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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-24 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, 10-19, 22-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Isozaki et al. (US 2008/0202323 A1, “Isozaki”).
As to claims 1, 11, 12, 13, 22, 23, 24, Isozaki discloses an information processing apparatus (music reproduction apparatus) comprising:
processing circuitry configured to
set content information for content including a main track and an additional track, the content information including content parameter information defining a content of playback control of the main track during loop playback of the main track (selection section for selecting at least one music data to be reproduced, para. 0029; reproduction section in which a first track repeated reproduces a first phrase composed of one measure, para. 0035);
set trigger information defining a condition for adding the additional track to the main track during the loop playback (in response to external condition information, the reproduction section starts reproducing the measures included in a second phrase of a second track, para. 0035); and
set a content generation parameter by associating the content information with the trigger information to output a playback sound of the additional track in synchronization with a start timing of a next loop playback of the main track when the condition defined by the trigger information is met (reproduction start timing corresponding to one phrase reproduced by the first track is synchronized with the reproduction start timing of plural measures included in the phrase reproduced by the second track, para. 0036, 0218).
As to claim 4, Isozaki discloses: wherein the content information further includes information for associating the main track and the additional track (selected phrases and tracks are stored in advance in correspondence with the travel environment information, para. 0026, 0126).
As to claim 5, Isozaki discloses: wherein the main track and the additional track each include a loop material having a predetermined number of bars and a playback time (the music reproduction apparatus includes a reproduction section having a plurality of tracks, in which a first track repeatedly reproduces a first phrase composed of one measure, and a second track repeatedly reproduces a second phrase composed of a plurality of measures, an external condition information input section for inputting the external condition information representing the external condition, and a reproduction time length control section for controlling a reproduction time length of the first phrase reproduced by the first track in response to the external condition information, para. 0035-0036).
As to claim 6, Isozaki discloses: wherein the main track includes data selected from data prepared in advance or includes use of existing music, and the additional track includes data selected from data prepared in advance (selected phrases and tracks are stored in advance in correspondence with the travel environment information, para. 0026, 0126; music data is selected from music data storage, para. 0029).
As to claims 7, 14-15, Isozaki discloses: wherein the trigger information is information including at least any one of POI information, landmark information, area information, information associated with a moving object in which a user is, or information on the user himself/herself (music data is reproduced in response to travel environments, including seaside areas, mountains, urban district, etc., para. 0230-0231; vehicle status, para. 0127).
As to claim 10, Isozaki discloses: wherein at least one of the main track or the additional track is track data of a specific sound source acquired by sound source separation intended for existing music (music data selected from music data storage and assigned to tracks, para. 0114).
As to claim 16, Isozaki discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to determine whether or not to control the content generation parameter on a basis of the event and the trigger information (music reproduction apparatus makes a decision as to whether or not the music data to be reproduced should be necessarily changed based on travel environment information or vehicle status information, para. 0146-0151).
As to claim 17, Isozaki discloses: wherein in a case where it is determined to perform control of the content generation parameter, the processing circuitry is configured to perform the playback control based on the content generation parameter controlled according to the event (para. 0151).
As to claim 18, Isozaki discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to perform the control of the content generation parameter on a basis of a traffic condition or a speed limit (road traffic information, speed limit information, para. 0077).
As to claim 19, Isozaki discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: perform sound source separation on existing music, acquire track data of each sound source of the existing music, and use the track data acquired by the sound source separation as at least one of the main track or the additional track (para. 0082-0084).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 2-3, 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isozaki in view of Brockwell et al. (US 2022/0108675 A1, “Brockwell”).
Isozaki differs from claim 2 in that although it discloses an operation information output section 40 (para. 0072) and a user setup section (para. 0079), it does not specifically disclose: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to cause a display to display a screen for setting the content generation parameter.
Brockwell teaches a display 212 for setting an adjustable parameter (para. 0057). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Isozaki with the above teaching of Brockwell in order to improve the set up operation experience for the user.
As to claim 3, Isozaki in view of Brockwell teaches: wherein the content information further includes metadata of the content, and the metadata is information including at least one of a key, a beat, BPM, a code, a playback time, tonality, a musical instrument type of the content, or information associated with position data of the content in a case where the content is object audio (Isozaki: reproduction parameters include volume, pitch, tempo, tone color, tone-generation timing, para. 0025; Brockwell: music may have an initial tempo indicated in beats per minute (BPM), para. 0057; musical parameters include musical style, instrumentation, pitch, time control, harmony, para. 0017, 0048-0064).
As to claim 8, Isozaki in view of Brockwell teaches: wherein the POI information is set as information indicating a start point and an end point of a POI, the landmark information is set as information indicating a start point and an end point of a landmark, the area information is set as information indicating start/end of an area, and the information associated with the moving object is set as information indicating start/stop, stop time, start/end of right/left turn, and speed of the moving object (Brockwell: POI musical phrase begins at a predetermined distance from the POI, para. 0050; distance from a particular destination, para. 0102, which may be a landmark, town, etc., para. 0039, particular neighborhood, para. 0046; other vehicle speech sensor, para. 0088).
As to claim 9, Isozaki in view of Brockwell teaches: wherein at least one of the POI information, the landmark information, or the area information has a unique parameter (Brockwell: distinct musical phrases may be associated with POIs, landmarks, neighborhood/city/downtown area, para. 0046; different musical sounds are allocated to the different POIs, etc., para. 0039, 0048-0050, 0069, Tables 1 and 2).
Claim(s) 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isozaki in view of Brockwell, as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2011/0054917 A1, “Lee”).
Isozaki in view of Brockwell differs from claim 20 in that it does not teach: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to acquire the existing music to be subjected to the sound source separation on a basis of separation information including information indicating whether or not the existing music is sound source separable music.
Lee teaches the use of sound source separation technology to extract audio objects such as vocal, drum, piano, etc. in order to easily obtain a content for an object-based audio service (para. 0006) from a bitstream which includes a file header with reproduction level information associated with each audio object (para. 0028-0034). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Isozaki in view of Brockwell with the above teaching of Lee in order to more effective extract and reproduce an object-based audio.
As to claim 21, Isozaki in view of Brockwell and Lee teaches: wherein the separation information includes at least any one of information indicating a type of a sound source or information indicating whether or not sound source separation has been performed together with information indicating whether or not the music is sound source separable music (Lee: type of sound object such as vocal, drum, piano, etc., para. 0006).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Stella L Woo whose telephone number is (571)272-7512. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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.
/Stella L. Woo/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights