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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/16/26 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
The previous objections to the claims have been withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claims, filed 02/16/26.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of the independent claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. That is, Englman does not appear to disclose a display surface coupled to the set of mechanical reels. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Pacey et al. (U.S. Pub. 2009/0075721 A1), as presented in detail below.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, 9-11, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Englman et al. (U.S. Pub. 2011/0183746 A1) (hereinafter “Englman”) in view of Pacey et al. (U.S. Pub. 2009/0075721 A1) (hereinafter “Pacey”).
Regarding claim 1, Englman discloses an electronic gaming machine (“EGM”) (Fig. 1a; [0008]; [0021], gaming machine (e.g., slot machine)) comprising:
a set of mechanical reels (Fig. 4B; [0029]; [0046], wherein the gaming machine may include a number of mechanical reels);
a display surface overlaid on the set of mechanical reels (Fig. 4B, #60; [0046], partially reflective mirror positioned over the mechanical reels 54); and
a projector configured to project a digital element on the display surface (Fig. 4B, #58; [0046], video display (i.e., any suitable video projection display) for providing video images which appear to be superimposed over the mechanical reels), the display surface being located between the projector and the set of mechanical reels (Fig. 4B; [0046]).
Englman may not further explicitly disclose the display surface coupled to the set of mechanical reels. However, Pacey, directed to gaming machines ([0003]), teaches wherein a projection surface (display surface) is mounted to a rotatable structure and has a radius of curvature that is similar to that of a mechanical reel or other rotatable mechanical structure within a typical slot machine (Fig. 5D; [0089]; [0093], wherein video display device (projector) is configured to project images onto the outside surface of the projection surface). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Englman such that the display surface (projection surface) positioned over the mechanical reels is coupled to the mechanical reels (rotatable structures), as taught by Pacey, to allow the projector (video display device) to project images at a downward angle, upward angle, or from either the left or right of the projection surface onto the projection surface, and/or to achieve the claimed invention (Pacey, [0093]).
Regarding claim 3, Englman further discloses wherein the display surface comprises a transparent film overlaid on the set of mechanical reels and configured to allow the set of mechanical reels to be viewed through the display surface ([0046-0047], wherein the partially reflective mirror is positioned over the mechanical reels and the video display is situated for providing video images which appear to be superimposed over the mechanical reels).
Regarding claim 4, Englman further discloses wherein the projector [is] configured to project the digital element on a portion of the display surface blocking a corresponding portion of the set of mechanical reels being viewed through the display surface ([0046-0047], wherein the superimposed video images may selectively be made semi-transparent or opaque in selected places, allowing the superimposed images to completely block certain areas of the display). However, Englman may not further explicitly disclose wherein the projector comprises a laser projector. Nevertheless, Pacey teaches this limitation ([0079], where the video display device is a projection device that transmits and projects images onto a transparent layer, wherein the video display device can be an LCD projection device, or rather, can include traditional projection technologies such as laser projection displays). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a laser projector, as taught by Pacey, as an alternative embodiment to achieve the same result of projecting images onto a display surface.
Regarding claim 9, Englman further discloses wherein the digital element comprises a virtual version of content on the set of mechanical reels (Figs. 5-6; [0046]; [0063-0065], wherein the video image comprises a virtual version of content superimposed on mechanical reels).
Regarding claim 10, Englman discloses an electronic gaming machine (“EGM”) (Fig. 1a; [0008]; [0021], gaming machine (e.g., slot machine)) comprising:
a controller comprising processing circuitry (Fig. 2; [0038], central processor unit 34, also referred to as a controller or processor, which executes one or more game programs stored in a computer readable storage medium); and
memory communicatively coupled to the processing circuitry and comprising machine-readable instructions stored therein that are executable by the processing circuitry to cause the EGM to perform operations (Fig. 2; [0038], memory 36 comprising the computer readable storage medium storing the one or more game programs executable by the central processing unit 34 coupled thereto) comprising: spinning a set of mechanical reels as part of a wagering game (Figs. 1a & 4B; [0024]; [0029]; [0038]; [0040-0042]; [0046]; [0049]; [0084], wherein a player pushes a button(s) or interacts with a touch screen (e.g., touch screen configured in cover/window 62) to operate the gaming machine comprising a plurality of mechanical reels); and
controlling a projector to display a digital element on a display surface overlaid on the set of the mechanical reels, the display surface being between the projector and the set of mechanical reels (Fig. 4B; [0038]; [0040-0042]; [0046]; [0049]; [0084], wherein a video display (i.e., any suitable video projection display) provides a video image (digital element) on a partially reflective mirror (display surface) positioned over the mechanical reels and between the plurality of mechanical reels and the video display).
Englman may not further explicitly disclose the display surface coupled to the set of mechanical reels. However, Pacey, directed to gaming machines ([0003]), teaches wherein a projection surface (display surface) is mounted to a rotatable structure and has a radius of curvature that is similar to that of a mechanical reel or other rotatable mechanical structure within a typical slot machine (Fig. 5D; [0089]; [0093], wherein video display device (projector) is configured to project images onto the outside surface of the projection surface). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Englman such that the display surface (projection surface) positioned over the mechanical reels is coupled to the mechanical reels (rotatable structures), as taught by Pacey, to allow the projector (video display device) to project images at a downward angle, upward angle, or from either the left or right of the projection surface onto the projection surface, and/or to achieve the claimed invention (Pacey, [0093]).
Regarding claim 11, Englman further discloses wherein the display surface comprises a reflective film overlaid on the set of mechanical reels that is transparent ([0046-0047], wherein the partially reflective mirror is positioned over the mechanical reels and the video display is situated for providing video images which appear to be superimposed over the mechanical reels), and wherein controlling the projector to display the digital element comprises blocking a portion of the set of mechanical reels from being visible through the display surface ([0046-0047], wherein the superimposed video images may selectively be made semi-transparent or opaque in selected places, allowing the superimposed images to completely block certain areas of the display).
Regarding claim 18, Englman further discloses the operations further comprising: determining an outcome of the wagering game based on a result of the spinning the set of mechanical reels and the digital element (Fig. 1a; [0026]; [0052]; [0058]; [0073]; [0075-0076]; [0081], determining an outcome (e.g., winning outcome) based on the symbols of the set of mechanical reels and the displayed virtual images (e.g., flaming character symbols along a payline that could yield an award)).
Regarding claim 19, Englman discloses an electronic gaming machine (“EGM”) (Fig. 1a; [0008]; [0021], gaming machine (e.g., slot machine)) comprising:
a controller comprising processing circuitry (Figs. 2 & 4B; [0038-0039]; [0046], processor (CPU), also referred to as a controller, communicatively coupled to the primary display area 14 comprising the video display);
memory communicatively coupled to the processing circuitry and comprising instructions stored therein that are executable by the processing circuitry to cause the EGM to perform operations (Fig. 2; [0038-0039]) comprising:
determining physical content on a set of mechanical reels associated with a wagering game ([0075], wherein, for example, it is determined whether the combination of symbols (content) on a set of mechanical reels along a pay line comprises a winning combination); and
controlling a projector to display digital content on a display surface overlaid on the set of the mechanical reels, the display surface being between the projector and the set of mechanical reels (Fig. 4B; [0038]; [0040-0042]; [0046]; [0049]; [0084], wherein a video display (i.e., any suitable video projection display) provides a video image (digital element) on a partially reflective mirror (display surface) positioned over the mechanical reels and between the plurality of mechanical reels and the video display), the digital content based on the physical content (Figs. 5-6; [0046]; [0063-0065], wherein, for example, following a losing outcome, a virtual image (character 100) is activated and displayed).
Englman may not further explicitly disclose the display surface coupled to the set of mechanical reels. However, Pacey, directed to gaming machines ([0003]), teaches wherein a projection surface (display surface) is mounted to a rotatable structure and has a radius of curvature that is similar to that of a mechanical reel or other rotatable mechanical structure within a typical slot machine (Fig. 5D; [0089]; [0093], wherein video display device (projector) is configured to project images onto the outside surface of the projection surface). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Englman such that the display surface (projection surface) positioned over the mechanical reels is coupled to the mechanical reels (rotatable structures), as taught by Pacey, to allow the projector (video display device) to project images at a downward angle, upward angle, or from either the left or right of the projection surface onto the projection surface, and/or to achieve the claimed invention (Pacey, [0093]).
Claims 2, 8, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Englman in view of Pacey, as applied to claims 1 and 10, and in further view of Baerlocher et al. (U.S. Pub. 2023/0101988 A1) (hereinafter “Baelocher”).
Regarding claim 2, Englman further discloses wherein the projector is further configured to project the digital element onto the display surface ([0046]), and wherein the display surface comprises a reflective film overlaid on the set of mechanical reels ([0046], the partially reflective mirror is positioned over the mechanical reels). However, Englman may not further explicitly disclose the reflective film is configured to block visibility of the mechanical reel by a user of the EGM at positions on the display surface receiving light from the projector. Nevetheless, Baelocher, directed to a gaming machine ([0003]), teaches wherein the orientation of the display device in front of the mechanical reels allows for all or part of the mechanical reels to be blocked or otherwise not viewable ([0024]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the placement of the projector (video display) in order to adjust the transparency of the display, as taught by Baerlocher, based on the desired video images to be displayed/to block visibility of the mechanical reels (Baerlocher, [0024]).
Regarding claim 8, Englman further discloses processing circuitry communicatively coupled to the projector (Figs. 2 & 4B; [0038-0039]; [0046], processor (CPU) communicatively coupled to the primary display area 14 comprising the video display); memory communicatively coupled to the processing circuitry and comprising instructions stored therein that are executable by the processing circuitry to cause the EGM to perform operations (Fig. 2; [0038-0039]) comprising: determining a winning combination of symbols on the set of mechanical reels ([0052]; [0058]; [0073]; [0075-0076]; [0081]). Englman further discloses displaying the digital element over any one or more displayed symbols ([0063]; [0081-0082], wherein the displaying may be performed by a projector). However, Englman may not explicitly disclose displaying, using the projector, the digital element at a location on the display surface corresponding to a location of the winning combination of symbols on the set of mechanical reels. Nevertheless, Baerlocher teaches wherein paylines may be superimposed over the mechanical reels (Figs. 3A-3C; [0036]; [0038], wherein a payline may correspond to a location of a winning combination of symbols if the symbols match/represent a winning combination along the payline). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to project, using the projector, the superimposed digital image on the display surface corresponding to a location of the winning combination of symbols on the set of mechanical reels (e.g., in the form of a payline), as taught by Baerlocher, in order to clearly indicate a winning outcome (Baerlocher, [0036], wherein a winning combination formed along a payline can be easily ascertained).
