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 .
Status of the Application
This Office-Action acknowledges the Request for Continued Examination filed on 6/13/2025 and is a response to said Request.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 5/3/2024 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US Patent 11,055,968 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
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 1-2, 5-10, 12-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 (What is the statutory category?):
Claims 1-2, 5-10, 12-16, and 19-20 are drawn to at least one of the four statutory categories of invention (ie: process, machine, manufacture, or composition).
Step 2A; Prong I (Does the claim recite an abstract idea?):
Claim 1 (and similarly Claims 8 and 15) recites:
A gaming machine, comprising:
a cabinet;
a display device mounted to the cabinet and including graphical user interface (GUI) display screen displaying computer-generated images thereon; and a controller operably coupled to the display device, the controller including a memory device storing computer-executable instructions for displaying animated computer-generated images on the display device, a random number generator, and a processor programmed to execute the computer-executable instructions stored in the memory device to perform an algorithm to display an animated sequence of computer-generated images on the display device GUI including the steps of:
displaying a game screen on the display device GUI including a plurality of reels displayed in a grid;
animating an instance of a primary game by animating the plurality of reels to spin and stop to display an outcome of the primary game;
determining a primary game award as a function of the outcome of the primary game; and
upon detecting a trigger condition appearing in the outcome of the primary game outcome, responsively display a bonus game feature on the game screen by:
determining a number of free plays included in the bonus game feature based on the trigger condition;
randomly selecting a base feature award based on the primary game award using the random number generator;
determining a plurality of feature trigger awards available during the bonus game feature with each feature trigger award being equal to a multiple of the base feature award;
setting each feature trigger award to a different occurrence of a re-triggering condition;
displaying a plurality of feature trigger award images above a top portion of the grid, each feature trigger award image being displayed above a corresponding reel displaying a corresponding feature trigger award;
highlighting an image of a current feature trigger award associated with a next occurrence of the re-triggering condition on the game screen prior to spinning the reels by animating a frame around the current feature trigger award;
animating the plurality of reels to spin and stop to display an instance of the bonus game feature including an appearance of the next occurrence of the re-triggering condition; and
modifying the feature trigger award images displayed on the display device GUI by:
animating an oversized award image of the current feature trigger award overlaying the reels; and
animating the frame to move to an adjacent feature trigger award image.
Claim 8 recites:
A method of operating a gaming machine including a cabinet, a display device mounted to the cabinet and including graphical user interface (GUI) display screen displaying computer-generated images thereon, and a controller including a memory device storing computer-executable instructions for displaying animated computer-generated images on the display device, a random number generator, and a processor operably coupled to the display device, the method including the processor executing the computer-executable instructions stored in the memory device to perform an algorithm to display an animated sequence of computer-generated images on the display device GUI including the steps of:
displaying a game screen on the display device GUI including a plurality of reels displayed in a grid;
animating an instance of a primary game by animating the plurality of reels to spin and stop to display an outcome of the primary game;
determining a primary game award as a function of the outcome of the primary game; and
upon detecting a trigger condition appearing in the outcome of the primary game outcome, responsively display a bonus game feature on the game screen by:
determining a number of free plays included in the bonus game feature based on the trigger condition;
randomly selecting a base feature award based on the primary game award using the random number generator;
determining a plurality of feature trigger awards available during the bonus game feature with each feature trigger award being equal to a multiple of the base feature award;
setting each feature trigger award to a different occurrence of a re-triggering condition;
displaying a plurality of feature trigger award images above a top portion of the grid, each feature trigger award image being displayed above a corresponding reel displaying a corresponding feature trigger award;
highlighting an image of a current feature trigger award associated with a next occurrence of the re-triggering condition on the game screen prior to spinning the reels by animating a frame around the current feature trigger award;
animating the plurality of reels to spin and stop to display an instance of the bonus game feature including an appearance of the next occurrence of the re-triggering condition; and
modifying the feature trigger award images displayed on the display device GUI by:
animating an oversized award image of the current feature trigger award overlaying the reels; and
animating the frame to move to an adjacent feature trigger award image.
Claim 15 recites:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage media having computer-executable instructions embodied thereon to operate a gaming machine including a display device including graphical user interface (GUI) display screen displaying computer- generated images thereon and a controller including a random number generator and a processor operably coupled to the display device, when executed by the processor the computer-executable instructions cause the processor to perform an algorithm to display an animated sequence of computer-generated images on the display device GUI including the steps of:
displaying a game screen on the display device GUI including a plurality of reels displayed in a grid;
animating an instance of a primary game by animating the plurality of reels to spin and stop to display an outcome of the primary game;
determining a primary game award as a function of the outcome of the primary game; and
upon detecting a trigger condition appearing in the outcome of the primary game outcome, responsively display a bonus game feature on the game screen by:
determining a number of free plays included in the bonus game feature based on the trigger condition;
randomly selecting a base feature award based on the primary game award using the random number generator;
determining a plurality of feature trigger awards available during the bonus game feature with each feature trigger award being equal to a multiple of the base feature award;
setting each feature trigger award to a different occurrence of a re-triggering condition;
displaying a plurality of feature trigger award images above a top portion of the grid, each feature trigger award image being displayed above a corresponding reel displaying a corresponding feature trigger award;
highlighting an image of a current feature trigger award associated with a next occurrence of the re-triggering condition on the game screen prior to spinning the reels by animating a frame around the current feature trigger award;
animating the plurality of reels to spin and stop to display an instance of the bonus game feature including an appearance of the next occurrence of the re-triggering condition; and
modifying the feature trigger award images displayed on the display device GUI by:
animating an oversized award image of the current feature trigger award overlaying the reels; and
animating the frame to move to an adjacent feature trigger award image.
[the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite certain method of organizing human activity because they describe managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, (including social activities, and following rules or instructions)]
To further elaborate on the Examiner’s interpretation regarding the claimed invention being directed towards certain methods of organizing human activity, the Examiner believes the invention describes managing interactions between people and machine (ie: a gaming machine) in which rules or instructions for the gaming machine is being implemented.
Step 2A; Prong II (Does the claim recite a practical application?):
The examiner submits that the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea 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 either further define the abstract idea (and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract) or amount to no more than instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer, or use a computer as tool to perform the abstract idea.
The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application for the following reasons. The claim elements of claims 1, 8 and 15 above that are not underlined constitute additional limitations.
The examiner submits that the following additional limitation merely uses a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea: processor, display device, a controller.
The Examiner finds that there are concepts regarding the application simply appends well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality. For example:
Krynicky, US 20050266909, discloses that slot machines are also well known in the art and comprise a row or rows of reels (or simulated reels) having symbols positioned about the face of each reel (paragraph 5);
Falciglia, SR., US 20100203948 discloses that, as is well known, the combinations of reel positions and their odds of hitting are associated with the controller, and the controller is arranged to stop the reels in a position displaying a combination of indicia as determined by the controller based on the combinations and odds (paragraph 142);
Hardy et al., (US 20080146346) teaches that a random number generator is well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art determining outcomes of game play when playing a game (para 186);
Rehill et al., US 10726678 discloses that it is well known to one of ordinary skill in the graphical user interfaces are arranged to display information regarding a program, software application or other element associated with a computing device (Col 22, lines 44-47);
Fujimaki et al., US 20140114890 discloses that it is well known to one of ordinary skill in the art that a computer includes an input device, a central processing unit (CPU), a storage device (for example, a RAM) for storing data, a program memory (for example, a ROM) for storing a program, and an output device (paragraph 50);
Wilson, US 20070099695 discloses that slot machines are popular in casinos and other gaming establishments and that a typical slot machine has a number of (physical or animated) reels which spin during play and stop to display a pattern of symbols on one or more payout lines. Certain symbol patterns are "winners" resulting in a payout to the player (paragraph 2);
Cockrell, Jr., US 20070057464, discloses that computer systems for implementing games can be suitable general-purpose computers having a processor and memory and are well known to one of ordinary skill in the art (paragraph 69);
Geisner, US 20080242421, discloses processors can be general purpose processor for implementing online games and are well known to one of ordinary skill in the art (paragraph 24, 34, 52);
Wilson, US 20050277457, discloses that it is readily understood that the video games are normally computer controlled, and that the game-logic electronic circuitry for implementing the method for playing such a video game in a machine is well known and available to one skilled in the art (paragraph 28);
Reeves et al., US 20160063799 discloses that graphical user interfaces (GUIs) are arranged to display information regarding a program, software application or other element associated with a computing device and are well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art (paragraph 82);
Walker et al., US 20080039190 discloses that graphical user interfaces, including graphical buttons provided via touch screens, menus, etc., are well known in the art (paragraph 101);
Saffari, US 20030050111, discloses a conventional gaming machine (system) comprising an input device used to play a game, processor to implement the game, memory device, and/or display are used to allow a player to play a game to a determined outcome (paragraph 2);
Tempest et al., US 20050056995, discloses that technology that is well-known in the art, include a random number generator for determining an outcome of a game (paragraph 21)
Michaelson et al., US 20040166922, discloses that procedures for generating random numbers from a given random number seed and utilizing the generated random numbers to determine a game outcome are well known in the art (paragraph 68).
