CTNF 18/383,283 CTNF 86185 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 03/23/2026. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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 r esponsive 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. 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. Therefore the hardware and animation features do not provide a practical application. Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 03/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues against the previous 101 regarding steps that cannot be performed in the mind. Specifically that no mental process is recited for the accumulation of symbols and subsequent actions that occur. Examiner points to bolded sections of the language in the 101 rejection above which shows the mental step with focus on such language as “responsive to” which reads on the mental step of observing a state of the game (e.g. what symbols are shown) and determining a subsequent actions according to rules. For example an individual can count the symbols which occur in a game outcome, including for multiple games, and know what state a game should next move to based on the count and the rules For example if five symbols over a series of plays would have a reel set activate a person can mentally determine that this action should occur based on the count. The actual machine steps, such as generating symbols and activating reels, are addressed in step 2B. Therefore examiner finds that an exception is recited in step 2A. As for the claims as a whole this is addressed further in step 2B wherein the additional elements beyond the identified exception are considered. In step 2B it is found that the machine elements do not overcome the 101 rejection as indicated above since in step 2B the elements are directed to conventional and extra solution activity features. As per the practical application the claims again are considered as a whole and applicant argues that a practical application is provided based on the game supporting the features of accumulating and adding initiations as claimed. Examiner points out that this goes towards rules for a game and is directed towards how the game is played but not an improvement such as improving on a machine element related to how the game is carried out. Game rules and unique games are not a practical application but instead directed towards a series of mental steps on how to play a game. Applicant further argues an improvement to the machine interface such as the user interface being presented based on the accumulation and initiations as claimed. It is unclear to examiner how this improves the function of the user interface beyond presenting of a game with a game theme. For example this appears to be presenting images related to how the game is played and not towards improving how an interface is presented. This would be directed towards the conventional feature of presenting on a display the current state of a game with the particular image being a theme and therefore not a practical application under step 2A or significantly more than step 2B. Presenting a themed image is not an improvement of itself since it is the normal function of a user interface to present an image for the state of the game when playing a game. Therefore examiner disagrees a practical application is recited though clarification is requested. For example does this improve on memory, display usage, or other practical features beyond displaying the state of the game. Therefore for the above reasons the 101 rejection is maintained . As per the prior art examiner agrees that the amended language overcomes the prior art since the prior art functions in a different manner and it would not have been obvious to modify it accordingly . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Aoki et al. (US Pub. No. 2015/0356833 A1) teaches a slot game wherein after collecting a certain number of non-triggering symbols awards a free-spin award is provided to the player; the bonus game is triggered automatically (without requiring the trigger symbol T); the bonus game is triggered upon initiation by the player; and the number of collected non-trigger symbols are added to the bonus game. 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 5/28/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/383,283 Page 2 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/383,283 Page 3 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/383,283 Page 4 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/383,283 Page 5 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/383,283 Page 6 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/383,283 Page 7 Art Unit: 3715
Prosecution Insights