Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/178,391

METHOD AND DEVICE FOR PROVIDING GAME SERVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Mar 03, 2023
Priority
Mar 04, 2022 — RE 10-2022-0028217
Examiner
WILLIAMS, ROSS A
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Nexon Korea Corporation
OA Round
4 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
1m
Est. Remaining
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allowance Rate
408 granted / 663 resolved
-8.5% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
722
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
23.7%
-16.3% vs TC avg
§103
41.5%
+1.5% vs TC avg
§102
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
§112
11.0%
-29.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 663 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Status of Claims Claims 1, 11, 21, 22, 23 have been amended. Claims 6 and 16 have been cancelled Claim 24 is newly added Claims 1 – 5, 7 – 15 and 17 – 24 are pending. 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. Claim(s) 1 - 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higgins et al (US 2020/0152005) in view of Khan (US 11,521,200) in view of Saunders (US 2018/0365691). As per claim 1, Higgins discloses: receiving, by a server device from a user device, electronic wallet information associated with an electronic wallet used to trade a cryptocurrency over a blockchain network, wherein the user device is executing an interactive virtual environment; Higgins discloses a player playing a virtual slot machine game (i.e. virtual environment) wherein the user has an associated electronic wallet that they can use to trade cryptocurrency) ((Higgins 0018) linking, by the server device, based at least in part on the electronic wallet information …, electronic wallet to an account of the user using the interactive virtual environment by storing electronic wallet information of the electronic wallet to the account of the user; (Higgins discloses the linking of a wallet for trading cryptocurrency on a block chain network to a user account of the game establishment wherein wallet information is stored in the player account of the gaming establishment) (Higgins 0018) obtaining by the server device, cryptocurrency information about a first cryptocurrency among cryptocurrencies owned by the electronic wallet, wherein the cryptocurrency information includes a quantity of the cryptocurrency; and (Higgins discloses the obtaining of transfer requests to facilitate the transfer of cryptocurrency funds to and from game establishment cryptocurrency wallets and external cryptocurrency wallets (Higgins 0024). Higgins further discloses the system utilizing a first currency out of multiple (i.e. a player may have an account with bitcoin and/or ether. (Higgins 0018, 0019) providing, on the user device, an interface for displaying the quantity of the cryptocurrency and (Higgins discloses the displaying of the quantity of cryptocurrency) (Higgins Fig 2B) Higgins fails to disclose: generating, by the server device, a determination of whether the electronic wallet information is valid by verifying, based at least in part on a verification request transmitted to a plurality of nodes linked within the blockchain network, whether the electronic wallet information exists on the blockchain network; …based on the obtained cryptocurrency information of the cryptocurrency, providing a certain in- game effect to the user having the account linked to the electronic wallet, wherein the certain in-game effect is preset in correspondence with the cryptocurrency information used in the blockchain network, which is different from a currency used in the game service. However Khan discloses a system wherein a user can engage in a video game using a artificially intelligent entity wherein the intelligence level of the entity is proportional to the amount of cyptocurrency tokens that they have in their wallet (Khan 3:18 – 60). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify Higgins in view of Khan to use a known technique to modify similar game systems in the same way by causing in game effects to of a game character or a virtual environment to be proportionally related to the amount of cryptocurrency they possess in their wallet. This would be beneficial to a cyptocurrency token creator as it would incentivize a user to trade and increase the amount of cryptocurrecy of a particular type in exchange for in-game benefits. In a similar field of endeavor, Saunders discloses: 027] FIG. 1 shows an architecture of a crypto currency system including identity verification nodes. The system includes one or more devices 100 associated with one or more users, one or more private nodes 110, 120, 130, and one or more public nodes 140, 150. The system disclosed in this application does not require mining of coins, however mining can be performed. The device 100, the private nodes 110, 120, 130, and the public nodes 140, 150 communicate with each other via a communication network 160, such as the Internet, cellular network, data network, a mesh network, local area network, etc. [0028] The device 100 can be a personal computer, a mobile device such as a cell phone, a personal digital assistant, etc. The device 100 includes a wallet which can be implemented in software and/or in hardware. A user (the owner of the wallet/identity) associated with the device 100 downloads and opens the application—i.e. wallet. As the user signs up to create an account, a cryptographic pair of keys is created: one public key, and one private key. The private key is stored on the device 100, and is known only to the wallet. From that private key, a wallet address is created. The wallet address and account information is signed with the private key and transmitted to the identity ledger, where the identity ledger adds an identity creation entry containing the wallet address signed with the private key, thus creating an account on the identity ledger. The wallet address can then be used to authorize transactions on the system. A wallet can contain multiple identities, meaning a wallet can be associated with multiple cryptographic pairs of keys. One cryptographic pair of keys is designated as primary and is associated with a wallet on the identity ledger. [0029] The private nodes 110, 120, 130 contain an identity ledger which records identity transactions between two or more devices 100 in the system. The identity ledgers contained in the private nodes 110, 120, 130 are not publicly accessible, and can be accessed only by authorized nodes within the system. The private nodes 110, 120, 130 communicate among each other to create distributed consensus among all private nodes 110, 120, 130 and as a result maintain a synchronized identity ledger. A member of the public cannot view transactions on the identity ledger. (Saunders 0027 – 0030) It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify Higgins in view of Saunders to use a known technique to modify similar systems in the same way by verifying wallet transactions and wallet information to perform a verification upon a plurality of nodes. This would be beneficial as the use of an identity ledger is approximately 100 times more energy efficient than verifying the block chain (Saunders 0033). As per claim 2, Higgins discloses: obtaining electronic wallet information comprising at least one of identification information of the electronic wallet and authentication information of the electronic wallet; (Higgins disclose the identification of an electronic wallet and authenticating information associated with the wallet to access the wallet) (Higgins 0018) verifying validity of the obtained electronic wallet information; and (Higgins disclose verifying the wallet) (Higgins 0018, 0034) based on the obtained electronic wallet information being valid, registering the obtained electronic wallet information in the account of the user. (Higgins discloses the linking of an external cryptocurrency wallet to a gaming establishment cryptocurrency wallet) (Higgins 0018, 0029-0031, 0034) As per claim 3, Higgins discloses: wherein the obtaining of the cryptocurrency information of the cryptocurrency comprises obtaining a quantity of the cryptocurrency owned by the electronic wallet. (Higgins discloses the identification a transfer amount from one wallet to another (i.e. quantity owned by wallet)) (Higgins 0029) As per claim 4, Higgins discloses: wherein the obtaining of the cryptocurrency information of the cryptocurrency further comprises obtaining a quantity of a cryptocurrency of a certain type owned by the electronic wallet. (Higgins discloses the user providing a bitcoin (i.e. type of cryptocurrency) account number that is tied to their bitcoin account) (Higgins 0030, 0036, Page 6, Table 1) As per claim 5, Higgins discloses: wherein the obtaining of the quantity of the cryptocurrency comprises obtaining a quantity of a first cryptocurrency by converting a quantity of a second cryptocurrency owned by the electronic wallet into the quantity of the first cryptocurrency, based on an exchange rate between the first cryptocurrency and the second cryptocurrency. ( Higgins discloses the conversion of cryptocurrencies from one currency to another based upon an exchange rate) (Higgins 0028, 0052). As per claim 7, wherein, the in-game effect is provided in a fixed amount after the quantity exceeds a preset threshold value regardless of the quantity of the cryptocurrency. (Combination of Higgins in view of Walker wherein Khan, wherein Khan discloses an embodiment of only 5 levels that correspond to an in game effect or intelligence level in proportion to the amount of tokens) (Khan Fig 4) As per claim 8, wherein the providing of the in-game effect comprises, based on the obtained cryptocurrency information of the cryptocurrency, improving an ability of a character of the user in a game. (Combination of Higgins in view of Walker, wherein Walker teaches a threshold amount held in account may be determined and the player receives a game effect such as an ability to summon game characters, or have game characters become more powerful in a game) (Walker 0055, 0059, 0062). As per claim 9, further comprising providing an interface for displaying, in a game screen, the obtained cryptocurrency information of the cryptocurrency and the provided in-game effect. (Combination of Higgins in view of Walker, wherein Walker teaches the display of an account balance threshold and the provided in game effect such as “a modified payout table”) (Higgins 0070) As per claim 10, Higgins discloses: wherein the electronic wallet is for trading a cryptocurrency different from a virtual currency used in the game service. (Higgins discloses the game establishment being able to convert cryptocurrency into a different virtual currency used by the game machine/establishment) (Higgins 0052). Independent claim(s) 11 and 21 - 23 is/are made obvious by the combination of Higgins, Khan and Saunders based on the same analysis set forth for claim(s) 1, which are similar in claim scope. Examiner notes that regarding the hardware limitations of memory and at least one processor, the Examiner points to paragraphs 0002, 0154, 0179 of Higgins. Dependent claim(s) 12-15 and 17 - 20 is/are made obvious by the combination of Higgins, Khan and Saunders based on the same analysis set forth for claim(s) 2 – 5 and 7 – 10 respectively, which are similar in claim scope. As per claim 24, wherein generating the determination is additionally based at least in part on verifying, based at least in part on an authentication request transmitted to the user device, whether the electronic wallet information corresponds to a user of the user device. (Combination of Higgin and Saunders wherein Saunders teaches the authentication of the use and associated transactions corresponding to the user of the device (Saunders 0039 - 0042) Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-23 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Please see above rejection addressing the newly amended claim limitation in view of Khan and Saunders. 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 ROSS A WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-5911. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am - 4pm. 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. /RAW/ Examiner, Art Unit 3715 8/25/2026 /KANG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 3 earlier events
Sep 24, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Dec 19, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 11, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Jun 04, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 04, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 08, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 09, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12481323
DISPLAY DEVICE
3y 4m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12450978
COIN OPERATED ENTERTAINMENT SYSTEM
2y 3m to grant Granted Oct 21, 2025
Patent 12444274
VIRTUAL SPORTS BOOK SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 9m to grant Granted Oct 14, 2025
Patent 12383836
IMPORTING AGENT PERSONALIZATION DATA TO INSTANTIATE A PERSONALIZED AGENT IN A USER GAME SESSION
3y 1m to grant Granted Aug 12, 2025
Patent 12387550
PUSHBUTTON SWITCH, OPERATING UNIT, AND AMUSEMENT MACHINE
2y 9m to grant Granted Aug 12, 2025
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
62%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+17.4%)
3y 8m (~1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 663 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