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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to amendments filed on 08/27/2026.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to mental steps without significantly more. As per step 1 examiner recognizes the claims are directed towards gaming system which includes hardware for carrying out the claimed game. As per step 2A the claim(s) recite(s) “a symbol accumulation sequence comprising at least a first quantity of at least two initiations, cause the processor to: associate a first symbol accumulation sequence retriggering event with the symbol accumulation sequence, responsive to less than a first quantity of symbols accumulated at a plurality of symbol display positions associated with a first reel set comprising a first plurality of displayed reels and an occurrence of the first symbol accumulation sequence retriggering event: increase a remaining quantity of initiations to a second quantity of initiations, and communicate data that results in a display, by a display device, of the remaining quantity of initiations to the second quantity of initiations, and responsive to at least the first quantity of symbols accumulated at the plurality of symbol display positions associated with the first reel set: associate, based on the first quantity of symbols accumulated at the plurality of symbol display positions associated with the first reel set, a different, second symbol accumulation sequence retriggering event: with the symbol accumulation sequence, and responsive to an occurrence of the second symbol accumulation sequence retriggering event that is independent of the first quantity of symbols accumulated at the plurality of symbol display positions associated with the first reel set: increase the remaining quantity of initiations to a third quantity of initiations, and communicate data that results in a display, by the display device, of the remaining quantity of initiations to the third quantity of initiations.” Which reads on a slot game comprising accumulating symbols wherein, based on rules, in below a first threshold and a retrigger event occurs a certain quantity of initiations, or plays of the game, will be determined and if a threshold is met a second quantity of initiations different from the first will be determined. Further embodiments include active and inactive reel sets which are activated based on the accumulation thresholds. Dependent claims further rules on how to determine number of initiations, association between events and accumulation, and other rules. As per the mental step examiner recognizes highlighted language reads on the mental step of observation and applying of a rule. Specifically an individual can observe a displayed outcome of symbols and apply a known rule to determine the next step. This would include an individual counting the number of symbols accumulated over a series of plays of the game (examiner note: initiations are plays of the game with each initiation being a round) and knowing, based on the rules, that a reel set should be active or inactive based on the number and how many quantities of plays of the game should be set for the game. The act of determining what rule to apply and what next step to apply in a game is a function that can be performed mentally and is known to have been caried out prior to game. In this case the identified steps read on the features of observation and determination which are known mental steps. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claims remain directed towards a series of game rules which can be performed mentally based on observing the state of a game. This include observing the outcome of symbols presented and applying a rule according to the outcome which an individual can perform mentally. Additionally mechanical and electronic features go towards step 2B and are addressed below.
As per step 2B examiner recognizes that additional elements are directed to conventional activities or extra solution activity. See below.
Limitation “gaming system comprising: a processor; and a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor in association with a symbol accumulation sequence comprising at least a first quantity of at least two plays of a game, cause the processor to”, display steps, and other associated hardware. Further amended limitations “a housing comprising an access door; a security monitoring circuit supported by the housing; a display device;” and “when an opening of the access door is detected via the security monitoring circuit during the symbol accumulation sequence: disable any occurrence of the first symbol accumulation sequence retriggering event associated with the symbol accumulation sequence, and following at least a closing of the access door detected via the security monitoring circuit: enable the first symbol accumulation sequence retriggering event to occur,” read on conventional hardware found in gaming machines designed to secure and prevent tampering and fraud during play by preventing unauthorized access. The hardware elements are commonly found in the gaming art related to electronic slot machines or wagering terminals and therefore are no more than a generic recitation of computer hardware elements including network elements and therefore does not provide a practical application that amounts to more than the identified abstract idea. This includes the recitation of memory, processors, and displaying steps which are generically found in electronic gaming machine including the elements accepting wagers for the purpose of presenting an outcome and payout for the results. See US 6186894 B1 at col. 5, lines 25-38 regarding video slot reels including displaying outcomes and that the activity of spinning and producing random outcomes from a wagering game are convention activities well-understood in the art. See Acres (US Pub. No. 2012/0172107 A1) teaches within the electronic gaming art the use of a random number generator to determine numbers for specific reel stop positions in order to determine an outcome which is evaluated if it is a winning combination of symbols appearing on a played payline (paragraph [0073]). Specifically it is conventional to communicate data to output to a user comprising animated reels or static images to communicate an outcome and award due as well as the state of the game. Therefore these limitations do not provide a practical application. Further the means of displaying graphics and animations regarding a result or state of the game are conventional to the art and is directed towards extra solution activity as being a means to output information without changing the identified mental steps above. This includes the act of communicating awards, number of plays, and communicating which reels are active or inactive for a particular game since the displaying of this step is extra solution activity and directed to the outputting of data to inform a player which is conventional to the art. See Pettie (US Pub. No. 2019/0197828 A1) which teaches “To address some of the issues described above, a number of hardware/software components and architectures are utilized in gaming machines that are not typically found in general purpose computing devices, such as PCs, These hardware/software components and architectures, as described below in more detail, include but are not limited to watchdog timers, voltage monitoring systems, state-based software architecture and supporting hardware, specialized communication interfaces, security monitoring and trusted memory.” paragraph [0053] including the elements of security door access “Security monitoring circuits detect intrusion into a gaming machine by monitoring security switches attached to access doors in the slot machine cabinet. Preferably, access violations result in suspension of game play and can trigger additional security operations to preserve the current state of game play.” col. 8 paragraph [0062]). Specifically the act of securing a gaming machine reads on the conventional security element of preventing unauthorized access which is needed to prevent fraud and to meet regulations related to wagering games. Additionally examiner notes the elements read on extra solution activity since the act of securing a gaming machine is not related to the inventive game rules indicated in step 2A and the flow of a game is not modified beyond extra solution activity to include a suspension feature. Specifically this is a security element while the inventive concept in the claims is directed towards game rules. Therefore the hardware and animation features do not provide a practical application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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. Applicant argues that amended claims overcome the previous 101 rejection. See above for the updated rejection. Therefore examiner maintains the 101 rejection since the claim amendments fails to overcome step 2B.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JUSTIN L MYHR whose telephone number is (571)270-7847. The examiner can normally be reached 10AM-6PM.
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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. 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.
/JUSTIN L MYHR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715 9/19/2026
Prosecution Insights