Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/471,341

FIXED WAGER WINDOW COUNTDOWN

Final Rejection §DP
Filed
Sep 21, 2023
Examiner
TORIMIRO, ADETOKUNBO OLUSEGUN
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Adrenalineip
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
748 granted / 983 resolved
+6.1% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1020
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
§103
33.3%
-6.7% vs TC avg
§102
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
§112
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 983 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . The Applicant’s argument and amendment received on 01/20/2026 has been considered. It is noted that claims 1-5 have been amended. New claims 6-12 has been added. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,798,355. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both describe a system comprising: a historical database configured to store historical play data; and at least one sensor configured to record data from a location of a sporting event, wherein the system is configured to perform, with a processor, steps of: detecting, via the at least one sensor, in the sporting event, at least one indicator of a play in the sporting event; comparing the at least one indicator to the historical play data; estimating an amount of time remaining until a next play in the sporting event; and sending, to a device, indicia of the estimated amount of time remaining until the next play (see claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,798,355). Claims 1-12 of the present application recites similar limitations than that of the claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,798,355, and hence appears that the subject matter of the present application is broader in scope than that of U.S. Patent No. 11,798,355 and is therefore an obvious variant thereof. The following claim chart shows the claim-to-claim comparison between independent claim 1 from the present application and claim 7 of the U.S. Patent No. 11,798,355. 18/471,341 11,798,355 1. A system comprising: a historical database configured to store historical play data; and at least one sensor configured to record data from a location of a sporting event, wherein the system is configured to perform, with a processor, steps of: detecting, via the at least one sensor, in the sporting event, at least one indicator of a play in the sporting event; comparing the at least one indicator to the historical play data; estimating an amount of time remaining until a next play in the sporting event; and sending, to a device, indicia of the estimated amount of time remaining until the next play . 7. A system for calculating estimated time remaining to place a user wager on a play available as an option in a play by play wagering game, comprising: a database configured to store a plurality of received wagers of the play by play wagering game during a live sporting event, the database further storing durations of a plurality of current wager offers, a historical play database containing data about previous wager offers; and a wager offer module, configured to provide, to a user device, the plurality of current wager offers stored in the database, including a first group of current wager offers and a second group of current wager offers different from the first group; wherein the system is configured to provide automated content recognition (ACR) and further comprises a media library database comprising a plurality of reference fingerprint media files, wherein the system is configured to retrieve an external data stream comprising media content in real time, compare the external data stream to the plurality of reference fingerprint media files using ACR, and identify one or more matches; wherein the system is configured to perform, with a processor, steps of: providing, to the user device, the first group of current wager offers; detecting, via ACR analysis of the external data stream or via the at least one sensor, in the live sporting event, at least one indicator of an end of a wagering time; estimating, with the wager offer module, from an occurrence of the at least one indicator, an estimated amount of time remaining to place the user wager on a next play based on durations of one or more previous wager offers for similar plays; providing, to the user device, the estimated amount of time; closing selection, from the user device, of current wager offers in the first group; after closing selection of the current wager offers in the first group, providing the second group of current wager offers to the user device, wherein the system is further configured to determine a similarity score determined by a comparison of context of the next play on which the one or more current wager offers are provided and the previous wager offers in the historical play database, and the system is configured to use the similarity score to adjust the estimated amount of time remaining to place the user wager on the next play. This is an obviousness-type double patenting rejection. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks, filed 01/20/2026, with respect to the 35 USC 101 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 101 rejection of claims 1-5 has been withdrawn. Applicant's arguments with respect to the Obviousness Double Patenting Rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner points out that although the claim was amended, the subject matter and limitations are still obvious and a nonstatutory double patenting rejection is still appropriate. The examiner notes that a nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). The rejection is therefore maintained. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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. 9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADETOKUNBO OLUSEGUN TORIMIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-1345. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri (8am - 4pm). 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, Peter Vasat can be reached on (571) 270-7625. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ADETOKUNBO O TORIMIRO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 21, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Jan 20, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 14, 2026
Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597315
REAL TIME ACTION OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592123
ACCESSING GAMING ESTABLISHMENT ACCOUNT FUNDS WITH A TICKET VOUCHER BASED ON MULTIPLE CASHOUT INPUTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592120
SLOT MACHINE DATA AND RECOMMENDATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12562029
GAMING DEVICE AND METHOD OF CONDUCTING A GAME WITH A CHANGEABLE BONUS VALUE FEATURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12562032
ASSIGNMENT OF PLAYER GROUPS AND DETERMINATION OF GROUP PAYOUTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+16.5%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 983 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month