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Looking at the limitations 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; there is no additional element that applies or uses 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; the additional elements merely recite the words ‘‘apply it’’ (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; the additional elements do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Step 2B (Are there additional elements that are “something more” than an abstract idea?):
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea 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.
Dependent claims 2, 5-7, 9, 12-14 16, and 19-20 merely include limitations that either further define the abstract idea (and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract) or amount to no more than generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use because they’re merely incidental or token additions to the claims that do not alter or affect how the process steps are performed. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Looking at the limitations 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/7/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant presented arguments with regard to “Subject Matter Eligibility Example 37 - Relocation of Icons on a Graphical User Interface” (starting near bottom of page 10 to middle off page 11)
The Examiner disagrees. Displaying an abstract idea pertaining implementing a wagering game in which game rules are carried out is interpreted as merely a generic function of GUI pertaining to interactions between a person and a computer. In this case, the Examiner believes the invention describe managing interactions between people and machine (ie: a gaming machine) in which rules or instructions for the gaming machine is being implemented (ie: determining a subtotal of first/second game symbols, and based on if the first/second symbols are adjacent one another, increasing the subtotal to a second subtotal). Unlike the icon position change to facilitate the operation of user in "Example 37 Relocation of Icons on a Graphical User Interface", the GUI in instant application does not include any specific design to improve any technology aspect.
Furthermore, the ordinary usage of GUI is an interface that changes as the user interacts with it. For example, this Office action is drafted on Microsoft Word, which has a GUI. As the mouse button is clicked on a virtual “button” of the GUI (such as “Save’), the GUI changes to reflect that input. When the save operation is complete, a message is automatically generated to indicate such. As keys on the keyboard are pressed, the GUI also reflects this change. There is no factual evidence on the record to say that one of ordinary skill would consider pressing any of these buttons to modify the GUI to another type of GUI.
Similarly, there is no factual basis to show that a user participating in game play would consider moving from one operation to another through the progression of the game play would consider each progression to change the GUI. The more reasonable interpretation would be that it is the same GUI that is operating throughout the game. Nevertheless, Applicant asserts that the GUI features are more than a nominal recitation of a computer in carrying out an abstract idea and that they represent a technical improvement. Therefore, Example 37 does not relate to the current claims and the 101 rejection is maintained.
Applicant presented arguments with regard to “MPEP 2106.04 Eligibility Step 2A: Whether a Claim is Directed to a Judicial Exception” (starting near middle to the bottom of page 11).
The Examiner disagrees and believes that the claimed invention continues to be directed towards an abstract idea. With regard to the rearranging of icons on a graphical user interface, the Examiner believes that the GUI of the claimed invention is dissimilar to the GUI provided in the example. In this case, the generating and displaying game play is interpreted (ie: GUI) is interpreted as utilizing general-purpose computer components for implementing game play (ie: game rules). Furthermore, the Examiner believes the graphical user interface being presented for display as described by the applicant is dissimilar to the MPEP’s example of a graphical user interface being presented for display and therefore fail eligibility.
Applicant presented arguments with regard to “MPEP 2106.05 Eligibility Step 2B: Whether a Claim Amounts to Significantly More” (starting at top of page 12 to page 13).
The Examiner disagrees and does not believe the additional elements disclosed within the claimed invention demonstrate the claim as a whole to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor provide an improvement to the functioning of a computer or improves another technology or technical field. Reiterating from the response to arguments previously before. The Examiner believes that the abstract ideas set forth are not considered improvements to computer functionality and other existing technology. Instead, the claimed invention is merely displaying a GUI via a display device an abstract idea of generating a game with computer-generated images including a plurality of reels displayed in a grid in which game rules are being carried out for animating a determined feature trigger award. Furthermore, based upon the applicant’s specification, there appears to be no disclosure within the specification that there is a technological problem in which the claimed invention is a technological solution, let alone any disclosure that such a technological solution would be result in an improvement to computer functionality and other existing technology.
With regards to the Examiner indicating the claimed invention being novel and non-obvious over prior art, the examination process under USC § 102/103 differs from the examination process under USC § 101. In this case, even if there is no prior art rejection, this does not necessarily mean the claimed invention overcomes USC § 101.
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 JEFFREY WONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3003. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5pm.
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, Kang Hu can be reached on (571) 270-1344. 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.
/JEFFREY K WONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3715