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 .
Applicant’s submission of a Response
Applicant’s submission of a response was received on 12/22/2025. Presently, claims 1-14 are now pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s representative asserts that the amended claims limitations are not met. However, the rejection of claims 1-14 is maintained as presented below. Moreover, in light of the amendments to the claims, new rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been presented, as discussed in detail below.
Applicant’s representative alleges the following:
In regards to 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection, applicant respectfully submits that the rejection misunderstands the description in Chinese of paragraph 44 of Lai.
In regards to 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection, applicant respectfully submits that the figures of Stardew Valley cited in the office action are merely screenshot pictures, which are too unclear to anticipate any limitation of the claims.
In regards to 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection, applicant respectfully submits that none of the references, whether taken alone or in any combination, disclose or suggest “canceling the matching of the first player and an input operation of the second player and storing information of the first player and the second player as the cancelled matching” and the rest of the amendments made to the claim.
Regarding point (1), the examiner disagrees, but notes that Lai is not relied upon to teach or disclose this limitation in the instant rejection because new amendments have changed certain parameters that needed to be re-evaluated.
Applicant’s representative argues that paragraph 44 of Lai does not disclose "matching the first player and a second player different from the first player, based on at least one of an input operation of the first player and an input operation of a player whom the second player selects as the first player" and "in response to the canceling the matching, based on the stored information, disabling re-matching of the first player and the second player regardless of an elapsed time since the matching while disabling use of the specific game object by the first player and the second player relating to the matching," as recited in amended claim 1.
In response to the arguments above, the office action relies on a newly found prior art reference of Segel et al. (Here's What To Do If You Accidentally Unmatch With Your Potential Soulmate On Bumble; hereinafter Segel) (necessitated by applicant’s amendment) to teach once you unmatch from another user, re-matching is disabled regardless on an elapsed time. (See office action below).
Regarding point (2), the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant’s representative argues that "Drawings and pictures can anticipate claims if they clearly show the structure which is claimed. In re Mraz, 455 F.2d 1069, 173 USPQ 25 (CCPA 1972). However, the picture must show all the claimed structural features and how they are put together. Jockmus v. Leviton, 28 F.2d 812 (2d Cir. 1928).". MPEP § 2125. Applicant respectfully submits that the Figures of Stardew Valley cited in the Office Action are merely screenshot pictures, which are too unclear to anticipate any limitations of the claims.
In response to the arguments above, it should be noted that the rejection is based on the game “Stardew Valley” while the screenshots are merely provided to as evidence of how said game and associated game content anticipates the claim language. Additionally, applicant’s arguments fail to identify specific screenshot features as being “unclear” and it is believed that said screen shots provide sufficient clarity to fully anticipate the claims and show the claimed structure. Furthermore, besides the screenshot, the examiner has provided the sections in the Stardew Wiki webpage where said features may be found. For example: When searching for multiplayer section, simply typing “multiplayer” in the search bar will show the multiplayer section along with all the relied upon features.
Regarding point (3), the examiner notes that Lai is not relied upon to teach or disclose this limitation in the instant rejection.
Applicant’s representative argues that "canceling the matching of the first player matched to the second player based on at least one of an input operation of the first player and an input operation of the second player and storing information of the first player and the second player as the cancelled matching,", "arranging, in the first game field presented to the first player, both a game object operable only by the first player and the specific game object associated with the second player selected by the first player from among a plurality of second players who are matched, and presenting the first game field of the first player in which the game object and the specific game object are arranged to the first player," and "in response to the canceling the matching, based on the stored information, disabling re-matching of the first player and the second player regardless of an elapsed time since the matching while disabling use of the specific game object by the first player and the second player relating to the matching," is not disclosed by the prior art alone or in any combination.
In response to the arguments above, the office action relies on a newly found prior art reference of Segel and Farm Together as evidenced by Farm Together Wiki (hereinafter Farm Wiki) (necessitated by applicant’s amendment) to teach about the matching and re-matching system and permissions of players selected by the first player. (See office action below).
In regards to dependent claims, in light of the remarks and standing rejection below, the examiner asserts the prior art of record teaches all the elements as claimed and these elements satisfy all structural, functional, operational, and spatial limitations currently in the claims. Therefore, the standing rejections are proper and maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1 and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stardew Valley as evidenced by Stardew Valley Wiki (hereinafter Stardew) in view of Segel in view of Farm Wiki.
Regarding claims 1 and 13-14, Stardew discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a game program to be executed by a computer including a processor (inherent because Stardew valley is played mainly on a computer, Nintendo Switch, PlayStation, Xbox, or mobile devices), the game program causing the processor to execute: presenting a first game field associated with a first player, to the first player (the player creating the world is the host of this game field; shown below in the Multiplayer section which was released in August 1st, 2018),
PNG
media_image1.png
465
1410
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
326
722
media_image2.png
Greyscale
; matching the first player and a second player different from the first player (multiplayer mode to match with other players; as shown above in the Multiplayer Section),
PNG
media_image3.png
327
679
media_image3.png
Greyscale
; associating a specific game object shared by the first player matched to the second player with the first player matched to the second player (players share farm, the seeds planted would be the specific game object; shown below in the Gameplay section)
PNG
media_image4.png
456
672
media_image4.png
Greyscale
; disabling use of the specific game object by the first player and the second player relating to the matching (This is an inherent feature in Stardew valley, once the players are unmatched, meaning out of the Co-op farm, they won’t have access to the shared space or any specific game objects inside of the space).
Stardew does not explicitly disclose matching the first player and a second player different from the first player based on at least one of an input operation of the first player and an input operation of a player whom the second player selects as the first player; canceling the matching of the first player matched to the second player based on at least one of an input operation of the first player and an input operation of the second player and storing information of the first player and the second player as the cancelled matching; arranging, in the first game field presented to the first player, both a game object operable only by the first player and the specific game object associated with the second player selected by the first player from among a plurality of second players who are matched, and presenting the first game field of the first player in which the game object and the specific game object are arranged to the first player: and in response to the canceling the matching, based on the stored information, disabling re-matching of the first player and the second player regardless of an elapsed time since the matching while disabling use of the specific game object by the first player and the second player relating to the matching. canceling the matching of the matched first and second players based on an input operation of the first player and an input operation of the second player.
However, Segel focuses on the matching and unmatching feature of the Bumble app and it relates to Stardew because they both have a matching feature for a social setting between users. Segel teaches matching the first player and a second player different from the first player based on at least one of an input operation of the first player and an input operation of a player whom the second player selects as the first player (inherent to bumble because it requires the first player to accept matching with the second player and the second player is also required to accept matching with the first player that was selected by the second player); canceling the matching of the first player matched to the second player based on at least one of an input operation of the first player and an input operation of the second player (requiring input to unmatch a user is inherent to bumble) and storing information of the first player and the second player as the cancelled matching (information is inherently stored to avoid matching again in the future; see 2nd paragraph of Segel); and in response to the canceling the matching, based on the stored information, disabling re-matching of the first player and the second player regardless of an elapsed time since the matching (bumble will not resurface unmatched profiles, once unmatched, it’s permanent; see 2nd paragraph of Segel).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stardew to implement the teachings of Segel for the benefit of allowing a user to control and regulate their matching. By blocking or disabling matching with a player, the user can avoid anyone they don’t like and never be matched with them again.
Farm Wiki focuses on another farming game that allows users to match together and the host of the farm can edit what permissions other players have on their farm, which relates to Stardew because they are both directed to social interaction between players on a shared farm. Farm Wiki teaches arranging, in the first game field presented to the first player, both a game object operable only by the first player and the specific game object associated with the second player selected by the first player from among a plurality of second players who are matched (the player can make sure that he sets permissions so that he can inherently choose what permissions each player will have, such as operation of the crops; see Fig Below),
PNG
media_image5.png
795
715
media_image5.png
Greyscale
and presenting the first game field of the first player in which the game object and the specific game object are arranged to the first player (the shared space is inherently presented to the first player in Farm Wiki).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stardew to implement the teachings of Farm Wiki for the benefit of allowing the host player to have control over the shared space. Although multiple players can be matched and have access to the space, the host player needs to allow or restrict actions of any of the other matched players inside the shared space for security purposes.
Regarding claim 10, Stardew discloses wherein the game program causes the processor to execute arranging (inherent because in Stardew planting seeds is a form of arranging). Stardew does not explicitly disclose in the first game field, only the specific game object associated with the first player and the player among the plurality of other players specified by the first player among specific game objects each associated with respective players of the plurality of other players.
However, Farm wiki focuses on another farming game that allows users to match together and the host of the farm can edit what permissions other players have on their farm, which relates to Stardew because they are both directed to social interaction between players on a shared farm. Farm Wiki teaches the first game field, only the specific game object associated with the first player and the player among the plurality of other players specified by the first player among specific game objects each associated with respective players of the plurality of other players (in Farm Wiki the host player can set specific permissions to selected players; see Figure below).
PNG
media_image5.png
795
715
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stardew to implement the teachings of Farm Wiki for the benefit of allowing the host player to have control over the shared space. Although multiple players can be matched and have access to the space, the host player needs to allow or restrict actions of any of the other matched players inside the shared space for security purposes.
Regarding claim 11, Stardew discloses wherein an area for arranging the specific game object in the first game field is fixed irrespective of which player of the other players is specified by the first player (an inherent feature of Stardew valley is that crops can’t be moved by anyone once planted, therefore the arranging of the specific object is fixed).
Regarding claim 12, Stardew discloses wherein a count of the plurality of other players who can be matched with the first player has an upper limit (the upper limit is 4 players as shown below in the Multiplayer Section).
PNG
media_image2.png
326
722
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stardew in view of Segel in view of Farm Wiki in view of League of Legends as evidenced by Learn to play: League of Legends (hereinafter League).
Regarding claim 2, Stardew discloses matching players in a Coop environment but does not explicitly disclose wherein the matching comprises establishing the matching in response to acceptance of input operations for the matching from both of the first player and the second player.
However, League teaches wherein the matching comprises establishing the matching in response to acceptance of input operations for the matching from both of the first player and the second player (all players need to accept the matching, in 4:24 - 4:30 the first player accepts the match but one of the players doesn’t in 4:35 - 4:42 so the game needs to keep matching, then in 5:55 to 5:59 all players accept the matching).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stardew to implement the teachings of League for the benefit of allowing users to require a deliberate input to start matching with other players, otherwise there is no way to control how a user starts matching. Allowing the user to start their own matching is their way of letting the game know that they are ready to start playing.
Regarding claim 9, Stardew discloses accepting an operation of specifying a player of the plurality of other players (the host player specifies who will be playing in the created space; shown below in the Creating a multiplayer world Section),
PNG
media_image3.png
327
679
media_image3.png
Greyscale
from the first player; and arranging, in the first game field (planting seeds is a form of arranging), the specific game object associated with the player and the first player in response to acceptance of the specifying operation (planting seeds work as a specific game object being arranged; shown below in Experience Section).
PNG
media_image6.png
307
667
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Stardew does not explicitly disclose displaying information of a plurality of other players matched with the first player, on a screen for presenting the first game field to the first player.
However, League teaches displaying information of a plurality of other players matched with the first player (by pressing tab you can see all the players matched; minute 29:00), on a screen for presenting the first game field to the first player (the field where the players are playing acting as the first field; 29:00 – 29:05).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stardew to implement the teachings of League for the benefit of allowing a player to access information about each matched player on the field that is relevant to the progression of the game. By accessing this information players can find out the progress, status, or level of each player matched.
Claims 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stardew in view of Segel in view of Farm Wiki in view of League in view of UCHIBORI (US 20120064969 A1; hereinafter Uchibori).
Regarding claim 3, Stardew discloses matching players in a Coop environment but does not explicitly disclose wherein the matching comprises causing the first player to enable browse of a part of information of the second player and to limit browse of other parts of information of the second player, until the first and second players are matched.
However, Uchibori teaches wherein the matching comprises causing the first player to enable browse of a part of information of the second player and to limit browse of other parts of information of the second player, until the first and second players are matched (restriction of information until players become friends ¶122).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stardew to implement the teachings of Uchibori for the benefit of allowing the user to control the privacy of their information. Limiting or disabling personal information until the user has matched or become friends with another player is a way to control the privacy of your information.
Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stardew in view of Segel in view of Farm Wiki in view of League in view of Uchibori in view of LOIA et al. (US 20160248864 A1; hereinafter Loia).
Regarding claim 4, Stardew discloses wherein the game program causes the processor to execute performing game processing related to the specific game object according to an input operation inputted for the specific game object by the matched first and second players (the shared farm is the one where players share the seeds planted as the specific object and players can interact with the seeds by planting them; shown below in Experience Section),
PNG
media_image6.png
307
667
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Stardew does not disclose the matching comprises enabling, both of the first and second players, to browse information of the first and second players to which the browse is limited, based on a history of input operations of the first and second players for the specific game object.
However, Loia teaches the matching comprises enabling, both of the first and second players, to browse information of the first and second players to which the browse is limited (information of each user is limited and must be unlocked by an unraveling process in ¶44 and this unraveling process is similar to an interactive game in ¶49), based on a history of input operations of the first and second players for the specific game object (there are input operations being performed on the questionaries to unravel hidden information in ¶43, here the Q&A work as a specific game object shared by both users in ¶49 to unlock information about the other user).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stardew to implement the teachings of Loia for the benefit of allowing the users to unlock or discover information about each other in an interactive way. By interacting with the specific game object, limited information starts unraveling for the users which allows for interactive play and at the same time discovering information about the player you matched with.
Regarding claim 5, Stardew discloses wherein the specific game object is configured to enable the first and second players to acquire a different game object by establishment of a predetermined condition in a state where the first and second players are matched (the predetermined conditioned is planting the seeds acting as the specific game object and the different game object is obtained from harvesting a crop; shown below in the Experience Section),
PNG
media_image6.png
307
667
media_image6.png
Greyscale
and the game program causes the processor to execute accepting the input operation for acquiring the different game object only from the first player or the second player (any matched player can harvest the crop and the crop works as a different game object; as shown in the Experience Section above).
Regarding claim 6, Stardew discloses wherein accepting comprises causing at least one of the first and second players to acquire the different game object according to the input operation of either one of the matched first and second players (left click or c can be used to place item or harvest; shown below in the Keyboard and Mouse Section)
PNG
media_image7.png
743
517
media_image7.png
Greyscale
for the acquisition even when both the first and second players do not perform the input operation for the acquisition (auto grabber for auto harvesting even without input from players; shown below in Auto-Grabber Section).
PNG
media_image8.png
598
672
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Stardew discloses wherein accepting comprises causing, the first and second players, to acquire the different game object by accepting the input operation for the acquisition from one of the matched first and second players (left click or c can be used to place item or harvest from any player; shown below in the Keyboard and Mouse Section).
PNG
media_image7.png
743
517
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stardew in view of Segel in view of Farm Wiki in view of League in view of Uchibori in view of Loia in view of McCarthy (US 20150065241 A1; hereinafter McCarthy).
Regarding claim 8, Stardew discloses wherein the game program causes the processor to execute: arranging a first game object (placing the crops is considered arranging); and changing a parameter of the first game object arranged in the first game field (by default when planting seeds parameters are changed like coordinates, location, status, etc.) by accepting the input operation using the different game object from the first player (there is an input when harvesting crops acting as a different game object from any of the players; See Experience section below).
PNG
media_image6.png
307
667
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Stardew does not explicitly disclose when arranging a game object the input operation is accepted only from the first player.
However, McCarthy teaches when arranging a game object the input operation is accepted only from the first player (only one player can access the specific field and plant crops; ¶34).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stardew to implement the teachings of McCarthy for the benefit of allowing the host player to restrict actions of other users in the farm and allow the first user to be the only one with the power to arrange objects. Although the farm can be a shared space, this space is hosted by the first user and thus the first user has more control over the space.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSE ANGELES whose telephone number is (703)756-5338. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-5pm.
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.
/JOSE ANGELES/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/DMITRY SUHOL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715