Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/056,982

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TRIGGERING A BONUS

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Nov 18, 2022
Priority
Nov 07, 2011 — continuation of 9633512 +3 more
Examiner
RENWICK, REGINALD A
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Acres Technology
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allowance Rate
499 granted / 704 resolved
+0.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
745
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§103
42.3%
+2.3% vs TC avg
§102
23.3%
-16.7% vs TC avg
§112
5.7%
-34.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 704 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claims disclose an abstract idea that lack practical application, and significantly more. Under Step 2A, the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea). The claims are directed to the abstract ideas of a method of organizing human activity as the claims present a method of exchanging financial obligations. Here, the gaming system excepts wagers from players, places the wagers into a pool, wherein credits from the pool are distributed to said one or more players based upon one or more criteria. However, this is a means of exchanging financial obligations as stated in In re Smith, wherein a casino is obligated to pay the player under certain conditions in exchange for a player’s wager. Thus, this presents a method of organizing human activity. Additionally, claims 2, 3, 6, and 7, stipulate additional limitations that are also abstract and provide furtherance of the abstract idea. For example, claims 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 and similar claims further discuss the game and thus, the abstract idea. The second prong of Step 2A, ask whether the claims recite additional elements that would integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Here, no such practical application exists. There is no improvement made to computer technology since the claims discuss providing pool payouts to players, which is not a longstanding problem in computer technology. Additionally, there is no practical application as there is no particular machine that is used to implement the claim language, but instead and as will be discussed below only generic computers are used to perform the invention. Also, there is no transformation of the machine used in the application into a different state or thing. Lastly, the claims do not attempt to apply the abstract idea in a meaningful way beyond simply using the claimed machine. 3. Step 2B asks whether a claimed invention which fails Step 2A contains an inventive concepts, i.e. significantly more. Here, Examiner takes Official Notice, the invention does not recite significantly more as the claim language only recites an electronic gaming device, including a community display, memory, a processor, a display, and networking components, however such are generic computers for performing the steps above. Thus, the claim is directed to an abstract idea that lacks significantly more and thus is not patent eligible. Therefore, the abstract idea lacks significantly more to make the claims eligible patent subject matter. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/05/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended the claims to recite a community display that displays information regarding the game. However, collecting information and displaying information was found in both Electric Power Grid and Intellectual Ventures I LLC to be an abstract idea. The Court has previously determined that displays that offer an improvement, such as improving the functionality of a trading system, would move the claim language into patent eligible subject matter. However, there is no improvement to computer technology that is presented. Examiner also does not agree with the argument that a particular machine is presented as the arrangement is merely a collection of gaming devices performing abstract operations that are located in the vicinity of each other. For these reasons the claims remain rejected. Applicant also argues that the do not present an exchange of financial obligations but instead presents specific architecture for presenting pools related to the frequency of play. Examiner does not agree as said pools of wagers are collecting wagers from players and distributing said wagers based on a series of rules. Thus, here the technical architecture comprises of the rules for distributing the pool, and the abstract idea is centered on exchanging financial obligations. Lastly, in regards to Step 2B, the community display does not add significantly more as Examiner takes Examiner Notice that a community display is well-understood, routine, and common in gaming computer technology. Examiner suggests reviewing previously rejections and Response to Arguments as they address many of the previous arguments presented that could be pertinent here. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINALD A RENWICK whose telephone number is (571)270-1913. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm. 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 at (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. REGINALD A. RENWICK Primary Examiner Art Unit 3714 /REGINALD A RENWICK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 5 earlier events
Jul 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Nov 05, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §101
Jan 20, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 18, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 07, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599843
GAMEPLAY RECORDING VIDEO CREATION SYSTEM
3y 1m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599832
AUTOMATIC UMPIRING SYSTEM
2y 4m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594491
THUMBSTICK ASSEMBLY WITH ADJUSTABLE DAMPING AND GAMEPAD
2y 2m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576307
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR GENERATING SPORTS ANALYTICS WITH A MOBILE DEVICE
2y 11m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569773
AUTOMATED VIDEO GAME TEST BED AND METHODS
2y 8m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+9.1%)
3y 0m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 704 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month