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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 120 as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 17854231, 17244929, 16405945, 1645945, 62766867, fail to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. The prior-filed application, Application No. 17854231, 17244929, 16405945, 1645945, 62766867, fail to disclose receiving, via an input port of said image capture device, a video signal which is output from said video output of said controller of said electronic gaming device; outputting said video signal from a first output port of said image capture device to said video display; and transmitting, from a second output port of said image capture device, at least a portion of said video signal. Accordingly, claims 1-15 are not entitled to the benefit of the prior application.
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 1-6, 8-12, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1-6, 8-12, 14-15 are directed to an abstract idea of performing a mental process. In addition are directed to an abstract idea of organizing human activity. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
Step 1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter
More specifically, regarding Step 1, of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, the claims are drawn to at least one of the four statutory categories of invention (i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition).
Step 2a1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims are analyzed to determine whether it is directed to a judicial exception.
Claims 1-6 recite a method of monitoring an amount of a progressive jackpot which is displayed by a video display of an electronic gaming device based, comprising the steps of:
interposing, between a video output of a controller of said electronic gaming device and a video input of said video display, an image capture device, said image capture device comprising a controller, a memory and software configured to cause said controller to implement the steps of:
receiving, via an input port of said image capture device, a video signal which is output from said video output of said controller of said electronic gaming device;
outputting said video signal from a first output port of said image capture device to said video display; and
transmitting, from a second output port of said image capture device, at least a portion of said video signal;
receiving, at a remote jackpot monitoring system, said portion of said video signal;
detecting, at said remote jackpot monitoring system, at least one currency symbol in data representing one or more images represented by said portion of said video signal and extracting a numerical value adjacent to said at least one currency symbol to identify said amount of said progressive jackpot;
identifying, at said remote jackpot monitoring system, a time and a location associated with each frame of said one or more images;
determining, at said remote jackpot monitoring system, a current progressive jackpot amount for the electronic gaming device from a most recent frame of said one or more images based on said time and said location associated with each frame of said one or more images and said amount of said progressive jackpot associated with said most recent frame;
determining, at said remote jackpot monitoring system, a previous progressive jackpot amount for the electronic gaming device from a previous frame of said one or more images based on said time and said location associated with each frame of said one or more images and said amount of said progressive jackpot associated with said previous frame;
storing, at a central server connected to said remote jackpot monitoring system, said current progressive jackpot amount and said previous progressive jackpot amount;
determining, at said central server, a change in the jackpot amount based on said current jackpot amount and said previous progressive jackpot amount;
determining, via said central server and a jackpot processing server, a previous progressive jackpot was awarded between the time of said current jackpot amount and said previous progressive jackpot amount; and
validating said current jackpot amount based on the determination that said previous progressive jackpot was awarded.
Claims 8-12, 14-15 recite a jackpot monitoring system configured to monitor a progressive jackpot which is displayed by a video display associated with an electronic gaming device, comprising:
an image capture device, said image capture device interposed between a video output of a controller of said electronic gaming device an a video input of said video display, and comprising
a controller, a memory and software stored in said memory and configured to cause said controller to:
receive, via an input port of said image capture device, a video signal which is output from said video output of said controller of said electronic gaming device;
output said video signal from a first output port of said image capture device to said video display; and
transmit, from a second output port of said image capture device, at least a portion of said video signal; and a
remote jackpot monitoring system, comprising a processor, a memory and software stored in said memory and configured to cause said controller of said electronic gaming device thereof to:
receive said portion of said video signal;
detect at least one currency symbol in data representing one or more images represented by said portion of said video signal and extracting a numerical value adjacent to said at least one currency symbol to identify said amount of said progressive jackpot;
identify a time and a location associated with each frame of said one or more images;
determine a current progressive jackpot amount for the electronic gaming device from a most recent frame of said one or more images based on said time and said location associated with each frame of said one or more images and said amount of said progressive jackpot associated with said most recent frame; and
determine a previous progressive jackpot amount for the electronic gaming device from a previous frame of said one or more images based on said time and said location associated with each frame of said one or more images and said amount of said progressive jackpot associated with said previous frame;
a central server connected to said remote jackpot monitoring system configured to cause said controller of said electronic gaming device thereof to:
store said current progressive jackpot amount and said previous progressive jackpot amount; and
determine a change in the jackpot amount based on said current jackpot amount and said previous progressive jackpot amount; and
a jackpot processing server connected to said central server and configured to cause said controller of said electronic gaming device thereof to:
determine, via said central server and said jackpot processing server, a previous progressive jackpot was awarded between the time of said current jackpot amount and said previous progressive jackpot amount; and
validate said current jackpot amount based on the determination that said previous progressive jackpot was awarded.
