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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11 November 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that claim 1 has been amended to incorporate limitations from allowable dependent claim 3. Examiner notes that not all of the claim limitations from claim 3 have been imported, and also notes that the specific limitation imported into claim 1 was noted as being taught by Moore in the previous office action. Further, the newly cited Nelson reference also has teachings relevant to this limitation. Examiner notes that importing the whole of claim 3, rather than just the single limitation, into claim 1, would result in allowable subject matter.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: The first limitation of claim 3, “in response to receiving a selection of a first wagering game, presenting a plurality of cabinet types for selection, wherein the plurality of cabinet types are associated with cabinet types on which the first wagering game is available”, is an exact restatement of a limitation of claim 1. It is assumed that when claim 1 was amended, this portion of claim 3 was meant to be deleted or amended. Appropriate correction is required.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dhaliwal (U.S. Publication 2021/0046383) in view of Anderson (U.S. Patent 9,728,041, Moore (U.S. Publication 2010/0228526), and Nelson (U.S. Publication 2008/0108435).
As to claim 1, Dhaliwal discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising computer readable code executable by one or more processors (p. 12, sections 0153-0154) to:
display, on a user interface, a plurality of user selectable components corresponding to one or more wagering games (figs. 3-7; figs. 9-11; fig. 17, element 1712; fig. 18; p. 1, sections 0002-0004; p. 1, section 0008; p. 2, sections 0015-0023; p. 8, section 0091; a user can select electronic gaming machine components corresponding to specific games using an interface);
determine, based on user input, a selection of a subset of the plurality of user selectable components corresponding to an electronic gaming machine configuration (p. 4, sections 0041-0047; a user chooses components corresponding to a machine type, machine bank type, game, etc.);
generate a representation of a first electronic gaming machine based on the selected subset of the plurality of user selectable components (fig. 6; p. 4, sections 0041-0047; a representation of a group of selected machines with selected components is generated and shown to the user), wherein the representation of the electronic gaming machine configuration is based on gaming machine data from a content management server (p. 3-4, section 0040; information about the selected virtual electronic gaming machines is retrieved from a server);
and store the representation of the first electronic gaming machine as a first component of a presentation (p. 3-4, section 0040; p. 5, section 0055; p. 9, section 0099; the electronic gaming machine representation, which is part of an overall augmented/virtual reality presentation can be stored locally or at a remote server).
Dhaliwal does not disclose, but Anderson discloses that gaming machine data comprises one or more banking types associated with different cabinet types (col. 3, lines 4-25; col. 3, line 65-col. 4, line 37; gaming machine data includes an identifier that would include a name/type for the gaming machine/cabinet and this is then associated with a banking type based on layout such as a line, circle, back-to-back, or curved). The motivation for this is that it assists in managing a large number or gaming machines (col. 1, lines 31-42). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dhaliwal to have gaming machine data comprising one or more banking types associated with different cabinet types in order to assist in managing a large number or gaming machines as taught by Anderson.
Dhaliwal does not disclose, but Moore discloses wherein determining the selection comprises presenting a plurality of cabinet types for selection wherein the plurality of cabinet types are associated with cabinet types on which a first wagering game is available (fig. 3a; fig. 7a; fig. 7b; p. 1, sections 0005-0007; p. 4, section 0052; p. 5, section 0082; a user can choose a layout of a model, which includes a cabinet, of a particular gaming machine out of at least two different machines and place it in the display; a user can configure which games may be downloaded to each device, which would limit which cabinets can be chosen for each selected game). The motivation for this is to help with efficient layout of a casino floor (p. 1, section 0003). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dhaliwal and Anderson to present a plurality of cabinet types for selection wherein the plurality of cabinet types are associated with cabinet types on which a first wagering game is available in order to help with efficient layout of a casino floor as taught by Moore.
Moore discloses presenting based on selection of a gaming machine or table, but does not appear to disclose determining the selection in response to receiving a selection of a first wagering game itself. Nelson, however, discloses determining the selection in response to receiving a selection of a first wagering game (fig. 4; p. 3, sections 0032-0033; a user selects a game and the types of gaming machines for which the game is available to run are presented for selection; the machines are associated with cabinets as can be seen in the figure and thus the machine type would correspond to cabinet type as well). The motivation for this is to help a user choose and facilitate installation of a particular machine or machines (p. 2, section 0012). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dhaliwal, Anderson, and Moore to, determine a selection in response to receiving a selection of a first wagering game in order to help a user choose and facilitate installation of a particular machine or machines as taught by Nelson.
