DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 6, 12 and 13 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.
Regarding claim 6, “the open tops” lacks a proper antecedent basis; claim 1 recites “open upper ends” instead.
In claim 12, line 2, “the out-of-play and in-play positions” lacks a proper antecedent bases. For the purposes of applying the prior art, it is assumed that claim 12 depends from claim 11.
Claim 13 is rejected because it depends from a rejected claim 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Number 6,513,807 (Lynch).
Regarding claim 16, Lynch describes the releasing visually distinguishable sets of tokens 250,252 by different players onto a game board having a vertically extending playing zone 30 and through an array of bumpers 50 that are considered to deflect the tokens 250,252 in a randomized movement. The tokens 250,252 are further collected in a side-by-side chutes 60 which are located below bumpers 50. See Lynch, column 9, line 17 to column 10, line 10. Also, see Figures 18-22 of Lynch. Further, Lynch discloses a method of play wherein a player can fill a primary target with balls corresponding to that player. See Lynch, bridging paragraph between columns 9-10. An entirely filled target is considered to correspond to the recited playing pieces located in a line.
Regarding claim 20, the Lynch balls fall through the playing zone via gravity.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5, 7-11, 14 and 15 are allowed.
Claims 12 and 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 17-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not anticipate, nor make obvious, a game system having the array of offset rows of bumpers; and chutes in combination with two or more visually distinguishable sets of playing tokens wherein the number of chutes is greater than the maximum number of playing tokens that can be received in the chutes; the prior art also does not anticipate, nor make obvious, the method of nudging of a stuck playing token or releasing the playing tokens until another line prescribed playing tokens is formed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Raleigh Chiu whose telephone number is (571) 272-4408. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Tuesday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eugene Kim, can be reached on (571) 272-4463.
The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
It is noted that all practice before the Office is in writing (see 37 C.F.R. § 1.2) and the proper authority for action on any matter in this regard are the statutes (35 U.S.C.), regulations (37 C.F.R.) and the commentary on policy (MPEP). Therefore, no telephone discussion may be controlling or considered authority of Petitioner’s/Caller’s action(s).
/RALEIGH W CHIU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711