The above underlined limitations recite an abstract idea of performing a mental process. Mental processes include concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). The steps of detecting, identifying, and determining as claimed are steps of performing an observation and evaluation. Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea of performing a mental process.
In addition, the claim recite steps of detecting, identifying, and determining jackpot amounts, a change in a progressive jackpot amount, and validating the current jackpot amount based on the determination that the previous progressive jackpot was awarded. The claims recite steps of managing and verifying jackpot amounts, which is a management of a game. A management of a game is social activity. Therefore, the claims recite steps of organizing human activity.
Step 2a2 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
The second prong of step 2a is the consideration if the claim limitations are directed to a practical application.
Limitations that are indicative of integration into a practical application:
-Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
-Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
-Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b)
-Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
-Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo
Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application:
-Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f)
-Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)
-Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h)
Claims 8-12, 14-15 do not apply a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment, and do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing.
Claims 8-12, 14-15 are not directed to an improvement to a function of a computer. There is no improvement to a technical field. In addition, the claims do not apply the judicial exception with, or by use of a particular machine. The claims do not apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way.
The gaming device, controller, monitoring system and servers are generic computers or components of a computer used to implement the abstract idea. The image capture device comprising a controller, a memory and software are not used in a meaningful way.
Applicant’s specification discloses an application takes a printscreen or screenshot (also as known as a screen grab or screen capture; paragraph 52). The image capture device is a generic computer device/component used to implement the abstract idea. The judicial exception is not applied by a particular machine.
In addition, the steps of interposing an image capture device between a video output of a controller of said electronic gaming device ana video input of said video display; receiving the video signal; outputting the video signal; transmitting the video signal; receiving the video signal amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity.
For the reasons as discussed above, the claim limitations are not integrated to a practical application.
Step 2b of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claim as a whole is analyzed to determine whether any element, or combination of elements, is sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception.
The claims recite an image capture device comprising a processor, a memory and software. Applicant’s specification discloses an application in the EGM (gaming machine) to take a “printscreen or screenshot (also as known as a screen grab or screen capture”; paragraph 45). As indicated in Applicant’ specification, screen grab, screen capture, or taking a screenshot is well known. In addition, Russ (US 2017/0085937) discloses that Digital video record with a CPU and executable code is well known in the art (paragraph 41).
The steps of interposing an image capture device between a video output of a controller of said electronic gaming device ana video input of said video display; receiving the video signal; outputting the video signal; transmitting the video signal; receiving the video signal amount transmitting data over a network. The step of transmitting said amount with said associated identifying information to a remote jackpot monitoring system is a step of transmitting data. The courts have ruled that transmitting data over a network is well known, routine and conventional or insignificant extra solution activity. See Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
In addition, identifying, analyzing or extracting data using a computer (monitoring system or server). The step of identifying, analyzing or extracting data as claimed recite an abstract idea. The use of a computer to capturing the image and extracting data is well known in the art. The courts have ruled that electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document is well known, routine and conventional or insignificant extra solution activity. See Content Extraction and Transmission, LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, 776 F.3d 1343, 1348, 113 USPQ2d 1354, 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (optical character recognition).
The steps of storing jackpot amount is well known routine and conventional. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Dependent claims further recite generating information (timestamp), data gathering [the type of interface, how data is obtained (i.e., screen grab) or the type of data obtained (video input or output)], connection of the generic components, resizing the image, and how the abstract is performed (i.e., without technician). These limitations further recite an abstract idea or recited at a high level of generality, is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. The claim limitations are not integrated to a practical application for the same reasons discussed above. In addition, these limitations are well known, routine and conventional as discussed above. The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
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 8-12, 14-15 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.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “said controller" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear if the “said controller” refers to the controller of the electronic gaming machine or the controller of the image capturing device. In addition, in light of the specification, it appears that “said controller” refers to the processor of the remote jackpot monitoring system. In addition, the claim should clarify if “a remote jackpot monitoring system” is part of the “a jackpot monitoring system” of line 1 or is referring to the same jackpot monitoring system in line 1.
Claims 9-12, 14-15 are rejected by dependency.
Claim 8 is directed to a jackpot monitoring system comprising…a central server connected to said remote jackpot monitoring system…; and a jackpot processing server connected to said central server.