Regarding claim 14, Englman further discloses the operations further comprising: determining a winning combination of symbols on the set of mechanical reels ([0052]; [0058]; [0073]; [0075-0076]; [0081]). Englman further discloses displaying the digital element over any one or more displayed symbols ([0063]; [0081-0082]). However, Englman may not explicitly disclose wherein controlling the projector to display the digital element comprises controlling the projector to display the digital element at a location on the display surface corresponding to a location of the winning combination of symbols on the set of mechanical reels. Nevertheless, Baerlocher teaches wherein paylines may be superimposed over the mechanical reels (Figs. 3A-3C; [0036]; [0038], wherein a payline may correspond to a location of a winning combination of symbols if the symbols match/represent a winning combination along the payline). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display the superimposed digital image on the display surface corresponding to a location of the winning combination of symbols on the set of mechanical reels (e.g., in the form of a payline), as taught by Baerlocher, in order to clearly indicate a winning outcome (Baerlocher, [0036], wherein a winning combination formed along a payline can be easily ascertained).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Englman in view of Pacey, as applied to claim 1, and in further view of Rothschild (U.S. Pub. 2004/0248642 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Englman further discloses a reel comprising one or more blank symbols, and wherein symbols may be superimposed over reel symbol positions ([0070]). However, Englman may not explicitly disclose wherein the set of mechanical reels comprises a mechanical reel with a blank portion, and wherein the projector is further configured to project the digital element on the display surface to cause the digital element to appear to a user of the EGM as through it is located on the blank portion. Nevertheless, Rothschild, directed to an electro-mechanical gaming machine ([0002]), teaches this limitation ([0056]; [0058], wherein a first variable display device (e.g., a projector and a partially reflective mirror) is configured to generate a virtual superimposed video graphic that may be interactive with the reels to transform blank spaces on the reel(s) into symbols). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide video images superimposed with blank portions of a reel, as taught by Rothschild, in order to provide video images that are interactive with the underlying reel(s) (Rothschild, [0058]).
Regarding claim 6, Englman further discloses wherein a mechanical reel of the set of mechanical reels comprises a symbol that comprises a blank space ([0070], wherein a reel comprises one or more blank symbols). Englman further discloses wherein symbols may be superimposed over reel symbol positions ([0070]). However, Englman may not further explicitly disclose wherein the projector is further configured to project the digital element on the display surface to cause the digital element to appear to a user of the EGM as though it is located on the blank space, and wherein the digital element comprises an indication of additional information associated with the symbol. Nevertheless, Rothschild teaches these limitations ([0056]; [0058]; [0074]; [0109], wherein the first variable display device (e.g., a projector and a partially reflective mirror) is configured to generate a virtual superimposed video graphic that may be interactive with the reels to transform blank symbols on the reel(s) and may present additional information associated with the symbol, such as a winning symbol indicative of an award). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide video images superimposed with the blank symbols on the reels of Englman, as taught by Rothschild, in order to provide video images that are interactive with the underlying reel(s) and provide additional information to the player (e.g., an award) (Rothschild, [0058]; [0074]).
Claims 7, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Englman in view of Pacey, as applied to claims 1 and 15, and in further view of Burczyk et al. (U.S. Pub. 2013/0260860 A1) (hereinafter “Burczyk”).
Regarding claim 7, Englman further discloses processing circuitry communicatively coupled to the projector (Figs. 2 & 4B; [0038-0039]; [0046], processor (CPU) communicatively coupled to the primary display area 14 comprising the video display); memory communicatively coupled to the processing circuitry and comprising instructions stored therein that are executable by the processing circuitry to cause the EGM to perform operations (Fig. 2; [0038-0039]).
Englman further discloses determining symbol positions, and superimposing virtual symbol positions over the underlying reel symbol positions ([0070]). However, Englman may not further explicitly disclose wherein the operations comprise determining a symbol at a location on a reel of the set of mechanical reels while the reel is stationary; and displaying, using the projector, a virtual version of the symbol at a location on the display surface corresponding to the location on the reel while the reel is spinning. Nevertheless, Burczyk teaches these limitations (Fig. 4; [0016]; [0063]; [0073-0076], video display device 88 displays spinning virtual reels 80’ representative of the mechanical reels 80 and including symbols 82’ that are the same symbols 82 on the mechanical reels 80, wherein the virtual real is positioned the same as the mechanical reel). While Burczyk may not explicitly teach determining a symbol at a location on a reel of the set of mechanical reels while the reel is stationary, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine a symbol on a mechanical reel while stationary to more clearly detect the symbol and/or its position on the reel. Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display, using the projector, a virtual version of the symbol at a location on the reel while the reel is spinning, as taught by Burczyk, in the invention of Englman in order to provide a virtual/simulated display of the mechanical reel (Burczyk, [0016]; [0073-0076]).
