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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Yoshida, in para. [0027], describes “the utterance or physical movement” excludes any “operations of the player ,” and would therefore exclude the claimed “operation by the ... player to move the ... game card to a ... predetermined area” or “operation by the ... player to turn the ... game card.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. The cited paragraph does not exclude operations of the player from the physical movement. Yoshida stated in para. [0027] that: “The behavior of the player PL influences the progress of the game, and includes an operation of arranging the card(s) C in the game field GF, and an action different from the card arranging operation. The action includes physical movements such as player PL gestures, or utterances. In other words, in this specification, the term "behavior" in the game is a term that represents a concept including an operation of arranging a game medium and an action different from the game medium arranging operation, and the term "action" is a term that represents a concept including "movements" and "utterances" of a player.”
In the context of the Yoshida, "utterance" refers to verbal statements, sentences, words, or sounds spoken by players during gameplay, such as declaring a phase change or activating a card effect. These are captured via microphones as audio data and analyzed by the system's utterance identification unit to help determine game progress, especially when physical card operations alone are insufficient (e.g., for implicit agreements or skipping phases).
This differs from "player operation on the cards," which involves physical actions or manipulations, such as arranging, placing, moving, turning, or gesturing toward cards in the game field (e.g., pointing with a finger to designate an attack target). These operations are detected through image analysis from cameras, focusing on visual movements rather than speech. While both contribute to identifying game states, utterances are auditory and optional (e.g., for verbal confirmations), whereas card operations are tangible interactions directly affecting the physical layout of the game.
In para [0033], Yoshida describes the movement identification unit (15) analyzing images from player cameras (2B, 2C) or the field camera (2A) to identify player movements, such as hand or finger motions, including pointing to specific positions on the game field (e.g., designating attack targets or interacting with cards). Therefore, Yoshida teaches the claimed limitation of determining the operation to the game card by the player’s movement.
Applicant further argues that Yoshida is not configured to “use the artificial intelligence to perform image recognition on” as required by claim 1. Examiner respectfully disagrees, it is implicit that Yoshida utilizes artificial intelligence for processing recorded images or videos to identify player operations on cards. Yoshida describes using "image analysis" and "various techniques used for motion identification" in the movement identification unit to recognize player movements, such as hand or finger gestures (e.g., pointing to card positions), which suggests advanced computational methods commonly associated with AI even though the terms like "AI," "machine learning," or "neural networks" are not directly stated. It is also inherent to a degree, given the complexity of reliably identifying variable player operations (e.g., gesturing or manipulating cards) from video data in a dynamic game environment - this necessarily implies AI-like pattern recognition, as simpler non-AI methods (e.g., basic edge detection) would likely be insufficient for accurate, real-time results without additional undisclosed enhancements. Furthermore, Hsu was provided in the previous office action as supporting evidence of explicitly utilizing AI for image analysis.
Applicant argues that the identification in Yoshida is indirect and merely though the image recognition of differences in card states. Examiner respectfully disagree. Please refer to the identification of player operation as previously discussed above.
Applicant argues that Yoshida fails to disclose utilizing artificial intelligence in any image recognition and Hsu merely describes the application of machine learning for “card recognition”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Please refer to the use of the artificial intelligence to perform image recognition as previously discussed above. Hsu was simply provided in the previous office action as supporting evidence of explicitly utilizing AI for image analysis.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 9-12, 14, 18-27 & 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoshida (US 2020/0376364 A1) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yoshida (US 2020/0376364 A1) in view of Hsu (US 2020/0346118 A1).
