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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “that is played on the another game device from the another game device” which appears redundant but it is hard to speculate that is intended here. To advance prosecution, the limitation is construed to mean “that is played on the another game device”.
Claim 1 also recites “that is played on any one game device from the external device” again this appears redundant. To advance prosecution, the limitation is construed to mean “that is played on the another game device”.
Claim 2 recites “causes at least one body of the selected characters to be displayed together with the first character”. These characters are recited in a highly generalized manner so it is not a foregone conclusion that we are taking about a character representing a human character and that body mean human body. Likewise, looking at character reasonably broadly, it is unknown what is meant by body as it is unknown what the character is – does it even have a body? Further, it is unknowable what it means that the body be displayed with the first character. To advance prosecution, the limitations is construed as “causes at least one character of the selected characters to be displayed together with the first character.”
Claim 5 recites “the selected characters comprise more of the third character than the second character.” It is unknownable what this is referring to.as what is a character has not been defined in the first place. To advance prosecution, the limitation is construed to mean “the selected character is either the second character or the third character.
Appropriate attention is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
8. Claims 1-5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (a1)(a2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2020/0016491 to Kitsugi.
In Reference to Claims 1 and 20
Kitsugi discloses a game device (Fig. 2 game device 100 [0029]) for playing a game in which a character appears (Figs. 1 and 5A target character of a raising game [0076]), the game device, comprising:
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program (Fig. 2 memory 103, [0030]),
a display controller configured to cause a first character related to the game that is played on the game device to be displayed on a display (Fig. 2 control unit 101 controls display unit 110, see also [0075-0076]); and
a communication circuit configured to perform communication by a first communication method of transmitting and receiving information to and from another game device (Fig. 1 device 100 communicates with a smart phone 200 and via a network 300 to a management server 400 [0022, 0025]) and a second communication method of transmitting and receiving information to and from an external device different from the another game device (device 100 communicates with and plays a raising game with another device 100 [0025] via short-range wireless communication method e.g., BLUETOOTH® [0039], see also Fig. 2 where [t]herefore, the first communication unit 107 and the second communication unit 108 are configured so as to be capable of communicating with other devices using the different communication methods to enable transmission and reception of information.), wherein the communication circuit is configured to:
obtain information about a second character (target character on device 110 [0075-0076]) that appears in the game that is played on the another game device from the another game device through the first communication method (raising game [0075-0076] as between respective target characters), and obtain information about a third character (birth of a new character [0059, 0094, 0101]) that appears in the game that is played on any one game device from the external device through the second communication method ([0037] choice of communication method based on the amount of information transmitted or state needs to be maintained, in the case of a birth vs visiting ([0075-0076]) it is less so that the short distance wireless method can be used), and wherein the display controller is configured to cause characters selected from the second character and the third character to be displayed in a predetermined area during the game (based on whether the target characters are in an affectionate state or a rebellious state the characters occupy the center or peripheral locations of the displays of units 110 and 110, respectively. [0071]).
In Reference to Claim 2
Kitsugi discloses wherein the display controller causes at least one of the selected characters to be displayed together with the first character when the first character moves to the predetermined area (the characters are able to visit one another and as such if a target character of device 100 is selected to visit the target character of device 110 then the target character leaves device 100 and is displayed with the target character on device 110 ([0075-0076]).
In Reference to Claim 3
Kitsugi discloses comprising an operation input interface configured to receive an operation input from a user, wherein the first character is a character whose motion is controlled in response to an operation input from a user of the game device in the game that is played on the game device (for device 100, there is operation input unit 106 [0036]), wherein the second character is a character whose motion is controlled in response to 30 an operation input from a user of the another game device in the game that is played on the another game device (for device 110, there is operation input unit 106 [0036]), and wherein the third character is a character whose motion is controlled in response to an operation input from a user of the any one game device in the game that is played on the any one game device (either target character being a parent is able to tend to the new character that was birthed and is being raised where game content is shared [0064-0065] and raising [0066-0071]).
In Reference to Claim 4
Kitsugi discloses wherein motion of the selected characters in the predetermined area is controlled without being based on an operation input from a user (movement of the new character happens as the character grows, for example, the character in the egg state hatches and grows [0098]).
In Reference to Claim 5
Kitsugi discloses wherein the selected character is either the second character or the third character ([through the individual input controls either players of either device is able to select one of the target characters or the new character, for example, to perform a visit ([0059, 0075-0076]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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 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.
10. 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.
11. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
12. Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitsugi in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2009/0098919 to Yuji.
In Reference to Claims 11-14
Examiner deems that displaying information receives patentable weight however what the information is about is non-functional descriptive matter because the claim does nor operate any differently as a result of whatever the content of the information is. Nonetheless, the art according to Yuji is relied upon to demonstrate display of information and content.
In Reference to Claims 11 to 13
Kitsugi discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose wherein the display controller is configured to further cause the information about the second character and the information about the third character to be displayed on the display; wherein the information about the second character comprises information about a user of the another game device; and wherein the information about the second character comprises information about a user of the another game device. One of skill in the art would be aware of the video game and program of Yuji.
Yuji teaches of displaying information about a character where “[i]f the procedure of Step S112 finishes, the controller 103 displays the information based upon the result of progress of the task on the display screen 122 as result report in connection with the action of the participant character so as to present the information to the player. If the instructed task is a battle with the enemy character and the task has not been accomplished, reasons why the task has not been accomplished are displayed. If the instructed task has been accomplished, on the contrary, information showing a hint of action preferable as a next action of the player character is displayed (Step S113).” ([0068], see also Figs. 4C). Further, Yugi teaches of selecting a task, battle, and opponent (Fig. 4A) such that the information provided to the player of character 221 (Fig. 4C) is about the completion of the task relative to {or about} a particular opponent. As to Claim 11 information about the task is about character 201 and choosing Character A-E as an opponent is information about another character. As to Claim 12, information in Fig. 4B, information about 221 earning level 2 is about character 221 and not about character 222. As to Claim 13, information 231 is about character 221 and information about the user of another device as having won a battle.
The Supreme Court in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; and
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Here, it would require only routine skill in the art to modify the display of Kitsugi with the character information of Yuji to achieve the predictable result of helping the player know how to better take care of raising a new character by providing feedback to improve performance and achieve desired game outcomes. The information is very character specific where the information {feedback} about one character is not about another character. The Courts have held that applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results to be indicia of obviousness.
In Reference to Claim 14
Examiner construes “wherein the display controller is configured to cause a character selected from the third character and the second character whose information has been recently obtained from the another game device using the first communication method to be displayed in a predetermined area during the game” as an intended use claim wherein despite any of the information collected and displayed for either character selected (See rejection of Claims 11-13) can be displayed when the player is not in short range distance from another player such that the network method is invoked as the short range method will be non-responses (e.g., lost signal). In combination with Kitsugi, information of a target character or the new character is displayed using the first communication method {network} when the players are outside of short distance communication range.
Allowable Subject Matter
13. Claims 6-10 and 15-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
14. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
the prior art in combination with the balance of the claim limitations does not teach or suggest
further comprising a lottery circuit for performing lottery as to whether to cause the second character to be displayed in connection with display of the predetermined area, wherein when a result of lottery by the lottery circuit is a winning, the selected characters comprise the second character/ As to Claim 9, Kitsugi discloses wherein the predetermined area comprises a plurality of regions (center and peripheral regions [0071]), and wherein the display controller is configured t place different characters among the selected characters in the plurality of regions, respectively (based on whether the character is in an affectionate or rebellious state determines which area the character is placed ([0071]), and However, the reference does not change a region to be displayed among the plurality of regions, in response to an operation input made during display of the predetermined area, and register information in a first list and a second list and make update conditions different between the first list and the second list.
Conclusion
15. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is in the Notice of References Cited.
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Paul A. D’Agostino whose telephone number is (571) 270-1992.
17. 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.
18. 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 571-270-2992.
/PAUL A D'AGOSTINO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715