Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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 1-6, 8-11, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1-6, 8-11, 13-20 are directed to an abstract idea of organizing human activity. The claim limitations are not indicative of integration into a practical application and the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
Step 1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter
Claims 1-6, 8-1, 13-20 are drawn to at least one of the four statutory categories of invention (i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition).
Step 2a1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims are analyzed to determine whether it is directed to a judicial exception.
Claims 1, 5-6, 9-10 recite, a system for preserving persistent game state data for an asynchronous persistent group game in a gaming establishment, the system comprising:
at least one network server having at least one processor and at least one memory storing a plurality of instructions, which when executed, cause the at least one processor to at least:
receive, from a plurality locator devices on a plurality of gaming machines, data identifying locations of the plurality of gaming machines in the gaming establishment, over at least one network;
process data of the asynchronous persistent group game associated with the plurality of gaming machines executing one or more wager based games, including detecting a first team session in the asynchronous persistent group game,
identify one or more local jurisdictional requirements and one or more requirements of the gaming establishment, based on locations of the plurality of gaming machines in the gaming establishment,
modify, for at least an identified subset of the plurality of gaming machines, the asynchronous persistent group game according to the one or more local jurisdiction requirements and according to the one or more requirements of the gaming establishment, including modifying: one or more rules of the asynchronous persistent group game, one or more prizes of the asynchronous persistent group game, and one or more localization features,
update, based on the modification of the asynchronous persistent group game, asynchronous persistent group game state information controlling the asynchronous persistent group game and maintained in at least one memory of the at least one network server, including updating two or more of: gaming machine identification data, player identification data, player tool data, viewport data, virtual location data of one or more players, gaming machine location data, or controlling jurisdiction data,
process data of the asynchronous persistent group game state information associated with concurrently displaying at a first team of gaming machines and at a second team of gaming machines the asynchronous persistent group game, and
detect an asynchronous configuration of output at an identified subset of the plurality of gaming machines corresponding to the first team of gaming machines.
Claims 2, 11, 13-15 recite, a system for displaying an asynchronous persistent group on a plurality of gaming machine game in a gaming establishment, the system comprising:
at least one network server having at least one processor and at least one memory storing a plurality of instructions, which, when executed, cause the at least one processor to at least:
receive, from a plurality of locator devices on the plurality of gaming machines data identifying locations of the plurality of gaming machines in the gaming establishment over at least one network,
process data of the asynchronous persistent group game associated with the plurality of gaming machines executing one or more wager-based games
compare data indicative of a first gaming machine identified and data indicative of a persistent team game to determine if the first gaming machine is associated with the persistent team game,
when the first gaming machine is associated with persistent team game, identify one or more local jurisdictional requirements and one or more requirements of the gaming establishments,
configure a first display device of the first gaming machine to modify the asynchronous persistent group game according to the one or more local jurisdiction requirements and according to the one or more requirements of the gaming establishment, including modifying: one or more rules of the asynchronous persistent group game, one or more prizes of the asynchronous persistent group game, and one or more localization features,
update, based on the modification of the asynchronous persistent group game, asynchronous persistent group game state information controlling the asynchronous persistent group game and maintained in at least one memory of the at least one network server, including updating two or more of: gaming machine identification data, player identification data, player tool data, viewport data, virtual location data of one or more players, gaming machine location data, or controlling jurisdiction data, and
process data of the asynchronous persistent group game state information associated with concurrently displaying the persistent team game at a second gaming machine; and
an award server configured to at least:
control the first display device of the first gaming machine to display an addition of a monetary award to a progressive award, and control the first display device of the first gaming machine to display an award of the progressive award.
Claim 3-4, 16-20 recite, a method for preserving persistent game state in a data gaming establishment for an asynchronous persistent group game on at least one network server configured to communicate with a plurality of gaming, the method comprising:
transmitting, from a plurality of locator devices on the plurality of gaming machines, data identifying locations of the plurality of gaming machines in the gaming establishment, over at least one network;
detecting a session of a persistent team game in the asynchronous persistent group game responsive to a first gaming machine being associated with persistent team game;
identifying one or more local jurisdictional requirements and one or more requirements of the gaming establishment based on the locations of the plurality of gaming machines in the gaming establishment;
configuring a display of the first gaming machine to modify the asynchronous persistent group game according to the one or more local jurisdiction requirements and according to the one or more requirements of the gaming establishment, including modifying: one or more rules of the asynchronous persistent group game, one or more prizes of the asynchronous persistent group game, and one or more localization features,
updating, based on the modification of the asynchronous persistent group game, asynchronous persistent group game state information controlling the asynchronous persistent group game and maintained in at least one memory of the at least one network server, including updating two or more of: gaming machine identification data, player identification data, player tool data, viewport data, virtual location data of one or more players, gaming machine location data, or controlling jurisdiction data;
configuring the first gaming machine to join the persistent team game responsive to the first gaming machine not being associated with the persistent team game;
updating the display displaying the asynchronous persistent group game to include at least a portion of the persistent team game;
processing data of the asynchronous persistent group game state information associated with concurrently displaying the persistent team game conjunction with a second gaming machine; and
asynchronously configuring the asynchronous persistent group game to remain active on the display after the persistent team game for the second gaming machine is terminated.
The underlined limitations recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity. According to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Guidelines, organizing human activity includes managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
More specifically, the claims recite managing or operating an asynchronous persistent group game for a plurality of player associated with a plurality of gaming machines by transmitting data to a join a team and enabling the asynchronous persistent group game to remain active. The game is modified according to one or more local jurisdictional requirements and one or more gaming establishment requirement according to the location information. Managing an asynchronous persistent group game is management of a social activity, which is an organization of human activity.
Step 2a2 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
The second prong of step 2a is the consideration of whether the claim recites additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application.
An additional element or combination of additional elements that are indicative of integrating the abstract idea into a practical application include:
-Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
-Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
-Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b)
-Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
-Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo
Additional element or combination of additional elements that are not indicative of integration of the abstract idea into a practical application include:
-Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f)
-Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)
-Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h)
Claims 1-6, 8-11, 13-20 do not apply a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment, and do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing.
Claims 1-6, 8-11, 13-20 are not directed to an improvement to a function of a computer. There is no improvement to a technical field. In addition, the claims do not apply the judicial exception with, or by use of a particular machine. The claims do not apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way.
The claimed system comprising a network server connected to a plurality of gaming machines and the award server are not used in a meaningful way. The servers and the plurality of gaming machines are generic computers or computer components used to perform the abstract idea of managing interactions. The server and gaming machines are used to implement the group game in a computer embodiment. The steps of receiving data amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. The use of a computer generally links the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. For the reasons as discussed above, the claim limitations are not integrated to a practical application.
Step 2b of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims as a whole is analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception.
Claims 1-3 include the additional element of a network server to receive and transmit data. Claim 3 also recites the additional elements of a plurality of gaming machines and one or more locator devices on the plurality of gaming machines to transmit data.
These additional elements are well known, routine, convention as indicated below.
A server configured to communicate with a plurality of gaming machines or receive data from a plurality of gaming machines is well known and conventional. As indicated in by the courts, receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data is well known, routine, convention or insignificant extra solution activity. See Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network);
The claim limitation of a server to control or operate a game is well known and conventional. As evidence, Harris (US 2006/0014582) discloses a server to manage games played at a plurality of gaming machines (paragraph 44). The system creates various prize values and award the prize payout based on the winning outcomes (pargaphrs 74-75) Harris discloses that the configuration of a server to initiate presentation of game, present the game, create game data and transmit the game data to the gaming machines for use by the gaming machines is well known (paragraphs 44-45)
The additional elements taken alone, do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Looking at the additional elements as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation.
Moreover, the claims do not recite improvements to another technology or technical field. That is, they merely recite rules for operating a game, saving and retrieving game state data. The claims do not improve the functioning of the underlying computer itself -- they merely recite generic computing elements. Furthermore, they do not effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing: the underlying computing elements remain the same. As such, viewed as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Dependent claims 4-6, 8-11, 13-20 further recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity and additional element of saving data in a memory. The step of storing and retrieving information in a memory are well-known, routine and conventional as indicated by the courts. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
Taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified abstract idea. Looking at the additional elements as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For example, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. The rest of the dependent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons discussed above with respect to the conclusion that the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The dependent claims merely include limitations that further define the abstract idea and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract. The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-11, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites, identify one or more local jurisdictional requirements and one or more requirements of the gaming establishment, based on locations of the plurality of gaming machines in the gaming establishment, modify, for at least an identified subset of the plurality of gaming machines, the asynchronous persistent group game according to the one or more local jurisdiction requirements and according to the one or more requirements of the gaming establishment, including modifying: one or more rules of the asynchronous persistent group game, one or more prizes of the asynchronous persistent group game, and one or more localization features,
Applicant’s specification fails to teach that one or more requirements of the gaming establishment is identified and the asynchronous persistent group game is modified according to the one or more requirements of the gaming establishment.
The closest description is paragraph 75, which discloses the following.
[0075] Each of the plurality of gaming machines 522a-n may have a processor 526a-n. Each of the plurality of gaming machines 522a-n may also have a local non-volatile memory 524a-n configured to communicate with the processor 526a-n. Each of the plurality of gaming machines 522a-n may also have an input/output device 528a-n and/or a display device 530a-n configured to communicate with the processor 526a-n. A locator device or location determination device 532a-n may also be configured to communicate with the processor 526a-n. The locator device 532a-n may determine the general physical geographic location of the casino, or the specific location on the casino floor of each of the plurality of gaming machines 522a-n. Location information can be used to enforce local jurisdictional requirements (e.g., minimum payout percentage, bet size, and the like), or to modify the asynchronous persistent group bonus game (e.g., game rules, localization features for the city, the casino brands, prizes, and the like). In one embodiment, a Global Positioning System (GPS), a cellular towers triangulation or trilateration system, a WiMax triangulation or trilateration system, a WiFi triangulation or trilateration system, or some combination of these triangulation and trilateration system may be used. In another embodiment, IP address analysis may be used. In still other embodiments, the location determination device 532a-n may use any known method, system, or device to determine the physical location of each of the plurality of gaming machines 522a-n (some of which may also be gaming machine mobile devices such as smart phones), such as a nearby access point, signal strength analysis, time difference of arrival, or other RF location methods.
The specification discloses that location information can be used to enforce local jurisdictional requirements (e.g., minimum payout percentage, bet size, and the like), or to modify the asynchronous persistent group bonus game (e.g., game rules, localization features for the city, the casino brands, prizes, and the like). The specification discloses that the game is modified according to local jurisdictional requirements. However, there is no description that one or more requirements of a gaming establishment is identified. In addition, there is no description of modifying the asynchronous persistent group bonus game according to one or more requirements of a gaming establishment. The specification discloses how the asynchronous persistent group bonus game can be modified (e.g., game rules, localization features for the city, the casino brands, prizes, and the like). However, there is no description that these modifications are requirements of a gaming establishment.
Claims 5-6, 8-10 are rejected by dependency. Claims 2-4, 11, 13-20 incorporate similar limitations and are rejected for the same reasons as discussed above.
Claim 1 recites, update, based on the modification of the asynchronous persistent group game, asynchronous persistent group game state information controlling the asynchronous persistent group game and maintained in at least one memory of the at least one network server, including updating two or more of: gaming machine identification data, player identification data, player tool data, viewport data, virtual location data of one or more players, gaming machine location data, or controlling jurisdiction data. Applicant’s specification fails to teach that the listed claimed data are updated based on the modification. The claim recites that the modification according jurisdictional requirement and gaming establishsment. There is no description that gaming machine identification data, player identification data, player tool data, viewport data, virtual location data of one or more players are updated based on the modified data according to the one or more local jurisdictional requirement.
Claims 5-6, 8-10 are rejected by dependency. Claims 2-4, 11, 13-20 incorporate similar limitations and are rejected for the same reasons as discussed above.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-11, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites, modify, for at least an identified subset of the plurality of gaming machines, the asynchronous persistent group game according to the one or more local jurisdiction requirements and according to the one or more requirements of the gaming establishment, including modifying: one or more rules of the asynchronous persistent group game, one or more prizes of the asynchronous persistent group game, and one or more localization features. The claim is indefinite because it is not clear if each of: one or more rules of the asynchronous persistent group game, one or more prizes of the asynchronous persistent group game, and one or more localization features is required or one modification of a rule, prize or localization feature is required. The claim requires one or more local jurisdiction requirement and one or more one or more requirements of the gaming establishment. In addition, it is not clear if one or more rules of the asynchronous persistent group game, one or more prizes of the asynchronous persistent group game, and one or more localization features are local jurisdiction requirements or gaming establishment requirements.
Claims 5-6, 8-10 are rejected by dependency. Claims 2-4, 11, 13-20 incorporate similar limitations are rejected for the same reasons as discussed above.
Response to Arguments
35 USC 101
Applicant's arguments filed 2/4/26 with respect the 35 USC 101 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the claims do not recite an abstract idea. Applicant argues that the claims taken as a whole provides specific technical way of achieving a specific result in connection with network servers reestablishing where locator devices are situated on gaming machines.
However, the specification does not describe the locator device to be a specific device to perform the claimed limitations. Applicant’s specification discloses the following. “In one embodiment, a Global Positioning System (GPS), a cellular towers triangulation or trilateration system, a WiMax triangulation or trilateration system, a WiFi triangulation or trilateration system, or some combination of these triangulation and trilateration system may be used. In another embodiment, IP address analysis may be used. In still other embodiments, the location determination device 532a-n may use any known method, system, or device to determine the physical location of each of the plurality of gaming machines 522a-n (some of which may also be gaming machine mobile devices such as smart phones), such as a nearby access point, signal strength analysis, time difference of arrival, or other RF location methods.
The specification describe the locator device to be known devices and known techniques to determine the location. The modification of game operation is performed using a generic computer. The claims do no incorporate specific devices. The claims are not integrated into a practical application. With regards to step 2a1, the claims recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity. The claims recite managing an asynchronous group game based on location data received and modifying the game based on the local jurisdictional requirement and gaming establishment requirement. The claims recite managing or operating an asynchronous persistent group game for a plurality of players. Managing an asynchronous persistent group game is management of a social activity, which is an organization of human activity.
Applicant argues that the claims integrates a practical application and are a technical improvement. Applicant argues that the claims provide a specific technical way of implementing gaming machines having locator devices and modifying the asynchronous persistent group game according to the one or more local jurisdictional requirements and according to the one or more requirements of the gaming establishment, including modifying: one or more rules of the asynchronous persistent group game, one or more prizes of the asynchronous persistent group game, and one or more localization features.
However, as claimed, the modification is a modification of data includes one or more rules, one or more prizes, or one or more localization features. The modification of the game is a management of a game, and therefore an abstract idea of organizing human activity.
Unser step 2B, Applicant states that the features recited in claim 1 are not well understood, routine and conventional. However no specific arguments have been made.
35 USC 112
Applicant refers to paragraphs 75, 79, and 99 for support for the claim limitation. Paragraph 75 discloses that location information is used to enforce local jurisdictional requirements.
Paragraph 79 discloses that that the game can be configured to comply with rules, laws, or regulations of local government jurisdictions, local game rules created by the casino operator, themes created by the game designer, localization features associated with the city, casino brand and the like. There is no description of modifying one or more requirements of the gaming establishment including rules of the asynchronous persistent group game, one or ore prizes, and one or more localization features. The closest to a gaming establishment is a casino operator. However, a casino operator can be an employee (i.e. a technician, dealer, etc.) and not the gaming establishment. Further the specification discloses “local game rules created by the casino operator”. Assuming a casino operator is a gaming establishment, this is a rule and a localization feature. There is no description of one or more prizes. There is no description of one or more, of the listed claim requirements.
Paragraph 99 discloses game rules, game them and localization features (city scape, casino brands). However, there is no description of requirements and requirements of the gaming establishment. There is no description of one or more, of the listed claim requirements.
New rejection under 35 USC 112 1st paragraph has been made to address the amended limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jasson H Yoo whose telephone number is (571)272-5563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Peter Vasat can be reached at 571 270-7625. 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.
/JASSON H YOO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715