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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-8, 11 and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bosco (US 3,456,948).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Bosco teaches a game board apparatus and method (20, fig. 1) comprising: a frame (21) having a top and a bottom; a five-by-five grid of spaces wherein a plurality of elastomeric domes are disposed within a plurality of spaces of the five-by-five grid, respectively, each of the elastomeric domes having a convex shape (28a) when viewing the top of the frame or a concave shape when viewing the top of the frame, wherein each of the elastomeric domes is configured to be converted from the convex shape to the concave shape by pressing each from above the domes and to be converted from the concave shape to the convex shape by pressing each from beneath the domes; and indicia (12) on each elastomeric domes corresponding to a letter, a number, or a letter and number combination of a BINGO game, such that when a specific letter, number, or letter and number combination is selected pursuant to a game of BINGO, the dome corresponding to the selected letter, number, or letter and number combination is configured to be depressed so as to form the concave shape (col. 1, line 10 to col. 4, line 73).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Bosco further teaches wherein each of the elastomeric domes is sized so as to be pressed by a human finger (col. 1, lines 59-62).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Bosco further teaches wherein all of the elastomeric domes have the convex shape when view from above (fig. 1).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Bosco further teaches wherein some of the elastomeric domes have a convex shape (original convex) and some of the elastomeric domes have a concave shape when viewed from above (depressed state) (col. 1, lines 10-27 and lines 65-72).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Bosco further teaches wherein all of the elastomeric domes have a concave shape (depressed state) when viewed from above (col. 1, lines 10-27).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Bosco further teaches wherein each of the spaces of the five-by-five grid has an elastomeric dome (col. 2, lines 4-20).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 9, 10, 12, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bosco.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Bosco teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above (fig. 1) but fails to teach the letters “BINGO” comprises elastomeric domes as claimed.
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Bosco to have each of the letters of “BINGO” marked on the elastomeric domes as the same as numbers (12, fig. 1) in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Such modification would not involve any inventive feature since it is just a matter of design option and a mere duplication of using the domes as for the numbers.
Regarding claims 9, 10, 19 and 20, Bosco teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Bosco further teaches a center space (“FREE”) but silent to the center space does not have an elastomeric dome therein (fig. 1).
However, it is well-known in the art that, in the game of BINGO, the center space (“FREE”, fig. 1) is never used for marking/pressing. Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have recognized to modify the invention of Bosco to not have the elastomeric dome for the center space since it is not necessary to use the elastomeric dome for marking/pressing.
Claim(s) 3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bosco in view of Walterscheid (US 8,012,049).
Regarding claim 3 and 13, Bosco teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Bosco further teaches the game board apparatus can be made from any of the plastics or rubberized materials (col. 2, lines 5-10) but silent to a silicone as claimed.
However, Walterscheid teaches a suction cup (dome), having a concave face, is made of a elastomeric material, i.e. silicone (col. 1, lines 22-24).
In view of Walterscheid’s teaching, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Bosco by incorporating the teaching as taught by Walterscheid in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Such modification would not involve any inventive features since it is just a matter of using an alternative and well-known material for the game board apparatus.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Reference: Knott (GB 2024022A) is cited because it is related to BINGO game board.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tuyen Kim Vo whose telephone number is (571)270-1657. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8AM-6:30PM.
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, Steven Paik can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/TUYEN K VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876