Regarding claim 13, Englman further discloses the operations further comprising: determining symbol positions, and superimposing virtual symbol positions over the underlying reel symbol positions ([0070]). However, Englman may not further explicitly disclose determining a symbol at a location on a reel of the set of mechanical reels while the reel is stationary, wherein controlling the projector to display the digital element comprises controlling the projector to display a virtual version of the symbol at a location on the display surface corresponding to the location on the reel while the reel is spinning. Nevertheless, Burczyk teaches these limitations (Fig. 4; [0016]; [0063]; [0073-0076], video display device 88 displays spinning virtual reels 80’ representative of the mechanical reels 80 and including symbols 82’ that are the same symbols 82 on the mechanical reels 80, wherein the virtual real is positioned the same as the mechanical reel). While Burczyk may not explicitly teach determining a symbol at a location on a reel of the set of mechanical reels while the reel is stationary, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine a symbol on a mechanical reel while stationary to more clearly detect the symbol and/or its position on the reel. Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control the projector to display the digital element comprising a virtual version of the symbol at a location on the reel while the reel is spinning, as taught by Burczyk, in the invention of Englman in order to provide a virtual/simulated display of the mechanical reel (Burczyk, [0016]; [0073-0076]).
Regarding claim 15, Englman further discloses the operations further comprising: determining content on the set of mechanical reels ([0075], wherein, for example, it is determined whether the combination of symbols (content) on the set of mechanical reels along a pay line comprises a winning combination). However, Englman may not further explicitly disclose wherein controlling the projector to display the digital element comprises controlling the projector to display a virtual version of the content at a position on the display surface corresponding to a location of the content on the set of mechanical reels. Nevertheless, Burczyk teaches these limitations (Fig. 4; [0016]; [0063]; [0073-0076], video display device 88 displays spinning virtual reels 80’ representative of the mechanical reels 80 and including symbols 82’ that are the same symbols 82 on the mechanical reels 80, wherein the virtual real is positioned the same as the mechanical reel). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display the digital element comprising a virtual version of the content at a position on the display surface corresponding to a location on of the content on the set of mechanical reels, as taught by Burczyk, in the invention of Englman in order to provide a virtual/simulated display of the mechanical reel (Burczyk, [0016]; [0073-0076]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Englman in view of Pacey, as applied to claim 10, Rasmussen et al. (U.S. Pub. 2008/0096655 A1) (hereinafter “Thomas”).
Regarding claim 12, Englman discloses the use of a liquid crystal display (“LCD”) ([0026]; [0035]; [0046]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the LCD display with the projector configuration disclosed in Englman in order to achieve the claimed invention (see Englman, [0046], discussing the use a transmissive LCD display or of an LCD projector). However, Englman may not further explicitly disclose or teach applying an electric charge to the display surface to control an orientation of the plurality of liquid crystals to vary transparency of the display surface. Nevertheless, Thomas, directed to a gaming machine (e.g., slot machine) comprising a primary game display, such as a reel, and a secondary display, such as a transmissive LCD display, overlaying the primary game display ([0009]), teaches this limitation ([0087-0088], wherein LCDs either pass or block light reflected from an external light source dependent on a charge applied which changes the orientation of the liquid crystal material and varies a transparency). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention apply an electric charge to the LCD display to vary the transparency in order to adjust what the player views (Thomas, [0043]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Englman in view of Pacey and Burczyk, as applied to claim 15, and in further view of Rasmussen et al. (U.S. Pub. 2014/0274298 A1) (hereinafter “Durham”).