As to claim 2, Dhaliwal discloses code to:
receive, via user input, one or more additional selections of subsets of the plurality of user selectable components corresponding to one or more additional electronic gaming machine configurations (p. 4, sections 0041-0048; p. 9, sections 0103-0106; a user can repeat steps of choosing components for one or more additional machines);
generate one or more additional representations of the one or more additional electronic gaming machine configurations (p. 4, sections 0041-0048; p. 9, sections 0103-0106; a user can repeat steps of choosing components for one or more additional machines, representations of which are added to the overall representation);
receive a user input related to a presentation relationship to the representation of the first electronic gaming machine (p. 4, sections 0041-0048; each of the one or more machines can be stored in a particular location in relation to each of the other machines, reading on a presentation relationship);
and store the one or more additional representations as one or more additional components of the presentation in accordance with the presentation relationship (p. 3-4, section 0040; p. 5, section 0055; p. 9, section 0099; the electronic gaming machine representation, which would include additional machines and relationships between them, can be stored locally or at a remote server).
As to claim 4, Dhaliwal discloses code to:
obtain gaming data related to the wagering game; map the gaming data to a component user interface corresponding to the wagering game (p. 1, section 0001; p. 4, sections 0047-0049; obtained game data, which can be wagering game data, is mapped to and shown on the appropriate machine in the interface) ;
obtain media data related to the wagering game; and map the media data to the representation to obtain an updated virtual representation, wherein the updated virtual representation is presented (p. 1, section 0001; p. 4, sections 0047-0049; obtained sound/graphical/video media data, which can be data from a wagering game, is mapped to and shown on the appropriate machine in the interface in an updated representation when a user activates it or moves in a virtual environment).
As to claim 5, Dhaliwal discloses wherein the gaming data corresponds to one or more games that are available for selection, each available game corresponding to a game that is implementable on a real-world electronic gaming machine corresponding to a type of electronic gaming machine to which the representation of the electronic gaming machine corresponds (p. 4, sections 0044-0045; the real-world machine has a particular set of games available for play for its type and this is used to generate rules that govern which games a user can select).
As to claim 6, Dhaliwal does not disclose, but Moore discloses wherein the plurality of user selectable components corresponding to one or more electronic game parameters comprises a plurality of cabinet layouts for selection, and wherein at least one of the cabinets of the plurality of cabinet layouts corresponds to the electronic gaming machine (fig. 3a; fig. 7a; fig. 7b; p. 1, sections 0005-0007; p. 4, section 0052; a user can choose a layout of a model, which includes a cabinet, of a particular gaming machine out of at least two different machines and place it in the display). Motivation for the combination is given in the rejection to claim 1.
As to claim 7, Dhaliwal discloses wherein the representation of the first electronic gaming machine corresponds to a bank of electronic gaming machines comprising the first electronic gaming machine (p. 4, sections 0043-0047; a user can select a representation of a bank of machines to add to the gaming area presentation).
As to claim 8, Dhaliwal discloses code to present a user selectable component to select a second electronic game of a same game family as the first wagering game; and in response to selection of a second wagering game, cause the bank to include a first electronic gaming device for the first wagering game and a second electronic gaming device for the second wagering game (p. 4, sections 0041-0047; a user can select an EGM type; each EGM type has a particular set of games associated, reading on a game family; a user can select multiple games of the same family or different families using the UI components, and representations are displayed in the overall gaming area representation).
As to claim 9, Dhaliwal discloses code to display, on the user interface, one or more predefined representations of electronic games available to be added to a presentation (fig. 4; p. 4, section 0044; button representations are predefined with labels allowing a user to add particular games to the presentation).
As to claim 10, see the rejections to claims 1 and 2.
As to claim 11, see the rejection to claim 4.
As to claim 12, see the rejection to claim 5.
As to claim 13, see the rejection to claim 8.
Conclusion
Claim 3 is 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.
As to claim 3, Moore discloses presenting a plurality of cabinet types for selection, wherein the plurality of cabinet types are associated with cabinet types on which a first wagering game is available, while Nelson discloses determining the selection in response to receiving a selection of a first wagering game (see rejection to claim 1 above). The combination of art cited in claim 1 does not disclose and art combinable with Dhaliwal, Anderson, Moore, and Nelson does not disclose in response to receiving a selection of a first cabinet type, presenting a plurality of banking types for selection, wherein the plurality of banking types are associated with cabinet types for which the banking types are available.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON M RICHER whose telephone number is (571)272-7790. The examiner can normally be reached 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, King Poon can be reached at (571)272-7440. 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.
/AARON M RICHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2617