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 § 103
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:
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.
Claims 1, 9-11, 14, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowers (US 2011/0212766) in view of Detwiller (US 2011/0173587).
Claim 1. Bowers discloses a skill-based amusement system (Fig. 2), comprising:
a display (110 in Fig. 1);
at least one player station (160 in Fig. 1) having one or more player controls configured to control one or more selected actions for play of a skill-based game presented on the display (keys, buttons joystick, or other input, paragraph 84),
a control system in communication with the at least one player station (server 150 in Fig. 1, 250 in Fig. 2), the control system including a memory and one or more processors configured to execute a plurality of instructions stored in the memory to (paragraphs 12, 47-48, 53, 56, 137):
present a plurality of targets on a playfield shown on the display based on selected instructions stored in the memory (Skill game can be a shooting game with targets; paragraph 60;
receive one or more game play inputs from the one or more player controls of the at least one player station, and directing one or more objects across the playfield in a movement responsive to the one or more game play inputs (Player would manipulate a shotting device as the game controller element to direct projectiles toward one or more targets; paragraph 60); and
wherein a player at the at least one player station are enabled to use strategy or skill to direct objects at one or more targets of the plurality of targets to achieve a return to the player greater than 100% of a play amount or level input by the player upon capturing at least one engaged target of the one or more targets in accordance with game rules or instructions associated with the at least one engaged target (Although the
difficulty can be changed to increase the average payout, a skilled player may win more than 100% of the money that the player spent on the machine, paragraphs 46, 61).
Bowers discloses the claimed invention as discussed above but fails to teach that the targets move along a path and the plurality of targets comprises a series of different targets, each moving in a non-randomized movement along a substantially identifiable path or trajectory; and wherein, responsive to a target responsive to a target being engaged by the one or more objects, the engaged target is moved along a secondary. non-random predictable path that is recognizable or independent from the substantially identifiable path or trajectory, and wherein responsive to the engaged target being engaged by one or more additional objects, the engaged target is moved along an additional, non-random, predictable path or returned to the substantially identifiable path or trajectory. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. In an analogous art to gaming systems, Detwiller discloses a system for developing games. Detwiller discloses a skill based shotting game can be develop comprising a plurality of different targets (enemy actors, paragraph 111; particular ship such as mother ship or smaller ships; paragraphs 174, 177). Detwiller discloses that the path in which the target moves can be defined or set and therefore non-random (path; paragraph 111; set defined path, paragraph 183). This allows the difficulty to remain the same according to the game level. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Bower’s invention and incorporate a plurality of different targets each moving in a non-randomized movement along a substantially identifiable path or trajectory in order to provide the predictable result of providing the same difficulty for a game level.
It is noted that the claim recites, “recognizable or independent form the substantially identifiable path or trajectory” and “the engaged target is moved along an additional, non-random, predictable path or returned to the substantially identifiable path or trajectory”. Detwiller discloses that the target comprises Hit Points and armor and attack damage removes the Hit Points (paragraphs 131-132, 137) and therefore requires multiple engagement by the one or more objects until the Hit Points reaches 0 (paragraph 173). As indicated above, Detwiller discloses that the path in which the target moves can be defined or set and therefore non-random (path; paragraph 111; set defined path, paragraph 183). Therefore, the path is recognizable (as in, recognizable to be the same) from the substantially identifiable path or trajectory.
Claim 9. Bowers discloses the skill-based amusement system of claim 1, wherein the one or more player controls of the at least one player station comprise a series of buttons assignable to one of a series of game play actions, and a magnetic joy stick configured to facilitate directing of the one or more objects about the playfield (a button, a keyboard, a joystick, etc., paragraph 48).
Claim 10. Bowers discloses the skill-based amusement system of claim 1, wherein the at least one player station further comprises a monetary interface (value input device and payout mechanism in Fig. 11).
Claim 11. Bowers in view of Detwiller discloses the skill-based amusement system of claim 1, wherein each of targets is spawned onto the playfield according to prescribed target spawning sequences based on instructions configured to control a quantity of targets and a mix of target types on the playfield (actors/enemies comprises initial spawn position in the game; paragraph 115).
Claim 14. See rejection for claim 1 above.
Claims 3-5, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowers (US 2011/0212766) in view of Detwiller (US 2011/0173587) as applied to claims 1, 14 above, and further in view of Graboyes Goldman (US 2016/0343211)
Claims 3-4. Bowers discloses the claimed invention as discussed above but fails to teach (claim 3) at least some of the targets of the plurality of targets have a higher difficulty of obtainment than other targets of the plurality of targets and (claim 4) wherein the targets with the higher difficulty of obtainment are configured to provide higher award values than targets with a lower difficulty of obtainment. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. In an analogous art to gaming systems Graboyes Goldman discloses a gaming system configured to play a skill based game. Graboyes Goldman discloses a target game in which smaller targets or targets that are more difficult to hit award higher points than larger targets or targets that are easier to hit. This provides a game that award points based on the skill and difficulty. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Bowers’ invention and provide higher award for targets with higher difficulty of obtainment in order to provide the predictable result of awarding points based on skill and difficulty.
Claims 5, 15. Bowers discloses the claimed invention as discussed above but fails that the plurality of instructions includes instructions configured to determine whether a threshold criterion for obtaining or capturing one or more engaged targets has been met, and if the threshold criterion has been met, initiate a predetermined audio or visual sequence associated with obtainment or capture of the one or more engaged targets and distribute an award to the at least one player station. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. In an analogous art to gaming systems Graboyes Goldman discloses a gaming system configured to play a skill based game. Graboyes Goldman discloses a target game comprising a threshold criterion to obtain or capture one or more targets (i.e. require 2 hits, require a single it, hitting bullseye; paragraph 223). A predetermined visual sequence is associated is associated with obtainment or capture of the target (“knock down” target on the game screen, paragraph 223). The different threshold hold adds complexity and allows players to strategize when capturing the targets. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Bowers’ invention and incorporate a threshold criterion for capturing gone or more target in order provide the predictable result of adding complexity and allowing player to strategize when capturing the targets.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 35, 34-45, 27-29, 33-34 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Double Patenting
The Double Patenting rejection is withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
Prior Art rejection
Regarding claims 24, 35 and the dependent claims of thereof, the rejection has been withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
Regarding claims 1, 14 the claim recites “recognizable or independent form the substantially identifiable path or trajectory” and “the engaged target is moved along an additional, non-random, predictable path or returned to the substantially identifiable path or trajectory”. Therefore, in the alternative, there is no identifiable path that is independent from the identifiable path.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jasson H Yoo whose telephone number is (571)272-5563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter Vasat can be reached at 571 270-7625. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JASSON H YOO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715