Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/217,122

GAME PROCESSING PROGRAM, GAME PROCESSING METHOD, AND GAME PROCESSING DEVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 30, 2023
Examiner
TORIMIRO, ADETOKUNBO OLUSEGUN
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Gree, Inc.
OA Round
4 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
748 granted / 983 resolved
+6.1% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1020
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
§103
33.3%
-6.7% vs TC avg
§102
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
§112
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 983 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 . The applicant’s argument and amendment received on 09/23/2025 has been considered. It is noted that claims 1 and 13-15 have been amended. Claims 6 and 16 had been cancelled. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. 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. Claims 1-5 and 7-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (US 2018/0288391) in view of Bradski et al (US 2016/0026253), Nguyen (US 2011/0092271), and Kuffner et al (US 2020/0013214). Regarding claims 1 and 13-15: Lee et al discloses a system for providing a virtual space to a plurality of players, the system comprising: circuitry configured to: output, to a first terminal of a first player, an image of the virtual space and a first avatar corresponding to the first player (see abstract; paragraphs [0142], [0146], [0147]); at a predetermined timing, capture a virtual image of at least the first avatar in the virtual space and generating image information including the captured virtual image (see paragraphs [0142]-[0146]); and output at least a part of the image information to a second terminal not belonging to the first player (see paragraphs [0029], [0057]). In an analogous invention, Bradski et al teaches wherein the at least a part of the image information is output to the second terminal such that the first avatar in the virtual space is simultaneously displayed to a plurality of players to which the second terminal does not belong, the virtual image is captured using a virtual camera in the virtual space, and the virtual camera moves relative to the first avatar such that a position of the virtual camera changes over time (see paragraphs [0185], [0381], [0601], [0650], [0654], and [1378]). In an analogous invention, Nguyen teaches at least a part of the image information is output to the second terminal such that the first avatar in the virtual space is simultaneously displayed to a plurality of players simultaneously viewing the single second terminal, the second terminal not belonging to the plurality of players (see figure 2A; paragraphs [0044]-[0048], showing a community display that displays avatars in the virtual world to the plurality of players simultaneously, where the community is a secondary display different from the individual displays that belong to the players). In an analogous invention, Kuffner et al teaches the virtual camera is equipped to a virtual object that moves independently of the first avatar and that moves toward the first avatar to capture the virtual image including the first avatar at the predetermined timing (see paragraph [0020], showing controlling the viewpoint of such virtual camera may be a complex process for a novice user. For example, the user may utilize a 2D input such as a mouse (e.g., by changing position of mouse and clicking) and/or a 1D input such as a scrollbar of the mouse to control the viewpoint of the virtual camera. In this example, the user may be utilizing three independent inputs to control a six-dimensional viewpoint (e.g., 3D position of the virtual camera and 3D orientation of the virtual camera). For example, if the 2D input is mapped to a rotational path for the virtual camera, the viewpoint of the virtual camera may become closer to the virtual object/ avatar or even inside the virtual object, or a line-of-sight of the virtual camera may focus substantially away from the virtual object). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Lee et al’s virtual space, predetermined time, and avatar as taught by Bradski et al’s method and system for creating a virtual image, Nguyen’s community display, and Kuffner’s virtual camera being independent of the virtual image for the purpose of providing virtual information and image in virtual space. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s enjoyment and satisfaction in the game. Regarding claim 2: Lee et al discloses wherein the predetermined timing is a timing after an end of an activity within the virtual space (see paragraph [0144]). Regarding claim 3: Lee et al discloses wherein a configuration of the captured virtual image differs according to a result of activity within the virtual space (see paragraph [0144]). Regarding claim 4: Lee et al discloses wherein the virtual image is captured according to an operation by the first player (see paragraph [0142]). Regarding claim 5: Lee et al discloses wherein a result of activity within the virtual space is displayed in the virtual space when the virtual image is captured (see paragraph [0142]). Regarding claim 7: Lee et al discloses wherein a position of the first avatar in the virtual space is identified in accordance with a position and/or an orientation of the first terminal and/or a device associated with the first terminal, and the virtual image is captured from the position of the virtual camera (see paragraph [0144]). Regarding claim 8: Lee et al discloses wherein the virtual image is generated based on information detected by the first terminal and/or a device associated with the first terminal (see paragraphs [0005]-[0008]). Regarding claim 9: Lee et al discloses wherein the image information includes download information of a URL for downloading the virtual image or a barcode encoding the URL (see paragraph [0097], showing a web storage accessible over the internet). Regarding claim 10: Lee et al discloses wherein the at least a part of the image information is output such that at least one of the captured virtual image and the download information is displayed on the second terminal (see paragraphs [0029], [0057]). Regarding claim 11: Lee et al discloses wherein the at least a part of the image information is output such that the captured virtual image is displayed on the second terminal (see paragraphs [0029], [0057]). Regarding claim 12: Lee et al discloses wherein the image information is output for storage in a server (see paragraph [0059]). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5 and 7-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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 ADETOKUNBO OLUSEGUN TORIMIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-1345. 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, Peter Vasat can be reached on (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. /ADETOKUNBO O TORIMIRO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 30, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 19, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 10, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 11, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 20, 2024
Response Filed
Mar 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
May 28, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
May 28, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 20, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 23, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597315
REAL TIME ACTION OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592123
ACCESSING GAMING ESTABLISHMENT ACCOUNT FUNDS WITH A TICKET VOUCHER BASED ON MULTIPLE CASHOUT INPUTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592120
SLOT MACHINE DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12562029
GAMING DEVICE AND METHOD OF CONDUCTING A GAME WITH A CHANGEABLE BONUS VALUE FEATURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12562032
ASSIGNMENT OF PLAYER GROUPS AND DETERMINATION OF GROUP PAYOUTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+16.5%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 983 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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