DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
1. 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 7 and 13 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. The recitation in claims 7 and 13 of “a flipper mechanism raise cards to move cards into a position to be removed from said card removal area” is unclear and indefinite. A person ordinary skill in the art cannot properly ascertain the metes and bounds of these claims. There appears to be grammatical errors. and the recitation of “a position” adds doubt to the scope since it is distinct from the recitation of “a position” in each independent claim from which they depend. It is recommended to amend as follows: “a flipper mechanism configured to raise cards [[to move cards]] into [[a]]the position to be removed from said card removal area”. For examining purposes, the scope will be construed commensurate with these suggested amendments as this appears to comport with the intended scope in view of the specification as a whole, including original claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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 of this title, 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.
3. Claims 6-7 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Willette et al. (US Pat. No. 4,310,160) in view of Riordan et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0060738).
With respect to claims 6-7 and 12-13, Willette et al. teaches an automatic card shuffler comprising: a first pre-shuffle bin 14 and a second pre-shuffle bin 16, said first pre-shuffle bin and said second pre-shuffle bin each configured to receive a plurality of cards 22; a first card slide and second card slide configured to receive cards removed from said first pre- shuffle bin and said second pre-shuffle bin, respectively, said first card slide adjacent to said first pre- shuffle bin and a second card slide adjacent to said second pre-shuffle bin (See annotated Fig 6 below); a common slide (See card 22c sliding along floor portion of compartment 65 – Fig. 6) in communication with said first card slide and said second card slide (Fig. 6), said common slide extending to a card removal area 26.
Willette et al. teaches an analog automatic card shuffler that utilizes a motor switch to (i) alternatively move cards from said first pre-shuffle bin and said second pre-shuffle bin to said first card slide and said second card slide, respectively, wherein cards are then slid to the card removal area (column 3). Willette does not expressly teach wherein a processor running executable instructions is utilized to operate the motor and move the cards as claimed. Riordan et al. also fails to expressly teach wherein executable instructions further comprise, (ii) once said cards slide to said card removal area, raise cards into a position to be removed from said card removal area; and (iii) maintain said cards in said position from which to be removed from said card removal area. However, analogous art reference Riordan et al. teaches the following to be known in the art: a processor running executable instructions (paragraph [0049]-[0050]) to: (i) move cards from a first pre-shuffle bin and a second pre-shuffle bin to said first card slide and said second card slide 415-1, 416-2, respectively (paragraph [0084]); (ii) once cards slide to a card removal area 420, raise cards into a position to be removed from said card removal area 420 (paragraph [0084] teaching the cards being raised via a flipper); and (iii) maintain cards in said position from which to be removed from a card removal area (paragraph [0091], [0092]); and further comprising a flipper mechanism 425/530 configured to raise cards into the position to be removed from said card removal area 420 (paragraphs [0084], [0091]-[0093); Fig.’s 18A-18B; Fig.’s 19A-19M). At time of applicant’s effective filing, a person ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the Willette et al. shuffler with the features disclosed by Riordan et al. The rationale to incorporate the processor is to modernize the automated card movement system using programmable (i.e. digital) electrical components. This will allow adjustments/customization of the number of cards being delivered to the card removal area. Moreover, the rationale to raise the cards (using a flipper) and maintain the cards in the card removal area is streamline the dealing process for certain specific games, like Baccarat – See paragraphs [0089]-[0090] of Riordan et al. The proposed modification has a reasonable expectation of success as the functionality of Willett et al is not frustrated by the combination since the number of cards being shuffled and raised for removal from the card removal area can be modified to suit the intended game.
PNG
media_image1.png
471
822
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 11, the combination of Willett et al. and Riordan et al. meets the claimed limitations. Specifically, after sliding down the common slide of Willett et la., the cards will be secured against a wall 430/511 that defines the card removal area as taught by Riordan et al. (paragraphs [0084], [0091]-[0093); Fig.’s 18A-18B; Fig.’s 19A-19M). Riordan et al. further teaches wherein said wall includes an opening through which cards may be individually removed Id. The motivation to combine is the same as stated above.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 1-5 are allowed.
Claims 8-10 and 14-17 are 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.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL DAVID DENNIS whose telephone number is (571)270-3538. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Eugene Kim can be reached at (571) 272 4463. 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.
/MICHAEL D DENNIS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711