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 02/02/2026 has been considered. It is noted that claims 1,5,8,9,14,15,17, and 19 have been amended.
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 a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1-20 are directed to an abstract idea of organizing human activity. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
Step 1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter
More specifically, regarding Step 1, of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, the claims are directed to a method and system, which is a statutory category of invention.
Step 2a1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims are analyzed to determine whether it is directed to a judicial exception.
The claims recite a judicial exception.
Claim 1 recites a gaming device comprising:
a display device;
a biometric feedback device;
a processor circuit; and
a memory coupled to the processor circuit, the memory comprising machine readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit, cause the processor circuit to:
provide a real-time environmental model of a shared virtual environment (SVE) comprising a plurality of virtual persons and a plurality of virtual Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs) each providing a virtual wagering game;
transmit display data corresponding to the SVE to a first player device worn by a first player, the display data comprising user display data that causes the display device to render a portion of the SVE based on a virtual orientation of the first player device and a virtual location of the first player in the SVE;
determine a virtual environment condition in the SVE; and
based on the virtual environment condition in the SVE, operate the biometric feedback device to provide biometric feedback to the first player.
Claim 17 recites a system comprising:
a processor circuit; and
a memory coupled to the processor circuit, the memory comprising machine readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit, cause the processor circuit to:
provide a real-time environmental model of a shared virtual environment (SVE) comprising a plurality of virtual persons and a plurality of virtual Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs) each providing a virtual wagering game;
transmit display data corresponding to the SVE to a first player device worn by a first player, the display data comprising user display data that causes a display device in the first player device to render a portion of the SVE based on a virtual orientation of the first player device and a virtual location of the first player in the SVE;
receive sensor data from a biometric sensor associated with a physical state of the first player; and
based on the sensor data, modify a portion of the SVE to react to the physical state of the first player.
Claim 19 recite the steps of a method comprising:
providing, by a processor circuit, a real-time environmental model of a shared virtual environment (SVE) comprising a plurality of virtual persons and a plurality of virtual Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs) each providing a virtual wagering game;
transmitting, by the processor circuit, display data corresponding to the SVE to a first player device worn by a first player, the display data comprising user display data that causes a display device in the first player device to render a portion of the SVE based on a virtual orientation of the first player device and a virtual location of the first player in the SVE;
determining, by the processor circuit, a virtual environment condition in the SVE; and
based on the virtual environment condition in the SVE, operating, by the processor circuit, a biometric feedback device to provide biometric feedback to the first player.
The claim limitations (as underlined above) are steps of organizing human activity.
According to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Guidelines, organizing human activity includes managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). The interaction encompasses both activity of a single person (for example a person following a set of instructions) and activity that involves multiple people (such as a commercial or legal interaction). Thus, some interactions between a person and a computer (for example a method of a person conducting activity using an electronic device) may fall within this grouping.
The claim limitations (as underlined) recite that a host game is initiated and a virtual wager associated with a player is received. The steps of playing a wagering game and managing a wagering game is step of a fundamental economic principle or practice and also step of managing social activities. The abstract idea of organizing human activity includes managing interaction between people including social activities. Therefore, the claim recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity.
Step 2a2 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
The second prong of step 2a is the consideration if the claim limitations are directed to a practical application.
Limitations that are indicative of integration into a practical application:
-Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
-Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
-Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b)
-Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
-Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo
Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application:
-Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f)
-Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)
-Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h)
Claims 1-20 do not apply a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment, and do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing.
Claims 1-20 are not directed to an improvement to a function of a computer. There is no improvement to a technical field. In addition, the claims do not apply the judicial exception with, or by use of a particular machine.
The claim recite one or more processors to perform the abstract idea of managing a game. As indicated in Applicant’s specification (paragraphs 33 and 34), the user device is a general purpose computer. Although not positively claimed as part of the claimed system, the claim indicates that that system is connected to a server, and databases. The server, database, are also used to implement the abstract idea in a computer embodiment. The use of a computer generally links the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. For the reasons as discussed above, the claim limitations are not integrated to a practical application.
Step 2b of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claim as a whole is analyzed to determine whether any element, or combination of elements, is sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception.