1. Yoshida discloses a card game matchup system for use with a card game, the card game matchup system comprising:
a first image acquiring portion configured to acquire a first image obtained by imaging a first field that includes a first game card of a first player to play the card game (Fig. 3), [0028];
a second image acquiring portion configured to acquire a second image obtained by imaging a second field that includes a second game card of a second player to play the card game (Fig. 3), [0028];
a first game state recognizing portion configured to use an artificial intelligence trained to perform image recognition to recognize a first game state including a state of the first game card in the first field and an operation by the first player on the first game card in the first field (i.e. the card placing spots CP are provided separately in a first area AR1 which is used/operated by a first player P1), (Fig. 1), [0020], [0031]-[0032], [0042];
a second game state recognizing portion configured to use the artificial intelligence trained to perform image recognition to recognize a second game state including a state of the game card in the second field and an operation by the second player on the second game card in the second field (i.e. the card placing spots CP are provided separately in a second area AR2 which is used/operated by a second player P2), (Fig. 1), [0020], [0031]-[0032], [0042]; and
a judging portion configured to judge a state of the card game in accordance with a rule of the card game based on the first game state and the second game state [0021], [0049],
wherein the first game state recognizing portion is configured to use the artificial intelligence to perform image recognition on the operation of the first player on the first game card in the first image to recognize operations by the first player comprising at least one of touching the first game card, moving the first game card to a first predetermined area, and turning the first game card, and wherein the second game state recognizing portion is configured to use the artificial intelligence to perform image recognition on the operation of the second player on the second game card in the second image to recognize operations by the second player comprising at least one of touching the second game card, moving the second game card to a second predetermined area, and turning the second game card (i.e. since the card placing spots CP are provided separately in a first area AR1 which is used/operated by a first player P1 and a second area AR2 which is used/operated by a second player P2, the system would recognize which of the first player and the second player placed the respective game cards in their respective spots), [0020] and (i.e. the progress status can determine/recognize the action/movement/operation of the cards by the player when it is appropriate for the player to perform such actions), [0021], [0023], [0027], [0034]-[0036]. More specifically, in paragraphs [0021] and [0027], Yoshida states “It should be noted that the operation of arranging the cards C is a concept that is not limited to the operation of placing the cards C, which are picked up from the cards C in the player's hands or the deck DC, in the game field OF, but also includes an operation of changing the position(s) of the card(s) C already placed in the game field GF or an operation of changing the direction (s) of the card(s). That is, various operations that change the arrangement of the cards C in the game field GF may be included in the concept of the operation of placing the cards…The behavior of the player PL influences the progress of the game, and includes an operation of arranging the card(s) C in the game field GF, and an action different from the card arranging operation.” Furthermore, since the system uses captured images from the camera to analyze the cards by the player operations [0031]-[0032], a person of ordinary skilled in the art would recognize that such feature is performed by some form of artificial intelligence that has to be trained to recognize such operation.
Alternatively, as a evidence, Hsu discloses the well known technique of utilizing machine learning/artificial intelligence that is trained to recognize the captured images [0138]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to modify Yoshida with Hsu and would have been motivated to do so to help improve image recognition techniques.
3. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein: the first image acquiring portion is configured to receive the first image through a communication network, and the second image acquiring portion is configured to receive the second image through a communication network [0049], [0051].
4. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein: the first image acquiring portion is configured to acquire, as the first image, a plurality of first images imaged continuously while the card game is being played, and the second image acquiring portion is configured to acquire, as the second image, a plurality of second images imaged continuously while the card game is being played [0031].
5. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 4, wherein: the first game state recognizing portion is configured to perform the image recognition on each of the plurality of first images to recognize, as the first game state, an operation by the first player on the first game card in the first field based on a change of the first game card in the first field, and the second game state recognizing portion is configured to perform the image recognition on each of the plurality of second images to recognize, as the second game state, an operation by the second player on the second game card in the second field based on a change of the game card in the second field [0031]-[0032], [0042].
6. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 4, wherein: the first game state recognizing portion is configured to perform motion recognition on the plurality of first images to recognize the first game state, and the second game state recognizing portion is configured to perform motion recognition on the plurality of second images to recognize the second game state [0023], [0027], [0034].
7. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 2, wherein: the first game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize the first game state in accordance with the rule of the card game based on the first game card in the first field, the operation by the first player on the first game card in the first field, or a combination thereof, and the second game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize the second game state in accordance with the rule of the card game based on the second game card in the second field, the operation by the second player on the game card in the second field, or a combination thereof [0020].
9. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein the judging portion is configured to judge a matchup situation of the card game as the state of the card game in accordance with the rule of the card game based on the first game state and the second game state [0032], [0036].
10. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein the judging portion is configured to calculate a first score of the first player and a second score of the second player as the state of the card game in accordance with the rule of the card game based on the first game state and the second game state [0021].
11. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein the judging portion is configured to judge a win and a loss of the card game as the state of the card game in accordance with the rule of the card game based on the first game state and the second game state [0049].
12. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein: the first game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize, as the first game state, the first game card operated by the first player and a type of operation on the first game card by the first player, and the second game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize, as the second game state, the second game card operated by the second player and a type of operation on the second game card by the second player [0023], [0027], [0034].
14. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 12, wherein: the first game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize an operation by the first player to change an orientation of the first game card, and the second game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize an operation by the second player to change an orientation of the second game card [0023], [0027], [0034].
18. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 2, wherein the first game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize a type of operation by the first player based on a hand of the first player, a state of the first game card before the operation and a state of the first game card after the operation, or a combination thereof [0023], [0027], [0034].
19. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 12, wherein: the card game is a turn-based game, and the judging portion is configured to recognize an end of a turn of the first player in accordance with the rule of the card game based on the first game state, and recognize an end of a turn of the second player in accordance with the rule of the card game based on the second game state [0022]-[0024].
20. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, further comprising: a first turn switching instructing portion configured to receiving a first instruction from the first player, the first instruction associated with a switch of a turn; and a second turn switching instructing portion configured to receiving a second instruction from the second player, the second instruction associated with a switch of a turn, and wherein the judging portion is configured to switch the turn in response to the first instruction to the first turn switching instructing portion or the second instruction to the second turn switching instructing portion [0022]-[0024].
21. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein: the card game is a turn-based game, the first game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize a content of the first game card in the first field as a state of the first game card in the first field, the second game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize a content of the second game card in the second field as a state of the second game card in the second field, and the judging portion is configured to switch a turn based on the content of the first game card in the first field, the content of the second game card in the second field, and an operation to draw the game card [0022]-[0024].
22. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein: the first game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize, for each of a first plurality of game cards, a type of area on which the game card of is located based on a relative positional relation of the first plurality of game cards in the first field, a content of the game card in the first field, or a combination thereof, and the second game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize, for each of a second plurality of game cards, a type of area on which the game card is located based on a relative positional relation of the second plurality of game cards in the second field, a content of the game card in the second field, or a combination thereof [0031]-[0032], [0042].
23. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein: the first game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize a content of the first game card in the first field as a state of the first game card in the first field, the second game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize a content of the second game card in the second field as a state of the second game card in the second field, and the judging portion is configured to recognize, based on the content of the first game card in the first field and the content of the second game card in the second field, as the state of the card game: a target to which the first game card in the first field affects, and a target to which the second game card in the second field affects [0031]-[0032], [0042].
24. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein: the first game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize, as a state of the first game card in the first field, a content of the first game card in the first field, the second game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize, as a state of the second game card in the second field, a content of the game card in the second field, and the judging portion is configured to provide the first player and the second player with an option in the card game based on the content of the first game card in the first field and the content of the second game card in the second field [0031]-[0032], [0042].
25. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein the judging portion is configured to further generate guide information based on the state of the card game [0037].
26. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, wherein the first image acquiring portion is configured to acquire a first player image by imaging the first player; and the second image acquiring portion is configured to acquire a second player image by imaging the second player, the first game state recognizing portion is configured to use the artificial intelligence to perform image recognition on the first player image to recognize a motion of the first player, the second game state recognizing portion is configured to use the artificial intelligence to perform image recognition on the second player image to recognize a motion of the second player, and the judging portion is configured to judge the state of the card game based on the motion of the first player and the motion of the second player [0033].
27. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, further comprising an image information generating portion configured to generate judgment screen information to indicate a judging result by the judging portion [0029].
29. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, further comprising a recording device configured to record a log of the card game [0030]-[0031].
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 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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (US 2020/0376364 A1) as applied above and further in view of Blair (US 11,600,263 B1).
8. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, but does not expressly disclose wherein the judging portion is configured to judge a violation of the rule of the card game as the state of the card game in accordance with the rule of the card game based on the first game state and the second game state. Blair discloses wherein the judging portion is configured to judge a violation of the rule of the card game as the state of the card game in accordance with the rule of the card game based on the first game state and the second game state (col. 65, lines 4-22). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to modify Yoshida with Blair and would have been motivated to do so to help players play the game in accordance with the game rules.
Claim(s) 15 & 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (US 2020/0376364 A1) as applied above and further in view of Kaji (US 2007/0275782 A1).
15. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 12, but does not expressly disclose wherein the first game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize an operation by the first player to overlap the game card operated by the first player, and the second game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize an operation by the second player to overlap the game card operated by the second player. Kaji discloses wherein the first game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize an operation by the first player to overlap the game card operated by the first player, and the second game state recognizing portion is configured to recognize an operation by the second player to overlap the game card operated by the second player [0220]-[0222]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to modify Yoshida with Kaji and would have been motivated to do so to be able to detect any overlapping cards.
28. Yoshida discloses the card game matchup system according to claim 1, but does not disclose a third image acquiring portion configured to acquire a third image obtained by imaging a third field that includes a third game card of a third player to play the card game; and a third game state recognizing portion configured to use the artificial intelligence to perform image recognition on the third image to recognize a third game state including a state of the third game card in the third field, wherein the judging portion is configured to further judge the state of the card game based on the third game state. Kaji discloses a third image acquiring portion configured to acquire a third image obtained by imaging a third field that includes a third game card of a third player to play the card game; and a third game state recognizing portion configured to use the artificial intelligence to perform image recognition on the third image to recognize a third game state including a state of the third game card in the third field, wherein the judging portion is configured to further judge the state of the card game based on the third game state (Fig. 1), [0147], [0155]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to modify Yoshida with Kaji and would have been motivated to do so to allow playing of a game with more than two players.
Filing of New or Amended Claims
The examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the original disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims. See Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 263, 191 USPQ at 97 (“[T]he PTO has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasons why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims.”). However, when filing an amendment an applicant should show support in the original disclosure for new or amended claims. See MPEP § 714.02 and § 2163.06 (“Applicant should specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure.”). Please see MPEP 2163 (II) 3. (b)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SENG H LIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3301. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5).
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, David L. Lewis can be reached at (571) 272-7673. 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.
/Seng H Lim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715