Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Status of the Application
This Office-Action acknowledges the Amendment filed on 4/29/2025 and is a response to said Amendment.
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.
Claim 2-13 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.
Independent Claim 2 discloses “wherein offering comprises: continuously receiving, from an event server, live statistical data based on a performance of the plurality of real-life players in the first team and the second team during the event; and offering the buyout option, based on the live statistical data” on lines 56-60.
Independent Claim 8 discloses “continuously receiving, from an event server, live statistical data based on a performance of the plurality of real-life players in the first team and the second team during the event; and offering the buyout option, based on the live statistical data” on lines 55-58.
There appears to be no disclosure within the specification that supports such limitations. The Examiner found some disclosure within the specification that disclose of “a buyout option” and had indicated it below.
[0012] A.8. The method of claim A, in which the game includes a fantasy game that is based on a real-life tournament, in which players in the tournament are dropped from the tournament as the tournament progresses and are not replaced in the fantasy game that is based on the tournament so that some members of each fantasy team in the game do not earn points after elimination from the tournament. A.9. The method of claim A, comprising: during play of first game, facilitating the first player offering a buyout of the game to the second player. A.9.1. The method of claim A.9, comprising: receiving, from the first player, an indication of an amount of money that the second player will be awarded if the second player accepts the buyout; and presenting that amount to the second player in an offer to end the game. A.9.1.1. The method of claim A.9.1, comprising: receiving an acceptance of the offer; and in response to receiving the acceptance, awarding the amount of money to the second player, and awarding a second amount of money to the first player, in which the second amount of money includes an amount of money in a prize pool for the game minus the amount of money. A.10. The method of claim A, comprising: presenting the first player
with an option to offer a doubling raise of the game to the second player prior to a start of the game. A.11. The method of claim A, comprising: receiving from at least one of the first player and the second player a selection of a statistic related to a real event that is to be used to score the game. A.12. The method of claim A, in which the first player accesses the game through a gaming operator that determines outcomes for the game and the second player access the game through a service provider that provides at least one of a white-labeled access to the game and an over-the-counter access to the game.
[0134] The offered player may respond to such an offer through a user interface of a computing device. For example, the offered player may accept, reject, and/or ignore the offer. If the player rejects and/or ignores the offer, the game may continue as if the offer was not made. If the player accepts the offer, the offered player may be awarded the amount of money offered and the game may end. Such an offer and ending of a game may be referred to as a buyout.
[0136] Some embodiments may include a negotiation between players to resolve a surrender or buyout option. For example, a first player may offer a second player a buyout. The second player may respond with a counteroffer through a gaming operator interface. A back-and-forth counter offering process may proceed with any number of rounds as a game progresses. Offers may change to reflect changing circumstances of a game. In some embodiments, each player may enter an amount that they would accept as a buyout and/or offer as a buyout as the game progresses. Such amounts may or may not be shown to opposing players. In some embodiments, if the amounts ever match and/or an agreement is ever reached, a game may end with the matched buyout occurring. In some embodiments, a player may cancel and/or alter an offer that is made before it is accepted and/or after some amount of time after it is made.
While there is disclosure with regard to a buyout option, the Examiner believes the specification fails to fully support the claimed invention as disclosed in the claim language.
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 2-13 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?):
Claim 2-7 recite a system, whereas Claims 8-13 recite a series of steps. In this case, both are directed towards the abstract idea of implementing a fantasy sports game. Thus, these claims are directed to a process and a machine respectively, which are statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A; Prong I (Does the claim recite an abstract idea?):
Claim 2, and similarly Claim 8 recite:
at least one processor configured to control:
receiving, over a communication network, first and second location determination signals respectively from first and second mobile computing devices of first and second users, the first and second location determination signals defined by a geofence that covers a predetermined geographic region connected to a specific Wi-Fi network; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: “John and Joe are both at the park”]
determining, based on continuous monitoring of the first and second location determination signals, whether an amount of time spent by the first and second users within the predetermined geographic region is more than a predetermined threshold amount of time; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: John and Joe were both at the park for 15 minutes.]
determining the first user and the second user are in a group of users, in which given users in the group of users are associated with one another, the group of users is of a plurality of users and the plurality of users includes the first user and the second user, when the amount of time spent by the first and second users within the predetermined geographic region is determined to be more than the predetermined threshold amount of time; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: John and Joe were both at the park for 15 minutes and are therefore grouped together.]
determining an expected number of points for each real-life player of a plurality of real-life players; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: An individual can observe a game played by real-life players, and based upon observations (and the performance of the real-life player), the individual can ascertain a point score based on the real-life player. Such as a score of 6 for a real-life player scoring a touchdown during a game.
rendering, over the communication network, on an interface of at least one computing device of at least one of the users of the group of users, team selection information excluding real-life players among the plurality of real-life players for selection for first and second teams such that a number of common real-life players selectable for the first and second teams does not exceed a threshold, wherein the excluded real-life players, which are excluded for selection for each of the first and second teams, include real-players that are selected for the other of the first and second teams; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: Both Joe and John are presented with a list of athletes from which they can choose, the choice selection excluding real-players that had been selected for the other of the first and second team, so that they can create their respective fantasy team rosters so long as there such that the number of common players selectable does not exceed a threshold.]
receiving, over the communication network, from the at least one computing device, selected real-life player information indicating real-life players selected from the team selection information that form the first and second teams including a number of common real-life players not exceeding the threshold; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: Both Joe and John are selected from them a list of athletes so that they can create their respective fantasy team rosters.]
based on the first user and the second user being included in the group of users, rendering, over the communication network, on a first user interface of the first mobile computing device and a second user interface of the second mobile computing device, information enabling entry of one or more wager parameters for an event involving the first and second teams; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: John and Joe are able to make wagers for an event involving their respective fantasy teams.]
receiving, over the communication network, a first wager for the event from the first mobile computing device; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: John can make a wager on the event.
receiving, over the communication network, a second wager for the event from the second mobile computing device; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: Joe can make a wager on the event.
based on the first user and the second user being included in the group of users and in response to receiving the first wager and the second wager, pooling the first wager and the second wager into a pari-mutuel pool defined by the event and the group of users; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: based on the wagers made by John and Joe, their wagers are pooled into a pari-mutuel pool defined by the event and the group in which John and Joe belong.]
based on the first wager, the second wager and a plurality of additional wagers on the event from members of the group and expected number of points for each real-life player of the first team and each real-life player of the second team, determining odds for the first wager and second wagers; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: Based on John’s and Joe’s and additional wagers on the event from other members of the group in which John and Joe belong, a determination can be made on the odds for both wagers.]
in response to determining the odds for the first wager, rendering, over the communication network, on the first user interface the odds for the first wager; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: Based on the determined odds, John can be presented with odds on his wager.]
in response to determining odds for the second wager, rendering, over the communication network, on the second user interface the odds for the second wager; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: Based on the determined odds, Joe can be presented with odds on his wager.]
as the event progresses, offering, over the communication network, one of the first user interface and the second user interface, a buyout option to end the event early and providing a plurality of rounds of back-and-forth negotiations over the first user interface and the second user interface to resolve the buyout option, in which the buyout option reflects changes circumstances of the event and indicates a current state of the event, wherein offering comprises: continuously receiving, from an event server, live statistical data based on a performance of the plurality of real-life players in the first team and the second team during the event; and offering the buyout option, based on the live statistical data; [the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) certain method of organizing human activity because they describe commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations) and/or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, (including social activities, and following rules or instructions)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: as the event takes place, a buyout to end the event early is offered. If the buyout option is rejected, a counter offer can be made. With regard to the buyout offer being offered, it could be offered as a result of receiving statistical data based on a performance of players in both teams during the event. The receiving in real-time could be verbally communicated. Furthermore, the offering of a buyout can also be interpreted as being directed towards commercial or legal interactions since a buyout could include agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations.]
responsive to an indication that the buyout option is accepted from one of the first user interface and the second user interface, terminating the event at the one of the first user interface and the second user interface
[the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: as the event takes place, a buyout to end the event early is offered. If the buyout option accepted, the event associated with it is therefore terminated]
rendering, over the communication network, on the first and second user interfaces an outcome based on at least one of the first wager, the second wager or a response to the buyout option.
[the examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite a) mental process because it can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) b) 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)]. It should be noted that the limitation can be carried out manually without the aid of computer-based components. Ex: Outcomes on the John’s and Joe’s wagers or in response to the buyout option can be presented.]
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. 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.
The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application for the following reasons. The claim elements of claim 1 and 8 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: at least one processor, communication network, first and second mobile computing device.
It should be noted that the applicant’s disclosure regarding “receiving, over a communication network, first and second location determination signals respectively from first and second mobile computing devices of first and second users, the first and second location determination signals defined by a geofence that covers a predetermined geographic region connected to a specific Wi-Fi network”, the examiner finds that the use of the geofencing simply appends well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality. In support of this finding, the examiner refers, Sydir et al., US 20140171099 (Sydier) which discloses geo-fencing is conventional and well-known as well as disclosing that conventional location-determination approaches include GPS and Wi-Fi and cellular signal positioning (e.g., triangulation, trilateration, and other forms of interpolation and extrapolation) to determine geo-physical location relative to multiple signal sources. GPS provides near-ubiquitous location coverage outdoors and a GPS enabled typical smartphone can estimate its location with three to five meter accuracy. For signal positioning, the signal sources can use cellular or a variant of IEEE 802.11 (i.e., Wi-Fi). Signal-positioning approaches rely upon a map of signal sources whose locations are known to infer a location of a device (para 4, 13, 17).
Furthermore, regarding “determining an expected number of points for each real-life player of a plurality of real-life players”, the examiner finds that the use of limitation simply appends well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality. In support of this finding, the examiner refers, Morris et al., US 20060183548 (Morris), which discloses that in typical fantasy games, such as fantasy football, points are awarded to a fantasy player for touchdowns, field goals, passes thrown, yards gained, etc., based on the performance of the fantasy player's real-world counterpart on a selected play date. The points for each fantasy player on the fantasy team are totaled, and the total scores for each fantasy team are compared with each other to determine the fantasy league winner (para 4).
The Examiner would also like to point out that Carson et al., US 20140121013 discloses that users in a typical fantasy sports league receive scores for their fantasy sports teams based on the real-life performance of the athletes on the users' virtual teams during the season. Scoring varies among the different fantasy sports leagues but is generally a function of the real-world statistics of the athletes composing a user's virtual team (para 6).
The examiner submits that the following additional limitation merely generally links the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use: fantasy sports wagering. This is especially noticeable when Claim 7 and 13 are taken into consideration.
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 3-7 and 9-13 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 4/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states: Applicant respectfully submits that the subject matter is integrated into a practical application of an abstract idea, which, in one example, provides an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field.
Claims 2 and 8 do not merely recite performance of the allegedly abstract idea on a generic computer. Rather, the claims detail a particular manner of using a computer network and data processing system to solve a specific problem in the realm of interactive networked gaming by:
"continuously receiving, from an event server, live statistical data based on a performance of the plurality of real-life players in the first team and the second team during the event, and
offering the buyout option, based on the live statistical data"
(claim 2, see also claim 8).
The foregoing addresses a specific technological problem - the inability to integrate event progress with offering odds reflecting the event progress. Claims 2 and 8 provide a specific non-generic computer architecture that includes a dedicated resource (the event server) that receives live and trusted statistical data. The buyout is a functional feature of the platform that is specifically tied to the recited computer architecture.
Accordingly, claims 2 and 8 provide a technical solution (a specific non-generic computer architecture) to a technical problem (calculating odds based on live event progress)
Accordingly, for at least the foregoing reasons, Applicant respectfully submits that claims 2 and 8, as well as claims 3-7 and 9-13 are integrated into a practical application under Step 2A, Prong 2.
Under Step 2B, inquiry is made whether the claims add "significantly more" to the alleged abstract idea. While this inquiry is moot because the claims are integrated into a practical application under Step 2A, Prong 2, Applicant does not concede that the claims do not add "significantly more" and reserves the right to argue this issue, should it become necessary. (page 9)
The Examiner disagrees and believes the newly added limitation merely implemented general-purpose computer components for performing the abstract idea of “integrat[ing] event progress with offering odds reflecting the event progress”, all of which could be directed towards a mental process and/or method of organizing human activity (ie: observation or evaluation, which is grouped as a mental process and managing player behavior, which is grouped as a certain methods of organizing human activity under the 2019 PEG and a fundamental economic practice (e.g., rules for conducting a game) as discussed in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, In re Smith (Fed. Cir. 2016), and In re Marco Guldenaar (Fed. Cir. 2018)).
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 KEITH 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