Regarding claim 16, Englman may not further explicitly disclose the operations further comprising determining a configuration associated with the user, wherein controlling the projector to display the virtual version of the content comprises determining the virtual version of the content based on the configuration associated with the user, and wherein the configuration comprises a configuration associated with a visual impairment. However, Durham teaches these limitations ([0130-0138], wherein various lights from around the gaming environment of the user cause visual impairment of the user (e.g., affect the viewing of the display of the gaming machine), and wherein the display is adjusted accordingly (e.g., alters the images on the video reels)). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine a configuration associated with a user, the configuration associated with a visual impairment such as ambient lighting, and determining the virtual version of the content displayed accordingly, as taught by Durham, in order to avoid negatively impacting the user’s gaming experience and/or allow the virtual version of the content (e.g., simulated and/or superimposed mechanical reel) to appear more realistically (Durham, [0130]; [0138]).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Englman in view of Pacey, as applied to claim 10, and in further view of Aoki (U.S. Pub. 2011/0117987 A1) (hereinafter “Aoki”).
Regarding claim 17, Englman may not further explicitly disclose wherein controlling the projector to display the digital element on the display surface between the projector and the set of mechanical reels comprises controlling the projector to display the digital element on the display surface with an intensity based on a metric associated with play of the wagering game. However, Aoki, directed to a gaming machine with enhanced features provided by video images superimposed over a display of the gaming machine ([0001]), teaches this limitation ([0084], dynamic highlighting of payline indicators is provided, for example, wherein winning symbols or symbol locations may be highlighted while non-winning symbols or locations may be deemphasized (e.g., darkened, greyed out, etc.); Figs. 3 & 4b; [0091], wherein the visual appearance of underlying mechanical reels may be modified such that an overlapping display (transmissive display 54) may progressively change to a brighter shade of red to suggest the gaming machine is hot or on fire, and/or where the color or shading may also be used to indicate an amount of a wager). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display the digital element (video image) on the display surface with an intensity based on a metric associated with the play of the wagering game (e.g., winning symbols/payline, hot machine, wager amount, etc.), as taught by Aoki, in the invention of Englman to further interact the digital element (video image) with the underlying mechanical reels (wagering game) and/or to provide a more interactive/entertaining game display.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Englman in view of Pacey, as applied to claim 19, and in further view of Schultz et al. (U.S. 8,066,563 B1) (hereinafter “Schultz”) and Rasmussen et al. (U.S. Pub. 2008/0096655 A1) (hereinafter “Thomas”).
Regarding claim 20, Englman further discloses wherein the display surface comprises a reflective film or a transmissive LCD display overlaid on the set of mechanical reels ([0046]). However, Englman does not further disclose wherein the reflective film comprises a plurality of liquid crystals. Yet, Schultz, directed to a gaming machine having a video game display, teaches this limitation (Col. 11, ln. 64-Col. 12, ln. 9, wherein the display may comprise a silicon xtal reflective display (“SXRD”)). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a reflective surface such as a SXRD, as taught by Schultz, in the invention of Englman to provide a higher contrast display.
While Englman in view of Schultz may not further explicitly disclose or teach wherein the reflective film comprises the plurality of liquid crystals that determine a transparency of the display surface based on their orientation, the operations further comprising: adjusting whether the set of mechanical reels are visible by a user of the EGM by applying an electric charge to the display surface, this limitation is taught by Thomas ([0087-0088], wherein LCDs either pass or block light reflected from an external light source dependent on a charge applied which changes the orientation of the liquid crystal material and varies a transparency). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply an electric charge to a display comprising a plurality of liquid crystals (e.g., a SXRD) to vary the transparency in order to adjust what the player views (Thomas, [0009]; [0043], wherein the secondary display (e.g., LCD display) may selectively be made transparent or opaque, allowing selective portions of the primary game display (e.g., reels) to be seen).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. 7,887,408 B2 – This reference teaches wherein one or more display devices may be located along (e.g., mounted upon or attached to) the outer first surface of a reel.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA N BRANDLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30am-5:00pm.
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.
/ALYSSA N BRANDLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3715