The claim is indefinite because it is not clear of the central server and the jackpot processing server is part of the claimed jackpot monitoring system. The claim recites that the jackpot monitoring system comprises these components but also indicates that they are connected and therefore separate from the jackpot monitoring system.
Claims 9-12, 14-15 are rejected by dependency.
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:
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 1-5, 8-11, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilleque (WO 2009/114196 A2) in view of Vemuri (US 2021/0248872).
Claim 1. Hilleque discloses a method of monitoring an amount of a progressive jackpot (paragraph 17) which is displayed by a video display of an electronic gaming device (“display of a gaming machine”, paragraph 58) based, comprising the steps of:
interposing, between a video output of a controller (display controller 403 in Fig. 4) of said electronic gaming device (as indicated above, the display can be a “display of a gaming machine”, paragraph 58) and a video input of said video display (122 in Fig. 4. As indicated above, the display can be a “display of a gaming machine”, paragraph 58), an image capture device (splitter with video recorder 400 and 405 in Fig. 4), said image capture device comprising a controller, a memory and software (Video recorder is a digital video recorder and therefore inherently comprises a controller, memory and software record the video digitally. In addition, the recording device comprises a capturing programmed logic circuitry configure to digitize any received video and/or recognize content of the video; paragraphs 7, 24) configured to cause said controller to implement the steps of:
receiving, via an input port of said image capture device, a video signal which is output from said video output of said controller (port 402 from display controller 403 in Fig. 4) of said electronic gaming device (As indicated above, the display can be a “display of a gaming machine”, paragraph 58. Therefore, the display controller is from the gaming machine);
outputting said video signal from a first output port of said image capture device to said video display (404a, 122 in Fig. 4); and
transmitting, from a second output port of said image capture device, at least a portion of said video signal (transmit to a user interface/auditor module to review the information; paragraphs 78-85);
receiving, at a remote jackpot monitoring system, said portion of said video signal (received by a user interface/auditor module to review the information; paragraphs 78-85);
identifying, at said remote jackpot monitoring system, a time and location associated with each from of said one or more images (The captured data includes at least a value of the jackpot award shown on the display device and a time corresponding to when the value is displayed on the display device; paragraph 20. In addition, Fig. 8 illustrates the date/time and location of EGM of the event.)
determining, at said remote jackpot monitoring system, a current progressive jackpot (paragraphs 86-90) amount for the electronic gaming device from a most recent frame of said one or more images based on said time and said location (paragraph 20, Fig. 8) associated with each frame of said one or more images and said amount of said progressive jackpot associated with said most recent frame (The capture of the images and the extraction of the data can occur periodically such as each second, in multiple second intervals, etc.; paragraphs 86-87, 90-92, 94- 96. Therefore, the last capture is the most recent frame.);
determining, at said remote jackpot monitoring system, a previous progressive jackpot amount for the electronic gaming device from a previous frame of said one or more images based on said time and said location associated with each frame of said one or more images and said amount of said progressive jackpot associated with said previous frame (The capture of the images and the extraction of the data can occur periodically such as each second, in multiple second intervals, etc.; paragraphs 86-87, 90-92, 94- 96. Therefore, a prior capture is a previous frame.);
storing, at a central server connected to said remote jackpot monitoring system, said current progressive jackpot amount and said previous progressive jackpot amount server receives various game events including when a win is hit detected and associate amount are directly from the jackpot controller; paragraphs 82, 84, 86);
determining, at said central server, a change in the jackpot amount based on said current jackpot amount and said previous progressive jackpot amount (change in jackpot values is recognized; paragraph 95).
Hilleque discloses the claimed invention as discussed above but fails to teach
detecting, at said remote jackpot monitoring system, at least one currency symbol in data representing one or more images represented by said portion of said video signal and extracting a numerical value adjacent to said at least one currency symbol to identify said amount of said progressive jackpot;
determining, via said central server and a jackpot processing server, a previous progressive jackpot was awarded between the time of said current jackpot amount and said previous progressive jackpot amount; and
validating said current jackpot amount based on the determination that said previous progressive jackpot was awarded.
Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art as discussed below.
Hilleque discloses OCR techniques are used to determine the value of the jackpot meter (paragraph’s 88-89). The image includes at least one $ symbol (Figs. 6a-6b). Therefore, it is implied the system can detect at least one currency symbol in data representing one or more images represented by said portion of said video signal and extracting a numerical value adjacent to said at least one currency symbol to identify said amount of said progressive jackpot. In addition, in an analogous art to wagering systems, Vemuri discloses a method of indirectly determining an amount of a progressive jackpot and which is displayed by a video display associated with an electronic gaming device (Figs. 1, 3; paragraphs 25, 35, 37). Vemuri discloses converting, via said processor of said jackpot monitoring system, said data representing said image to symbols (The server performs object recognition or OCR; paragraphs 53-51,58-60, 71-72, 81, 83. The server or portable computing may perform image analysis to identify the amounts; paragraphs 70-73); identifying, via said processor of said jackpot monitoring system, one or more "$" symbols in said symbols (“The server computing device 106 may be configured to identify text leading or ending with a currency denomination (e.g., “S’, “€”, “credits”, etc.) as a value, and if only one value is detected, this value may be assumed to be the current progressive value; paragraphs 72); identifying, via said processor of said jackpot monitoring system, the presence of one or more numerical values adjacent to said one or more "$" symbols (“The server computing device 106 may be configured to identify text leading or ending with a currency denomination (e.g., “S$”, “€”, “credits”, etc.) as a value, and if only one value is detected, this value may be assumed to be the current progressive value; paragraphs 72); and determining, via said processor of said jackpot monitoring system, said amount of said progressive jackpot, said amount comprising said one or more numerical values (jackpot amount 94 in Fig. 3; paragraphs 7-9, 37-39. 72-43). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hilleque’s invention to detect the currency symbol and identify the amount adjacent to the currency symbol as claimed in order to provide the predictable result of determining the progressive jackpot amount.
Hilleque discloses the information collected is used for auditing (paragraphs 53, 78). Hilleque discloses when a jackpot is award, the change in the values is recognized (paragraphs 95-96). Screen shots of the jackpot values are taken at intervals, continually and when predetermined events occur such as jackpot award (paragraphs 86-87, 96). Hilleque discloses that any discrepancies in terms of amount, timing, location, etc., could be recognized and recorded (paragraph 95). The awarded jackpot is obtained from the jackpot meter. The difference between the amount of the jackpot meter value before awarding the jackpot and after awarding the jackpot should be the actual awarded amount. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hilleque's invention and determine a previous progressive jackpot was awarded between the time of said current jackpot amount and said previous progressive jackpot amount; and validate said current jackpot amount based on the determination that said previous progressive jackpot was awarded in order to provide the predictable result of checking for discrepancies in the amount and timing of the jackpot.
Claim 2. Hilleque discloses the method in accordance with claim 1, wherein said portion of said video signal comprises a frame comprising said image (video signal comprises a video and therefore a frame; paragraph 64).
Claim 3. Hilleque discloses the method in accordance with claim 1, further comprising the step of associating identifying information with said amount (paragraphs 56, 58, 81-82, , 88-89), said identifying information comprising information which identifies at least one of said video display, said electronic gaming device, and a game theme to which said progressive jackpot corresponds (The capture image, and amount is associated relevant data including, a display device identifier identifying the display device from which the data was capture, paragraphs 90. See Also Fig. 6a regarding images or theme of the game.);
Claim 4. Hilleque discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising the step of generating a timestamp, said timestamp comprising a date and a time, and associating said timestamp with said amount (Hilleque discloses timestamp with date and time is associated with the amount; paragraphs 90; Fig. 8.).
Claims 5, 11. Hilleque discloses the claimed invention as discussed above but fails to explicitly teach connecting a video cable to said input port. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. Hilleque discloses the connection ports can be any well-known or suitable connection type including VGA, HDMI, DVI, composite component, LVDS. These connections are typically connected to the port using cables. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hilleque’s invention and connect the video ports with video cables since Hilleque discloses well known video connection ports used to connect the recorder and the controller.
Claim 8. See rejection above. It is noted as indicate in the 35 USC 112 rejection, it is not clear what the claimed jackpot monitoring system is comprised of.
Claim 9. Hilleque discloses the system of claim 8, wherein said software of said remote jackpot monitoring system is configured to cause said controller thereof to analyze data representing a first image to identify said amount of said progressive jackpot at a first time and to analyze data representing a second image to identify said amount of said progressive jackpot at a second time (Hilleque discloses a plurality of, or and first and second capture of the image data is stored associated with the identified information; Fig. 8, 10. Hilleque discloses timestamp with date and time is associated with the amount; paragraphs 90; Fig. 8..).
Claim 10. Hilleque discloses the claimed invention but fails to explicitly teach identify an award of a jackpot when said amount of said progressive jackpot at said second time is less than said amount of said progressive jackpot at said first time. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. Hilleque discloses the information collected is used for auditing (paragraphs 53, 78). Hilleque discloses when a jackpot is award, the change in the values is recognized (paragraphs 95-96). Screen shots of the jackpot values are taken at intervals, continually and when predetermined events occur such as jackpot award (paragraphs 86-87, 96). Hilleque discloses that any discrepancies in terms of amount, timing, location, etc., could be recognized and recorded (paragraph 95). The awarded jackpot is obtained from the jackpot meter. The difference between the amount of the jackpot meter value before awarding the jackpot and after awarding the jackpot should be the actual awarded amount. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hilleque’s invention and identify an award of a jackpot when said amount of said progressive jackpot at said second time is less than said amount of said progressive jackpot at said first time in order to provide the predictable result of checking for discrepancies in terms of amount and timing of the jackpot.
Claim 14. Hilleque discloses the system of claim 8, wherein said portion of said video signal comprises a frame which defines an image (video signal comprises a video and therefore a frame; paragraph 64).
Claim 15. Hilleque discloses the system of claim 8, wherein said controller of said remote jackpot monitoring system is further configured to: associate identifying information with said amount, said identifying information comprising information which identifies at least one of said video display, said electronic gaming device, and a game theme (The capture image, and amount is associated relevant data including, a display device identifier identifying the display device from which the data was capture, paragraphs 90. See Also Fig. 6a regarding images or theme of the game.); and
store said amount in a dataset in said database, said dataset including a timestamp of said amount and said associated identifying information (Hilleque discloses timestamp with date and time is associated with the amount; paragraphs 90; Fig. 8.).
Claims 6, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilleque (WO 2009/114196 A2) in view of Vemuri (US 2021/0248872) as applied to claims 1, 8 above, and further in view of Pacey (US 2006/0058100).
Claims 6, 12. Hilleque discloses the claimed intention but fails to teach locating an image capture device in a housing of said electronic gaming device. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. Hilleque discloses an image capturing device connected to video port of an electronic gaming machine but fails to teach the location of the of the video image capture device. In an analogous art to wagering games, Pacey discloses a slot machine comprising a video recording device (digital video record (DVR); abstract). Pacey discloses that the digital video recorder is located within the gaming terminal (“within the game terminal” or “ disposed in the top box area of the gaming terminal”; abstract, paragraph 41). Locating the image capture device within the gaming device allows the image capture device to be secure within the gaming device and prevent users from tampering with the image capture device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hilleque’s invention before the effective filing date and locate the image capture device within the gaming device in order to provide the predictable result of securing the image capture device within the gaming device and preventing users from tampering with the image capture device.
Response to Arguments
35 USC 101
Applicant's arguments with respect to the 35 USC 101 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that it is not possible to accomplish the claimed step of interposing a physical image capture device between the physical video output port of a gaming device controller and a video input port of a video display, let alone for the human mind to receive a video signal which is output from said video output of the controller of the electronic gaming device. In this regard, claims 1 and 8 are both recite a physical gaming machine which has been modified to include an additional physical image capture device, wherein the remaining aspects of the invention as claimed are not claimed relative to a conventional computing device, but a uniquely modified gaming machine. However, the recitation of the video ports, image capture device and gaming machine generally links the abstract idea abstract idea to an electronic embodiment. The additional elements are well known routine and conventional.
Applicant argues that the claimed steps cannot be performed in the human mind. However, as indicated in the rejection, the steps of detecting, identifying, determining and validating can be performed in the human mind.
Applicant argues that the claimed invention solves problem of efficiently and accurately capturing jackpot values in a timely manner and validating the values. The claims provide a technical improvement to casino management systems. Applicant argues that the claims amount to significantly more than an abstract idea. Applicant argues that similarly to BASCOM, the claims provide a solution in a specific ordered combination of steps.
However, computers inherently provide accurately and timely calculations. the use of the computer as claimed generally applies the abstract idea into a computer embodiment. The use of a computer does not provide a practical solution. There is no improvement to a technology. The claims do not recite a specific ordered steps to provide a specific solution. The use of an image capture device and analyzing the image is well known routine and convention. The claims do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea. The ordered steps of capturing an image, analyzing an image and making determinations from the analyzed image is not practical solution.
35 USC 112
New grounds of rejection under 35 USC 112 have been made to address the amended limitations.
Prior art
New prior art rejection in combination with the previously cited art have been made to address the amend limitations. Other than stating that the prior art fails to teach the added limitations, no specific arguments have been made.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
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
Prosecution Insights