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 § 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 1-8, 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are directed to a service for a casino. In the broadest reasonable interpretation and in light of the specification, a service is a facility providing a demand or goods. A service is not a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof.
Claims 9-16 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 9-16 recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity The claim limitations are not indicative of integration into a practical application and 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 9-16 recite a casino patron management system comprising:
a first casino system;
a second casino system;
a gateway server configured to implement a patron gateway service, said gateway server comprising a processor, a memory, a communication interface, and machine-readable code stored in said memory, said gateway server communicatively interposed between said first casino system and said second casino system; a
first API stored in said memory of said gateway server, said first API enabling interfacing of said gateway server with said first casino system and a second API stored in said memory of said gateway server, said second API enabling interfacing of said gateway server with said second casino system;
said machine-readable code stored in said memory of said gateway server configured to cause said processor thereof to utilize said first and second APIs to communicate with said first and second casino systems to exchange patron information between said first and second casino systems.
The underlined limitations recite an abstract idea of, organization of human activity). The claim recite steps of communicating or exchanging patron information between a first and second casino system which is a management of a game. Although no specific game is being played, the steps of organizing patron information for a game (casino game) is a management of a game. Managing a game is an organization of human activity.
In addition, the claims recite a fundamental economic principle or practice. The steps of exchanging patron information between business such as two casinos is an economic practice.
Step 2a2 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
The second prong of step 2a is the consideration of whether the claim recites additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application.
An additional element or combination of additional elements that are indicative of integrating the abstract idea into a practical application include:
-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
Additional element or combination of additional elements that are not indicative of integration of the abstract idea into a practical application include:
-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 9-16 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 9-16 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 additional elements of a first casino system; a second casino system; a gateway server comprising a processor, a memory, a communication interface, and machine-readable code stored in said memory, a first API stored in said memory of said gateway server, a second API stored in said memory of said gateway server are directed to generic computer and computer components used to generally link abstract idea to a computer environment.
For the reasons discussed above, the additional elements identified above considered alone and in combination fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2b of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims as a whole is analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception.
Claims 9-16 recite the additional element of a server configured to implement a patron gateway service communicatively interposed between a first casino system and second casino system and a first API and a second API stored in the memory of the gateway server to enable interfacing. Servers comprising APIs to communicate with external system are known in the art. As indicated by Soltys (US 2002/0086727), Apis for interfacing with various systems is conventional in the art (paragraph 54).
The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Dependent claims 10-16 further recite steps of communicating or exchanging patron information using generic computers. These limitations further recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified abstract idea. Looking at the additional elements as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For example, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons discussed above with respect to the conclusion that the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The dependent clams merely include limitations that further define the abstract idea and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract. The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claims 1-8, 17-22 recite a service comprising a server. Assuming that Claims 1-8, 17-22 are directed to the a system, Claims 1-8, 17-22 are rejected for the same reasons as claims 9-16 above.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: API in line 7 should be --application program interface (API)--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 incorporates similar claim limitation as is objected for the same reason as discussed above.
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.
Claims 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Sanford (US 2016/0225225).
Claim 17. Sanford discloses a patron gateway service comprising:
a server (990 in Figs. 9-11) comprising a processor, a memory, a communication interface, and machine-readable code stored in said memory and configured to cause said processor to (any suitable processor based device or system such as server including gone or more processors and one or more memory units; Fig. 9, paragraph 68:
receive, from a first casino system via said communication interface, information regarding a patron seeking to enroll in said first casino system (Player enrolls into a loyalty program at a second casino or gaming environment, paragraph 59. Transaction facilitator receives information of the user, paragraphs 55-61.);
transmit, via said communication interface, a request to one or more second casino systems for existing accounts of said patron; receive, via said communication interface, information regarding an existing patron account associated with one of said second casino systems; transmit, to said second casino system via said communication interface, said existing patron account information; and link said patron enrollment in said first casino system with said existing patron account associated with said second casino system (When player enrolls in a loyalty program at a second gaming environment, their account can be linked to the stored value payment vehicle through the master ID; paragraph 59. Therefore, information from the first casino (claimed limitation of “second casino system”) any casino or gaming environment is transmitted and linked as part of the enrollment to the transaction facilitation system; paragraphs 55-61. See paragraphs 55-74 regarding the type of patron information transmitted from the second casino system.).
Claim 18. Sanford discloses the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 17, wherein said patron account identification information comprises a PIN of said existing patron account (Identifier with credential such as PIN; paragraphs 26, 46).
Claim 19.Sanford discloses the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 17, wherein said first casino system comprises an online gaming system (internet gaming; online casino, paragraphs 20, 30, 35, 38).
Claim 20. Sanford discloses the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 17, wherein said second casino system comprises a casino patron loyalty system (player loyalty profile/account, 852 in Fig. 8; paragraphs 41-42, 62).
Claim 21. Sanford discloses the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 17, wherein said second casino system comprises a casino management system (i.e. management of player loyalty, 852 in Fig. 8; paragraphs 41-42, 62).
Claim 22. Sanford discloses the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 17, wherein said second casino system comprises a financial payment system. (financial account maintained by a casino; paragraph 34).
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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanford (US 2016/0225225).
Claim 1. Sanford discloses a patron gateway service for a casino, comprising:
a gateway server (990 in Figs. 9-11) configured to implement a patron gateway service (service of allowing a player to transfer fund between various accounts and associated account at one or more casinos, paragraph19), said gateway server comprising a processor, a memory (any suitable processor based device or system such as server including gone or more processors and one or more memory units; Fig. 9, paragraph 68 ), a communication interface and machine-readable code stored in said memory and configured to cause said processor to (Figs. 9-11):
receive, via said communication interface, a request from a first casino system of a request for player enrollment (Player enrolls into a loyalty program at a second casino or gaming environment, paragraph 59. Transaction facilitator receives information of the user, paragraphs 55-61.);
transmit, via said communication interface, a request for patron information to a second casino system; receive, via said communication interface, said patron information from said second casino system; transmit, via said communication interface, said patron information to said first casino system for use in completing said patron enrollment (When player enrolls in a loyalty program at a second gaming environment, their account can be linked to the stored value payment vehicle through the master ID; paragraph 59. Therefore, information from the first casino (claimed limitation of “second casino system”) any casino or gaming environment is transmitted and linked as part of the enrollment to the transaction facilitation system; paragraphs 55-61. See paragraphs 55-74 regarding the type of patron information transmitted from the second casino system.).
Sanford discloses the claimed limitation but fails to teach communicating using a first API with a second casino system and a second API to communication with a first casino system. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. Sanford discloses that the casino computing system can communicate with a transaction facilitator such as through API-calls, or other suitable communication techniques (paragraphs 26, 50). This allows applications and various systems to communicate and shared data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Sanford’s invention and use a first API to communicate with a second casino system and use a second API to communication with a first casino system Since Sanford discloses using APIs to communicate and in order to provide the predictable result of sharing data.
Claim 2. Sanford the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 1, wherein said first casino system comprises an online gaming system (internet gaming; online casino, paragraphs 20, 30, 35, 38).
Claim 3. Sanford discloses the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 2, wherein said second casino system comprises a casino management system (i.e. management of player loyalty, 852 in Fig. 8; paragraphs 41-42, 62).
Claim 4. Sanford disclose the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 2, wherein said second casino system comprises a financial payment system (financial account maintained by a casino; paragraph 34).
Claim 5. Sanford discloses the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 1, wherein said request from said first casino system includes patron identification information (Sanford discloses that player identifiers are linked and therefore request identification information when linking, paragraphs 25-26, 28, 46).
Claim 6. Sanford discloses the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 1, wherein said patron information comprises patron loyalty account information (player loyalty profile/account, 852 in Fig. 8; paragraphs 41-42, 62).
Claim 7. Sanford discloses the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 1, wherein said patron information comprises patron financial account information (financial account(s); paragraph 34).
Claim 8. Sanford discloses the patron gateway service in accordance with claim 7, wherein said financial account information comprises information identifying an electronic wallet (virtual card, electronic account, paragraph 32).
Claim 9. Sanford discloses a casino patron management system comprising:
a first casino system; a second casino system (one or more casinos, different casinos, paragraphs 19, 26, 35);
a gateway server (990 in Figs. 9-11) configured to implement a patron gateway service (service of allowing a player to transfer fund between various accounts and associated account at one or more casinos, paragraph 19), said gateway server comprising a processor, a memory, a communication interface, and machine-readable code stored in said memory (any suitable processor based device or system such as server including gone or more processors and one or more memory units; Fig. 9, paragraph 68 ), said gateway server communicatively interposed between said first casino system and said second casino system (Figs. 9-11);
said machine-readable code stored in said memory of said gateway server configured to cause said processor thereof to communicate with said first and second casino systems to exchange patron information between said first and second casino systems (exchange account info, game play info, player level, wagering info, game credits, merchant info, offers; paragraphs 19-24, 58-65).
Sanford discloses the claimed limitation but fails to teach a first API stored in said memory of said gateway server, said first API enabling interfacing of said gateway server with said first casino system and a second API stored in said memory of said gateway server, said second API enabling interfacing of said gateway server with said second casino system; and utilizing said first and second APIs to communicate with said first and second casino systems. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. Sanford discloses that the casino computing system can communicate with a transaction facilitator such as through API-calls, or other suitable communication techniques (paragraphs 26, 50). This allows applications and various systems to communicate and shared data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Sanford’s invention and use a first API to communicate with a second casino system and use a second API to communication with a first casino system Since Sanford discloses using APIs to communicate and in order to provide the predictable result of sharing data.
Claim 10. Sanford discloses the casino patron management system in accordance with claim 9, wherein said first casino system comprises an online gaming system (internet gaming; online casino, paragraphs 20, 30, 35, 38).
Claim 11. Sanford discloses the casino patron management system service in accordance with claim 10, wherein said second casino system comprises a casino management system (i.e. management of player loyalty, 852 in Fig. 8; paragraphs 41-42, 62).
Claim 12. Sanford discloses the casino patron management system in accordance with claim 10, wherein said second casino system comprises a financial payment system (financial account maintained by a casino; paragraph 34).
Claim 13. Sanford discloses the casino patron management system in accordance with claim 12, wherein said gateway server is configured to receive a request from said first casino system for patron information, said request including patron identification information (Sanford discloses that player identifiers are linked and therefore request identification information when linking, paragraphs 25-26, 28, 46).
Claim 14. Sanford discloses the casino patron management system in accordance with claim 13, wherein said patron information comprises patron loyalty account information (player loyalty profile/account, 852 in Fig. 8; paragraphs 41-42, 62).
Claim 15. Sanford discloses the casino patron management system in accordance with claim 13, wherein said patron information comprises patron financial account information (payment vehicle of player; value account identified; paragraphs 28, 47, 52-53, 79).
Claim 16. Sanford discloses the casino patron management system in accordance with claim 13, wherein said gateway server is configured to transmit a request for said patron information to said second casino system (player information is transmitted to the casino system to link player information; paragraphs 55-61).
Conclusion
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