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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on January 16, 2026.
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 9-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception. The claims will be analyzed with respect to the Subject Matter Eligibility Test at MPEP§2106.
Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 1 (see MPEP§2106.03)
The claims recite one of the four statutory categories of subject matter.
Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 2A Prong 1 (see MPEP§2106.04(a-c))
The claims recite abstract ideas in the following categories;
Mathematical concepts including mathematical relationships, formulas, equations or calculations (MPEP§2106.04(a)(2)I) (hereinafter “Math”).
Mental processes (MPEP§2106.04(a)(2)III) (hereinafter “MP”).
The abstract ideas have been noted in the claims below.
Regarding claim 9, receiving situational game data from past live events (MP – see collecting/observing data); simulating a game situation based on the situational game data (MP – see predicting a game outcome, e.g. they are going to pass it this play; Math – see generic calculations that may be associated with the abstraction of a real life event, e.g. half the time they pass); calculating a probability on an action related to the simulated game situation (MP and Math – see the above mental probability assessment or mathematical calculations); periodically updating the situational data based on at least one known outcome of an action of the past live events (MP and Math – see the above mental probability assessment or mathematical calculations as the game situation is continually updated).
Regarding claim 10, filtering a historic database to match the action related to the simulated game situation (MP and Math – see selecting mathematical variables for calculation/inclusion and also remembering what is important in historical gameplay); filtering the game data in the historic database based on the simulated situational game data and one or more schemes (MP and Math – see selecting mathematical variables for calculation/inclusion and also remembering what is important in historical gameplay); determining one or more odds or probabilities for a simulated action related to the simulated game situation based on the filtered game data based on the situational game data and the one or more schemes (MP and Math – see the above mental probability assessment or mathematical calculations as the game situation is continually updated and compared to historic gameplay).
Regarding claim 12, determining at least one player of interest; wherein the player of interest is a player related to the action related to the game situation (MP and Math – see selecting salient information as a mental process or part of mathematical calculation/equation construction).
Regarding claim 15, determining at least one team of interest; wherein the team of interest is a team related to the action related to the game situation (MP and Math – see selecting salient information as a mental process or part of mathematical calculation/equation construction).
Regarding claim 16, determining at least one area of interest on a field of play; wherein the at least one area of interest is an area related to the action related to the game situation (MP and Math – see selecting salient information as a mental process or part of mathematical calculation/equation construction).
Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 2A Prong 2 (see MPEP§2106.04(d))
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements are a display, generic computer hardware; insignificant extra solution activity such as collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis to data; and the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer. These additional elements individually and in combination provide for limitations that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. These additional elements (1) add “insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(g)” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) and (2) generally link “the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(h).” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I).
These additional elements individually and in combination are not limitations that provide for “improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, as discussed in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) apply or use the “judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) implement the “judicial exception with, or using a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(b);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) effect “a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(c);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) or apply or use “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, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(e).” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I). As such the claims as a whole do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 2B (see MPEP§2106.05)
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements are well-understood, routine and conventional generic computer hardware and insignificant extra solution activity (see MPEP§2106.05). The claimed additional elements with citations indicating their well-understood, routine and conventional nature are provided below. Examiner is taking official notice of generic displays and can provide myriad examples of generic display hardware.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claim(s) 9-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. 2020/0105107 by McKeever.
Regarding claim 9, McKeever discloses a method for displaying probabilities on a display (abstract; fig. 1; para. 47-49), comprising: receiving situational game data from past live events (para. 40-43 – see receiving actual race data); simulating a game situation based on the situational game data (fig. 1; para. 45-48 – see predicted win percentage); calculating a probability on an action related to the simulated game situation (fig. 1; para. 45-48 – see predicted win percentage); displaying graphical indicia related to the calculated probability on the action related to the simulated game situation on the display (fig. 1; para. 45-48 – see predicted win percentage displayed); periodically updating the situational data based on at least one known outcome of an action of the past live events (para. 40-43 – see updating data); updating the displayed graphical indicia on the display based on the periodically received new situational data (para. 40-43 – see updating data).
Regarding claim 10, McKeever discloses the method for displaying probabilities on a display of claim 9, wherein calculating a probability on an action related to the simulated game situation comprises: filtering a historic database to match the action related to the simulated game situation (para. 40-49 – see filtering data per horse); filtering the game data in the historic database based on the simulated situational game data and one or more schemes (para. 40-49 – see race simulation); determining one or more odds or probabilities for a simulated action related to the simulated game situation based on the filtered game data based on the situational game data and the one or more schemes (para. 40-49 – see race probability data based on race and horse data).
Regarding claim 11, McKeever discloses the method for displaying probabilities on a display of claim 9, wherein the graphical indicia is a display of at least the probability of one or more outcomes of a simulated play (fig. 1 – see displayed probabilities).
Regarding claim 12, McKeever discloses the method for displaying probabilities on a display of claim 9, further comprising determining at least one player of interest; wherein the player of interest is a player related to the action related to the game situation; and the graphical indicia is at least highlighting one or more of the at least one player of interest (fig. 1; para. 40-49 – see the data filtered by horse or rider).
Regarding claim 13, McKeever discloses the method for displaying probabilities on a display of claim 12, wherein highlighting one or more of the at least one player of interest includes at least one of circling or coloring the at least one player of interest (fig. 1; para. 40-49 – see the box bounded data).
Regarding claim 14, McKeever discloses the method for displaying probabilities on a display of claim 12, wherein the highlighting of the one or more of the at least one player of interest includes at least displaying one of the player's game, season, simulated, and/or career statistics (fig. 1; para. 40-49 – see the displayed names).
Regarding claim 15, McKeever discloses the method for displaying probabilities on a display of claim 9, further comprising determining at least one team of interest; wherein the team of interest is a team related to the action related to the game situation; and wherein the graphical indicia is at least one of the team's game, season, and/or career statistics (fig. 1, 5; para. 40-49, 74-76 – see the updated historic data that is reflected in the displayed probability).
Regarding claim 16, McKeever discloses the method for displaying probabilities on a display of claim 9, further comprising determining at least one area of interest on a field of play; wherein the at least one area of interest is an area related to the action related to the game situation; and the graphical indicia is at least highlighting one or more of the at least one area of interest on the field of play (fig. 1, 5; para. 40-49, 74-76 – see track information).
Regarding claim 17, McKeever discloses the method for displaying probabilities on a display of claim 9, wherein the display of the graphical indicia related to the calculated probability on the action related to the game situation is overlaid on footage of the live event (para. 68-71 – see live updates).
Regarding claim 18, McKeever discloses the method for displaying probabilities on a display of claim 9, wherein the footage of the live event is occurring in substantially real time (para. 68-71 – see live updates).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER J IANNUZZI whose telephone number is (571)272-5793. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30AM-5:30PM EST.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at 571-270-1344. 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.
/PETER J IANNUZZI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715