plane, (Kreative, 3:40-4:00 [see fig. 9 of this action] teaches virtual camera and positioned with focus on first plane); which is a position corresponding to a geometric center of the cover image on the first plane (Kreative, 3:55-4:03 [see fig. 9 of this action] teaches centering the camera on the first plane and Grapher, 2:55-3:00 [see fig. 10 of this action] shows cover image centered); this means camera focus positioned in center of first plane would also show album cover since that is also centered;
and a focal length of the virtual camera is a distance from the first position to the virtual camera (Kreative, 3:55-4:03 [see fig. 9 of this action] near bottom left shows camera coordinates x, y and z); this means focal length is a specific distance from the target position it is focusing on, since in order for it to be in the xyz coordinate space and be able to see the plane/target position, the focal length of the virtual camera must be a distance from the target position (which is at different xyz coordinates). The same motivations used in claim 1 apply here in claim 3.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan teaches wherein, from a center of the particle dot matrix along various directions to edges of the particle dot matrix, a color of particle dots in a particle matrix gradually changes from a first color to a second color (Kreative, 19:55-20:10 [see fig. 7 of this action] teaches center to edges of the matrix having gradual color change of particles first from dark blue to black and then once the user changes it, from white to black); first color would be white/blue (depending on configuration) and second would be black.
Regarding claim 16, the electronic device claim 16 recites similar limitations as method claim 1, and thus is rejected under similar rationale. In addition, Ryan, fig. 1, reference 102 teaches an electronic device with fig. 12’s memory 1212 and processor 1214, also paragraph 42 teaches "store computer instructions (e.g., software program instructions, routines, or services), data, and/or models used in embodiments described herein". The same motivations used in claim 1 apply here in claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, the computer-readable storage medium claim 17 recites similar limitations as method claim 1, and thus is rejected under similar rationale. In addition, Ryan, paragraph 36 teaches "user devices can include one or more processors, and one or more computer-readable media. The computer-readable media may include computer-readable instructions executable by the one or more processors. The instructions may be embodied by one or more applications". The same motivations used in claim 1 apply here in claim 17.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan teaches wherein, from a center of the particle dot matrix along various directions to edges of the particle dot matrix, a color of particle dots in a particle matrix gradually changes from a first color to a second color (Kreative, 19:55-20:10 [see fig. 7 of this action] teaches center to edges of the matrix having gradual color change of particles first from dark blue to black and then once the user changes it, from white to black); first color would be white/blue (depending on configuration) and second would be black.
Regarding claim 21, the electronic device claim 21 recites similar limitations as method claim 3, and thus is rejected under similar rationale.
PNG
media_image7.png
881
1680
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Figure 7
PNG
media_image8.png
854
1215
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Figure 8
PNG
media_image9.png
791
1216
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Figure 9
PNG
media_image10.png
871
1209
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Figure 10
Claim(s) 4 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kreative in view of Grapher and Ryan as applied to claim 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Kurz (U.S. Patent No. 11,182,978), hereinafter referenced as Kurz.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan fails to teach wherein the method further comprises: acquiring a depth value of each particle dot in the particle dot matrix, which is the distance from the particle dot to the virtual camera; and setting a size of each particle dot in accordance with the depth value of each particle dot; wherein the size of the particle dot is negatively related to the depth value of the particle dot.
However, Kurz teaches wherein the method further comprises: acquiring a depth value of each particle dot in the particle dot matrix, (Kurz, col. 12, lines 45-47 teaches "the rain streak image 606 is determined based on the depth of the virtual content 610 to which it will be applied,"); rain streak image (consisting of rain particles/particle dots) being determined based on depth shows each particle would have a depth value; which is the distance from the particle dot to the virtual camera (Kurz, col. 12, lines 47-48 teaches "e.g., based on the distance of the virtual content from the camera"); since rain streak is applied to virtual content from above, when determining depth from virtual content to camera, it means it would be distance of virtual content/rain streak (including particle dot) to the camera; and setting a size of each particle dot in accordance with the depth value of each particle dot (Kurz, col. 12, lines 57-59 teach "Generally, a given particle streak image may have depth-dependent parameters (e.g., density, size) that are used to adjust its appearance"); particle streak (inclusive of particle dots) having depth dependent parameters such as size shows the size of particle streak (meaning each particle dot) is set in accordance to depth value; wherein the size of the particle dot is negatively related to the depth value of the particle dot (Kurz, col. 13, lines 4-11 teaches "neural network 604 is trained to receive an input image having air-born particles and generate particle streak images for different virtual content depths...produce a rain streak image having less rain for a virtual content 612 where it will be positioned at a depth of 3 feet than for virtual content 612 where it will be positioned at a depth of 200 feet." and col. 12, lines 51-55 teach "that objects at 50 meters will rain that has density and size based on the relationship of the 50 meter depth to the 100 meter background depth. In this example, the characteristics of the rain are adjusted proportionally based on the depth"); this shows negative relation of particle dot to depth value since size is based on depth in terms of proportionality (which is typically negative relation), also one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that looking at a video of rain drops/particles, the farther away you go (increased depth), the more rain that you would see, but it would be smaller drops (decreased particle size) and then if you zoom in on the video (decreased depth), you would see less rain but the rain drops would be bigger (increased particle size), all of which shows an negative/inverse relation. Kurz is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of size based on depth of particles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan with the depth-based size techniques of Kurz to improve coherence (Kurz, abstract). This would be done by making a realistic field of perception from basing particle size on depth.
Regarding claim 22, the electronic device claim 22 recites similar limitations as method claim 4, and thus is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim(s) 5-6 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kreative in view of Grapher and Ryan as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Johnston (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0205570), hereinafter referenced as Johnston.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan teaches wherein the displaying the sound effect display interface corresponding to the audio file comprises: determining a movement distance of each particle dot in the particle dot matrix according to the sound attribute of the audio file and a noise (Kreative, 1:07-1:20 [see fig. 11 of this action] teaches applying fractal noise and 7:28-7:39 [see fig. 5 of this action] teaches particle dots in the matrix fluctuating by moving up and down to align with audio loudness); the fractal noise is a preset noise and the movement distance of each particle dot in the matrix is according to such along with preset sound attribute/loudness because the matrix with movement of particles comes after such (in subsequent step to fractal noise) and as the audio gets louder for example at 7:38 and 7:39, then the particles movement distance increases (they move more);
PNG
media_image11.png
881
1680
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Figure 11
rendering the particle dot matrix according to the movement distance of each particle dot in the particle dot matrix to generate the background image; (Kreative, 7:28-7:39 [see fig. 5 of this action] shows rendered particle dot matrix with each particle dot moving a specific distance); as explained in claim 1, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that this type of project is typically to be used as a background image.
However, the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan fails to teach and displaying the background image and superposing and displaying the foreground image onto the background image.
However, Johnston teaches and displaying the background image and superposing and displaying the foreground image onto the background image (Johnston, fig. 4 and paragraph 40 teach "FIG. 4 is an example display 400 of audio data as a frequency spectrogram 402 including an image 404. In FIG. 4, the image 404 is positioned in the display 400 relative to the frequency spectrogram 402. In particular, the image 404 has been positioned in the demarcated region 304 of FIG. 3 such that the image 404 overlaps a central region of the frequency spectrogram 402"); frequency spectrogram 402 acts as background, it is displayed in fig. 3 and is superposed by foreground image 404 both of which are then displayed in fig. 4. Johnston is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of amplitude usage and superposing techniques. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan with the superposing and amplitude techniques of Johnston so audio data can be edited and ensure removing unwanted audio data improves audio quality (Johnston, paragraph 4). This would be due to the visualization of audio data due to superposing as well as having specific features of such like amplitude on advanced hardware.
Regarding claim 6 the combination of Kreative, Grapher, Ryan and Johnston teaches wherein the determining the movement distance of each particle dot in the particle dot matrix according to the sound attribute of the audio file and the noise comprises: acquiring an amplitude corresponding to a current period according to an attribute value of the sound attribute corresponding to the current period (Johnston, paragraph 14 teaches "FIG. 2 is an example display of a visual representation of audio data as a frequency spectrogram" and paragraph 32 teaches "The visual representation can be selected to show a number of different features of the audio data. In some implementations, the visual representation displays a feature of the audio data (e.g., frequency, amplitude, pan position) on a feature axis and time on a time axis."); this shows acquiring amplitude and would be for various time periods inclusive of 0/start (meaning current time period) shown on fig. 2 x-axis and this is according to attribute value of preset attribute because it accounts for frequency as well (since shows a number of different features like amplitude and frequency which is also a preset sound attribute), thus all of this would impact the loudness/movement distance of each particle from Kreative; determining a first distance from each particle dot in the particle dot matrix corresponding to the current period to the first plane according to the initial position of each particle dot in the particle dot matrix and the noise (Kreative, 7:49-7:56 [see fig. 12 of this action] teaches a multiplier value for z position which multiplies each particle's z position location); first distance is due to changing the z position by the multiplier (result of such at current time), this is according to initial position since that is what is multiplied, and also according to preset noise since it comes after the aforementioned fractal noise in claim 5;
PNG
media_image12.png
1031
1920
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Figure 12
and determining the movement distance of each particle dot in the particle dot matrix corresponding to the current period according to the amplitude corresponding to the current period and the first distance from each particle dot in the particle dot matrix corresponding to the current period to the first plane (Kreative, 12:07-12:35 [see fig. 13 of this action] teaches each particle moving a distance at a current time period after the multiplier value has been set); prior to movement, the distance to be moved must be determined, this is according to the first distance because it is after the multiplier is set in a previous step and amplitude and frequency at the current time period from Johnston would affect the loudness thus the fluctuation of the particles from Kreative as well (since particles are shown to move more when louder). The same motivations used in claim 5 apply here in claim 6.
PNG
media_image13.png
942
1460
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Figure 13
Regarding claim 23, the electronic device claim 23 recites similar limitations as method claim 5, and thus is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kreative in view of Grapher and Ryan as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of C et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,319,116), hereinafter referenced as C, and FAN (CN 109814956 A), hereinafter referenced as FAN.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan fails to teach
wherein, before displaying the sound effect display interface corresponding to the audio file, the method further comprises: acquiring an average color value of various pixels of the cover image; converting the average color value into a color in an HSV color space to obtain a basic color; and determining the first color, the second color, and a background color of the sound effect display interface according to the basic color.
However, C teaches wherein, before displaying the sound effect display interface corresponding to the audio file, the method further comprises: acquiring an average color value of various pixels of the cover image (C, col. 5, lines 41-42 teach "resultant blended color may be a weighted average of the foreground and background colors."); this means average of foreground must be taken which includes various values of cover image and this would be before displaying the sound effect display because it is a configuration that would be preset "for use in presentation" as the abstract in C describes; converting the average color value into a color in an HSV color space to obtain a basic color (C, col. 5, lines 59-60 teach "third text background color 184 may be an alpha blend" and col. 6, lines 34-36 teach "convert the third text color 162 from a red-green-blue (RGB) color space to a hue-saturation-value (HSV) color space"); because the average color is an alphablend and the third text color is too, this means third text must be an average as well due to similar style computations and it is converted here to HSV which gives basic color (result of conversion); C is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of average of colors and RGB to HSV conversion. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan with the average of color and conversion techniques of C to ensure some or all information conveyed via the use of color is available to users in each operational mode of the mobile device (C, col. 2, lines 42-45). This would make the invention and colors more versatile.
However, the combination of Kreative, Grapher, Ryan and C fails to teach and determining the first color, the second color, and a background color of the sound effect display interface according to the basic color.
However, FAN teaches and determining the first color, the second color, and a background color of the sound effect display interface according to the basic color (FAN, paragraph 10 teaches "wherein each color block is a single color block", paragraph 11 teaches "determine a first color based on the color of the color block with the lowest brightness; determine a second color based on the color of the color block with the highest brightness; and determine a third color based on the color of the color block with the smallest sum of the squares of the contrast saturation" and paragraph 12 teaches "set the first color as the background color"); since each color is a single color block, basic color would be too, and the 3 colors determined based on/according to the color block are the background(first) color, first(second) color and second (third) color. FAN is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of obtaining multiple colors based off a base color/single color block. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kreative, Grapher, Ryan and C with the color determination techniques of FAN to ensure improving the user experience (FAN, paragraph 70). This would be done by optimizing and having the unique colors.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of C et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 10,319,116), hereinafter referenced as C, and FAN (CN 109814956 A), hereinafter referenced as FAN.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan fails to teach
wherein, before displaying the sound effect display interface corresponding to the audio file, the method further comprises: acquiring an average color value of various pixels of the cover image; converting the average color value into a color in an HSV color space to obtain a basic color; and determining the first color, the second color, and a background color of the sound effect display interface according to the basic color.
However, C teaches wherein, before displaying the sound effect display interface corresponding to the audio file, the method further comprises: acquiring an average color value of various pixels of the cover image (C, col. 5, lines 41-42 teach "resultant blended color may be a weighted average of the foreground and background colors."); this means average of foreground must be taken which includes various values of cover image and this would be before displaying the sound effect display because it is a configuration that would be preset "for use in presentation" as the abstract in C describes; converting the average color value into a color in an HSV color space to obtain a basic color (C, col. 5, lines 59-60 teach "third text background color 184 may be an alpha blend" and col. 6, lines 34-36 teach "convert the third text color 162 from a red-green-blue (RGB) color space to a hue-saturation-value (HSV) color space"); because the average color is an alphablend and the third text color is too, this means third text must be an average as well due to similar style computations and it is converted here to HSV which gives basic color (result of conversion); C is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of average of colors and RGB to HSV conversion. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kreative, Grapher and Ryan with the average of color and conversion techniques of C to ensure some or all information conveyed via the use of color is available to users in each operational mode of the mobile device (C, col. 2, lines 42-45). This would make the invention and colors more versatile.
However, the combination of Kreative, Grapher, Ryan and C fails to teach and determining the first color, the second color, and a background color of the sound effect display interface according to the basic color.
However, FAN teaches and determining the first color, the second color, and a background color of the sound effect display interface according to the basic color (FAN, paragraph 10 teaches "wherein each color block is a single color block", paragraph 11 teaches "determine a first color based on the color of the color block with the lowest brightness; determine a second color based on the color of the color block with the highest brightness; and determine a third color based on the color of the color block with the smallest sum of the squares of the contrast saturation" and paragraph 12 teaches "set the first color as the background color"); since each color is a single color block, basic color would be too, and the 3 colors determined based on/according to the color block are the background(first) color, first(second) color and second (third) color. FAN is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of obtaining multiple colors based off a base color/single color block. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kreative, Grapher, Ryan and C with the color determination techniques of FAN to ensure improving the user experience (FAN, paragraph 70). This would be done by optimizing and having the unique colors.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 and 12-14 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:
Regarding claim 7, the closest prior art of (or combination of) Johnston teaches wherein the acquiring the amplitude corresponding to the current period according to the attribute value of the sound attribute corresponding to the current period, comprises: acquiring a first calculated value according to an amplitude corresponding to a last period and an attenuation coefficient (Johnston, paragraph 7 teaches "editing effect can be an attenuation effect. Editing the audio data can include isolating a portion of the audio data corresponding to the portion of the displayed audio data overlapped by the image." and paragraph 41 teaches "a gain effect can be applied to amplify or attenuate the audio data using the overlapping image, e.g., as a mask"); calculated value would be the result after the gain effect is applied, to attenuate the audio data you would have to have attenuation coefficient and this uses audio data corresponding to the portion overlapped by image meaning it would contain amplitude information corresponding to last period because the visual representation displays feature of audio data such as amplitude on a feature axis and time on time axis (from above).
However, Johnston fails to teach and acquiring the amplitude corresponding to the current period according to the first calculated value and the attribute value of the sound attribute corresponding to the current period.
Furthermore, no prior art of record either alone or in combination teaches
and acquiring the amplitude corresponding to the current period according to the first calculated value and the attribute value of the sound attribute corresponding to the current period when read in light of the rest of the limitations in claim 7 and the claims to which claim 7 depends and thus claim 7 contains allowable subject matter.
Claim 8 contains allowable subject matter because it depends on a claim that contains allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 9, the closest prior art of (or combination of) Kreative teaches wherein the movement distance of each particle dot in the particle dot matrix corresponding to the current period is a product of the first distance from each particle dot in the particle dot matrix corresponding to the current period to the first plane (Kreative, 7:49-7:56 teaches a multiplier value for z position which multiplies each particle's z position location); first distance is due to changing the z position by the multiplier (result of such at current time), this is according to initial position since that is what is multiplied thus affecting movement distance.
However, Kreative fails to teach product of the first distance and the amplitude corresponding to the current period.
Furthermore, no prior art of record either alone or in combination teaches
product of the first distance and the amplitude corresponding to the current period when read in light of the rest of the limitations in claim 9 and the claims to which claim 9 depends and thus claim 9 contains allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 12, the closest prior art of (or combination of) FAN teaches wherein the determining the first color according to the basic color comprises: determining that a hue of the first color is same as a hue of the basic color (FAN, paragraph 52 teaches "color of the color block with the highest hue among the color blocks with the highest brightness and lowest saturation is determined as the second color"); this means when basic color/color block has the highest hue, it would be determined as second color in FAN (which is the first color from above explanation); and determining a value of the first color as a maximum value (FAN, paragraph 11 teaches "second color based on the color of the color block with the highest brightness"); here second color equates to first color as explained above and highest brightness indicates maximum value [consistent with applicant's disclosure definition of value in paragraph 82 "hue (Hue), saturation (Saturation) and brightness (Value)"].
However, FAN fails to teach determining that a saturation of the first color is same as a saturation of the basic color if the 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 first saturation if the saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation.
Furthermore, no prior art of record either alone or in combination teaches
determining that a saturation of the first color is same as a saturation of the basic color if the 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 first saturation if the saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation when read in light of the rest of the limitations in claim 12 and the claims to which claim 12 depends and thus claim 12 contains allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 13, the closest prior art of (or combination of) FAN teaches and determining a value of the second color as a maximum value (FAN, paragraph 158 teaches "the B value of the first color is set to 100"); value/brightness being 100 shows maximum for the color.
However, FAN fails to teach wherein the 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 first hue; determining that a saturation of the second color is same as a saturation of the basic color if the 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 first saturation if the saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation;
Furthermore, no prior art of record either alone or in combination teaches
wherein the 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 first hue; determining that a saturation of the second color is same as a saturation of the basic color if the 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 first saturation if the saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation; when read in light of the rest of the limitations in claim 13 and the claims to which claim 13 depends and thus claim 13 contains allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 14, the closest prior art of (or combination of) FAN teaches wherein the determining the background color according to the basic color comprises: determining that a hue of the background color is same as a hue of the basic color (FAN, paragraph 46 teaches "the color of the color block with the highest hue among the color blocks with the lowest brightness and lowest saturation is determined as the first color."); this means when basic color/color block has the highest hue, it would be determined as first color (which is the background color from above explanation); and determining a value of the background color is a difference between a value of the basic color and a first value, wherein the first value is a value corresponding to a value range to which the value of the basic color belongs, (FAN, paragraph 158 teaches "determine whether the differences in H, S, and B between the first color, the second color, and the third color are all less than 20; if so, the brightness of the first color is determined to be related to 50; if the B value of the first color is less than 50, the B value of the first color is set to 100); target value here is 20 and difference between colors and that are taken to see if less than the target value., also value range would be 0-100 as described.
However, FAN fails to teach determining that a saturation of the background color is same as a saturation of the basic color if the 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 first saturation if the saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation; and the value corresponding to a value range is positively correlated with a central value of the value range.
Furthermore, no prior art of record either alone or in combination teaches
determining that a saturation of the background color is same as a saturation of the basic color if the 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 first saturation if the saturation of the basic color is less than the threshold saturation; and a value corresponding to a value range is positively correlated with a central value of the value range when read in light of the rest of the limitations in claim 14 and the claims to which claim 14 depends and thus claim 14 contains allowable subject matter.
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 NAUMAN U AHMAD whose telephone number is (703)756-5306. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Kee Tung can be reached at (571) 272-7794. 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.
/N.U.A./Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/KEE M TUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611