The claims recites additional limitation of a computer system. These limitations are not positively claimed to be part of the claimed system. Assuming that they were part of the claims system, these limitations in combination with the user terminal is used to transmit and storing (retrieving and providing steps, identify and display information (event information, location, selection options, prizes).
The courts have ruled that storing data in a database and retrieving data from a database is well-known conventional and routine functions of a computer as indicated below.
Electronic recordkeeping, Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 225, 110 USPQ2d 1984 (2014) (creating and maintaining "shadow accounts"); Ultramercial, 772 F.3d at 716, 112 USPQ2d at 1755 (updating an activity log).
Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93;
The steps of identifying events, identifying and displaying available outcomes, providing selection options, are steps of presenting offers. The courts have ruled that a computer to present offers is well-known, routine and convention, or insignificant extra solution activity.
Determining an estimated outcome and setting a price, OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93; and
The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claims 1-7,16,17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmuck et al (US 2021/0019919) in view of Stelzer et al (US 2007/0060388).
Regarding claims 1, 16, 17, and 19: Schmuck et al discloses a gaming device comprising: a display device (see figure 3); a biometric feedback device (see paragraph [0003]); a processor circuit (see figure 3); and a memory coupled to the processor circuit, the memory comprising machine readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit, cause the processor circuit to: provide a real-time environmental model of a shared virtual environment (SVE) comprising a plurality of virtual persons and a plurality of virtual gaming devices (see paragraphs [0031]-[0042]); transmit display data corresponding to the SVE to a first player device worn by a first player, the display data comprising user display data that causes the display device to render a portion of the SVE based on a virtual orientation of the first player device and a virtual location of the first player in the SVE (see paragraph [0023], [0031]-[0042], and [0045]); determine a virtual environment condition in the SVE (see paragraphs [0031]-[0042]); and based on the virtual environment condition in the SVE, operate the biometric feedback device to provide biometric feedback to the first player (see paragraphs [0003], [0031]-[0042], [0052]).
In an analogous invention, Stelzer et al teaches electronic gaming machine providing virtual wagering game (see paragraph [0036], showing virtual character 30 scratches her right hand after "Mark Raises" (virtual character 20) and the wagering is to virtual character 30. In the electronic game 101, one of the players is the user of the amusement device 8, which may have a virtual character).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to modify Schmuck’s gaming system as taught by Stelzer’s virtual wagering game for the purpose of providing the user with an opportunity to participate in a virtual game while also having the ability to wager in the virtual environment. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the gaming system
Regarding claim 2: Schmuck et al discloses wherein the biometric feedback device comprises a haptic feedback device to provide tactile feedback to the first player corresponding to the first player virtually contacting a virtual object in the SVE (see paragraphs [0003], [0031]-[0042], [0052]).
Regarding claim 3: Schmuck et al discloses wherein the virtual object comprises a virtual vehicle corresponding to a real-world vehicle participating in a real-world sporting event, and wherein the tactile feedback comprises manipulating virtual vehicle instruments in the virtual vehicle (see paragraphs [0003], [0069], showing providing displaying of virtual objects that correspond to physical objects in the external environment and haptic feedback).
Regarding claim 4: Schmuck et al discloses wherein the virtual object comprises a virtual animal corresponding to a real-world animal participating in a real-world sporting event, and wherein the tactile feedback comprises virtually riding the virtual animal (see paragraphs [0003], [0069], showing providing displaying of virtual objects that correspond to physical objects in the external environment and haptic feedback).
Regarding claim 5: Schmuck et al discloses wherein the virtual object comprises a virtual balloon associated with a win at a virtual gaming device, and wherein the tactile feedback comprises virtually touching the virtual balloon (see paragraphs [0003], [0069], showing providing displaying of virtual objects that correspond to physical objects in the external environment and haptic feedback).
Regarding claim 6: Schmuck et al discloses wherein the virtual object comprises a virtual slot machine handle, and wherein the tactile feedback comprises virtual resistance during a virtual pull of the virtual slot machine handle by the first player (see paragraphs [0003], [0069], showing providing displaying of virtual objects that correspond to physical objects in the external environment and haptic feedback).
Regarding claim 7: Schmuck et al discloses wherein the virtual object comprises a spinning virtual slot reel, wherein the tactile feedback comprises virtual resistance of the virtual slot reel, and wherein virtually touching the virtual slot reel by the first player causes the virtual slot reel to stop spinning and generate a virtual wagering game result (see paragraphs [0003], [0069], showing providing displaying of virtual objects that correspond to physical objects in the external environment and haptic feedback).
Claims 8-15, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmuck et al (US 2021/0019919) in view of Stelzer et al (US 2007/0060388) and further in view of Buchner et al (US 2005/0113167).
Regarding claim 8: Schmuck et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed.
However, Schmuck et al does not disclose wherein the biometric feedback device comprises a heating device to provide thermal feedback to the first player corresponding to a virtual wagering game state of a virtual wagering game in the SVE.
In an analogous invention, Buchner et al teaches wherein the biometric feedback device comprises a heating device to provide thermal feedback to the first player corresponding to a virtual game in the SVE (see figure 1; paragraphs [0022], [0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to modify Schmuck’s gaming system as taught by Buchner’s biometric feedback for the purpose of having a system for alerting and providing feedback to users of the virtual gaming system. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the gaming system.
Regarding claim 9: Schmuck et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed.
However, Schmuck et al does not disclose further comprising a seat comprising the heating device to warm the seat based on an award from the virtual wagering game meeting a predetermined threshold.
In an analogous invention, Buchner et al teaches further comprising a seat comprising the heating device to warm the seat based on an award from the virtual game meeting a predetermined threshold (see figure 1; paragraphs [0022], [0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to modify Schmuck’s gaming system as taught by Buchner’s biometric feedback for the purpose of having a system for alerting and providing feedback to users of the virtual gaming system. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the gaming system.
Regarding claim 10: Schmuck et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed.
However, Schmuck et al does not disclose wherein the biometric feedback device comprises a brain interface to provide electrical impulses into a brain of the first player to simulate a sensory input.
In an analogous invention, Buchner et al teaches wherein the biometric feedback device comprises a brain interface to provide electrical impulses into a brain of the first player to simulate a sensory input (see figure 1; paragraphs [0022], [0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to modify Schmuck’s gaming system as taught by Buchner’s biometric feedback for the purpose of having a system for alerting and providing feedback to users of the virtual gaming system. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the gaming system.
Regarding claims 11, 14, 15, and 20: Schmuck et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed.
In an analogous invention, Buchner et al teaches further comprising a biometric sensor, wherein the instructions further cause the processor circuit to: receive sensor data from the biometric sensor associated with a physical state of the first player; and based on the sensor data, modify a portion of the SVE to react to the physical state of the first player (see figure 1; paragraphs [0022], [0030], [0047]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to modify Schmuck’s gaming system as taught by Buchner’s biometric feedback for the purpose of having a system for alerting and providing feedback to users of the virtual gaming system. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the gaming system.
Regarding claims 12 and 18: Schmuck et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed.
However, Schmuck et al not discloses wherein the biometric sensor comprises a heart rate monitor to obtain a heart rate of the first player.
In an analogous invention, Buchner et al teaches wherein the biometric sensor comprises a heart rate monitor to obtain a heart rate of the first player (see paragraph [0041]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to modify Schmuck’s gaming system as taught by Buchner’s biometric feedback for the purpose of having a system for alerting and providing feedback to users of the virtual gaming system. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the gaming system.
Regarding claim 13: Schmuck et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed.
However, Schmuck et al does not disclose wherein the biometric sensor comprises an electrical impulse sensor to detect electrical impulses in a brain of the first player.
In an analogous invention, Buchner et al teaches wherein the biometric sensor comprises an electrical impulse sensor to detect electrical impulses in a brain of the first player (see figure 1; paragraphs [0022], [0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to modify Schmuck’s gaming system as taught by Buchner’s biometric feedback for the purpose of having a system for alerting and providing feedback to users of the virtual gaming system. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the gaming system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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 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 at (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 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.
/ADETOKUNBO O TORIMIRO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715