DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 1 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 1 of U.S. Patent 11,842,607. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Applicant is advised that should claim 1 be found allowable, claim 1 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,842,607. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 1 recites method comprising: determining, by a computing device, that a first cellular telephone is accessing a gaming service through a first network that is known to the gaming service as being in an approved location; in response to determining that the first cellular telephone is accessing the gaming service through the first network, allowing, by the computing device, the first cellular telephone to access gaming services of the gaming service; determining, by the computing device, that a second cellular telephone is accessing a gaming service through a second network that is not known to the gaming service as being in the approved location; in response to determining that the second cellular telephone is accessing the gaming service through the second network, determining, by the computing device, that a first confidence level that the second cellular telephone is in the approved location based on a first internet protocol address of the second cellular telephone is above a threshold confidence; in response to determining that the first confidence level is above the threshold confidence, allowing, by the computing device, the second cellular telephone to access gaming services of the gaming service; determining, by the computing device, that a third cellular telephone is accessing a gaming service through the second network that is not known to the gaming service as being in the approved location; in response to determining that the third cellular telephone is accessing the gaming service through the second network, determining, by the computing device, that a second confidence level that the third cellular telephone is in the approved location based on a second internet protocol address of the third cellular telephone is below the threshold confidence; in response to determining that the second confidence level is below the threshold confidence, querying, by the computing device, a secondary location determination service for a location of the third cellular telephone; receiving, by the computing device, an indication of the location of the third cellular telephone from a secondary location determination service; and allowing, by the computing device, the third cellular telephone to access gaming services of the gaming service based on the location of the third cellular telephone being gin the approved location, (lines 1 – 34 claim 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC M THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-1699. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, David Lewis can be reached on 571-272-7673. 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.
/E.M.T/Examiner, Art Unit 3715 /DAVID L LEWIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights