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 .
Claim Status
After the amendments filed 07/01/2026, claims 1 and 4-22 remain pending, of which 1, 9-12, 17, and 20-22 were amened.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6-13 and 14-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baker et al (U.S. 2004/0021705).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Baker discloses:
a physical reel strip configured to be positioned in a slot machine (¶13-14, ¶61, Fig. 1, Fig. 3, reel strip 34), the physical reel strip comprising:
a transparent surface (¶61-62, Fig. 3, reel strip 34 includes a medium 58 which includes clear film 58a);
a light-diffusion layer coupled to the transparent surface including a layer of ink (¶14, ¶64-66, Fig. 3, silk-screen ink layers 64 and 66 are applied directly to the back of medium 58) comprising:
non-solid ink portions that each include a pattern printed on the transparent surface (¶66-67, Fig. 3, silk-screen ink layers 64 and 66 include portions which consist of half-tone producing patterns or hole array 60b that allows light to pass through); and
solid ink portions printed on the transparent surface between the non-solid ink portions (¶66-67, Fig. 3, second silk screen layer 66 is black UV ink which absorbs all or virtually all of the blacklight from source 54).
Regarding claim 17, Baker discloses:
a slot machine (¶40, Fig. 1B, gaming device 10) comprising:
a physical reel (¶45, physical reels 34) comprising:
a transparent surface (¶61-62, Fig. 3, reel strip 34 includes a medium 58 which includes clear film 58a); and
a light-diffusion layer attached to the transparent surface including a layer of ink (¶14, ¶64-66, Fig. 3, silk-screen ink layers 64 and 66 are applied directly to the back of medium 58) comprising non-solid ink portions that each include at least one repeating pattern printed on the transparent surface (¶66-67, Fig. 3, silk-screen ink layers 64 and 66 include portions which consist of half-tone producing patterns or hole array 60b that allows light to pass through); and
a light source positioned behind a portion of the physical reel and configured to direct a light toward a portion of the physical reel, wherein the light-diffusion layer is configured to reduce an amount of the light that passes through the light-diffusion layer by a threshold amount (¶14, ¶56-57, ¶66, Fig. 3, light source 54 is positioned behind reel and the light from light source 54 is reduced by passing through the opacity of the printed ink layers to selectively block and absorb the backlight thus allowing only a desired amount of light to pass through the non-solid hole arrays).
Regarding claim 4, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses that:
the pattern comprises a type of pattern selected from a plurality of types of patterns based on a characteristic of the slot machine (¶45, ¶61, ¶66-67, each reel 34 displays a plurality of indicia which correspond to a theme of the gaming device 10, the printed silk-screen layer corresponds to the pattern on the indicia of the reels 34).
Regarding claim 6, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses that:
the layer of ink comprises an ink having an opacity between 25% and 75% (¶19, ¶56, the percentage of light blocked varies between zero and one hundred percent).
Regarding claim 7, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses that:
the layer of ink comprises an ink having a color selected from a plurality of ink colors based on a characteristic of the slot machine (¶45, ¶61, ¶66-67, each reel 34 displays a plurality of indicia which correspond to a theme of the gaming device 10, the printed silk-screen layer corresponds to the color of the indicia of the reels 34).
Regarding claim 8, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses that:
the light-diffusion layer is configured to reduce an amount of light that passes through the physical reel strip by a threshold amount (¶14, ¶56, the printed ink layers are configured to block and absorb a threshold amount of light thus allowing a desired amount of light to pass through the non-solid hole arrays).
Regarding claims 9-10 and 15-16, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses that:
the transparent surface includes a front side and a back side (¶61-62, Fig. 3, reel strip 34 includes medium 58 which includes a clear film 58a and a layer of emulsion 58b defining a first structural face and an opposing reverse non-imaged side defining a second face), and
wherein the light-diffusion layer is printed on the back side of the transparent surface (¶64-66, Fig. 3, the light diffusion silk-screen layers 64 and 66 are applied and printed directly onto the back non-imaged side 58a of medium 58),
the physical reel strip further comprising:
a symbol layer coupled to the front side of the transparent surface (¶61-62, Fig. 3, indicia 60a representing the symbol layer is developed on the front emulsion side 58b of the clear medium 58).
Regarding claims 12 and 21, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses that:
printing the light-diffusion layer comprises printing a layer of ink comprising a non-solid pattern on the transparent surface (¶64, ¶66-67, Fig. 3, silk-screen ink layers 64 and 66 include portions which consist of half-tone producing patterns or hole array 60b that allows light to pass through and are printed onto medium 58).
Regarding claims 13 and 22, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses that:
printing the layer of ink comprises printing the layer of ink using an ink having the pattern, an opacity, and a color (¶14, ¶56, the printed ink layers include a symbol pattern, color and desired opacity configured to block and absorb a threshold amount of light thus allowing a desired amount of light to pass through the non-solid hole arrays) based on:
an intensity of a light source in the slot machine;
a distance between the light source in the slot machine and the position of the physical reel strip; and
a game symbol associated with the physical reel strip (¶14, ¶19, ¶21, ¶56, ¶80, software variables governing the halftone array pattern, spacing, and density are selectively manipulated during creation to match up with and step-down the high intensity backlight rays directly behind the target game symbols, highlighting them via a translucent gow).
Regarding claim 14, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses that:
the transparent surface comprises providing a clear polyester substrate (¶62, Fig. 3, clear-base color transparency material 58a is polyester of approximately 7mils in thickness).
Regarding claim 18, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses that:
the physical reel further comprises a symbol layer attached to the light-diffusion layer or the transparent surface such that both the light-diffusion layer and the transparent surface are between the light source and the symbol layer (¶14, ¶49, ¶64-66, backlight source 54 is located inside the reel diameter directly behind the strip and projects through the rear clear face 58a which comprises the silk-screen layers 64 and 66).
Regarding claim 19, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses:
a screen positioned on the opposite side of the physical reel from the light source and configured to display a symbol layer (¶45-50, Fig. 1B, Fig. 3, gaming device 10 includes a video display device 30 which displays the game symbols), wherein the light-diffusion layer is configured to reduce backlighting hotspots on the symbol layer (¶14, ¶56, the printed ink layers are configured to block and absorb a threshold amount of light thus allowing a desired amount of light to pass through the non-solid hole arrays).
Regarding claim 20, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, and further discloses that:
the layer of ink comprising a specific pattern, opacity, and/or color configured to reduce the amount of the light that passes through the light-diffusion layer by the threshold amount (¶14, ¶56, the printed ink layers are include a symbol pattern, color and desired opacity configured to block and absorb a threshold amount of light thus allowing a desired amount of light to pass through the non-solid hole arrays).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baker et al (U.S. 2004/0021705).
Regarding claim 5, Baker discloses that which is discussed above, although Baker does not specifically disclose that the colors include the specific blue color overlaid with and orange color, it would have been an obvious design choice to utilize the well-known complementary color physics of orange and blue in the printing of the diffusion layer to achieve known chromatic effects utilizing the complementary colors. Further, although Baker does not specifically disclose that the pattern comprises horizontal stripes, the use of horizontal stripes overlaid in an orthogonal manner is a well-known standard manner of ensuring uniform diffusion across two axes and would be an obvious matter of design choice to print the symbol patters in such a manner in order to yield the predictable result of optimizing the light diffusion for the gaming machine.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 4-22 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON PINHEIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-1350. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00A-4:30P ET.
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.
/Jason Pinheiro/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/DMITRY SUHOL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights