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 .
Response to Arguments
The previous objections to the claims have been withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claimed, filed 09/02/26.
The previous rejections of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) have been withdrawn in part based on the amendments to the claims, filed 09/02/26. However, claim 8 and its dependent claims remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), as presented below.
Applicant argues that the Specification, [0004] and [0084], provides support for the subject claim limitations of claim 8 (Remarks, filed 09/02/26, p. 9). Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Specification, [0004] and [0084], discloses, in part, causing a display, by the display device, of an indication of a determined repulsion between the first polarity indicator and the first magnetized symbol based on the polarities of the first magnetized symbol and the first polarity symbol, and a movement of the first magnetized symbol away from the first polarity indicator, and causing a display, by the display device, of an indication of a determined attraction between the second polarity indicator and the second magnetized symbol based on the polarities of the second magnetized symbol and the second polarity indicator, and a movement of the second magnetized symbol toward the second polarity indicator. However, these paragraphs do not disclose wherein both a movement based on an attraction and a movement based on a repulsion result in changing one of the symbols on first and second reels to a wild symbol, as required by claim 8.
The rejections of claims 2-3 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are moot, as the claims have been cancelled. However, claims 1, 8, and 16, and their dependent claims, remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as presented in detail below.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the claims have been amended to be “more directed to an electronic gaming machine mechanical polarity indicators”, and therefore, the claims exclude the alternative embodiments described in the Specification regarding personal gaming devices, desktop computer, laptop computers, tablet computers or computing devices, personal digital assistants, mobile phones, and other mobile computing devices (Remarks, filed 09/02/26, p. 10). Examiner agrees that the claims are now directed to an electronic gaming machine, however, Examiner notes that the amended claim limitations reciting an electronic gaming machine and mechanical polarity indicators do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more. Rather, the claimed electronic gaming machine comprising a housing, processor, memory, security monitoring circuit, display device, input devices, and mechanical polarity indicators merely provide the technological environment in which the rules for the game are implemented and do not, individually or in combination, integrate the rules into a practical application. Moreover, the claimed additional elements and their use in implementing the game rules are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the field of electronic gaming machines. Accordingly, the additional elements, considered individually and in combination, do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. To the extent that the additional element(s) enable presentation or execution of the claimed game rules, it constitutes insignificant extra-solution activity and therefore does not meaningfully limit the abstract idea.
Applicant further argues that the claims are directed to “a specific electronic gaming machine including amongst other physical components, a mechanical polarity indicators that integrate the alleged abstract idea into a practical application, that cannot be preformed in the human mind, and that are clearly physical technical improvements” (Remarks, filed 09/02/26, p. 10). Examiner respectfully disagrees. As previously noted above, the mechanical polarity indicators and additional hardware/software components are simply additional elements that implement the recited game rules in the context of an electronic gaming machine, and the elements and their use in implementing the game rules are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the field of electronic gaming machines. The claims fail to recite any additional elements that indicate an improvement to the functionality of the electronic gaming machine or other technological improvement. The claims recite polarities causing attraction/repulsion between indicators and magnetized symbols, the symbols visually moving towards or away from the respective indicators, and the movement producing a change on the reel, wherein the reels may be simulated reels with simulated movement, and the movement of the symbols on the reels may be simply generated and displayed (i.e., animation representing the operation of the game rules) (Specification, [0149]). The claimed processing of randomly selected polarities and magnetized symbols, determination of attraction/repulsion based on the respective polarities, and resulting movement/change of symbols constitutes rules for playing the game.
Accordingly, the claims remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, as presented in detail below.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8-9, and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“a security monitoring circuit supported by the housing, that monitors the access door” recited in claim 1, ln. 4-5, claim 8, ln. 4-5, and claim 16, ln. 4-5 should likely read “a security monitoring circuit supported by the housing[[,]] that monitors the access door”;
“polarity indicator, a movement” recited in claim 1, ln. 34-35 & 43-44 and claim 8, ln. 45-46 & 54 should likely read “polarity indicator[[,]] comprising a movement”;
“cause the first mechanical polarity indicator associated with first reel to indicate” recited in claim 8, ln. 27-28 should likely read “cause the first mechanical polarity indicator, associated with the first reel, to indicate”;
“cause the second mechanical polarity indicator associated with the second reel to indicate” recited in claim 8, ln. 30-31 should likely read “cause the second mechanical polarity indicator, associated with the second reel, to indicate”;
“cause a display, by the display device, of, a first amount” recited in claim 9, ln. 3 should likely read “cause a display, by the display device, of[[,]] a first amount”; and
“reel, a movement” recited in claim 16, ln. 39 should likely read “reel[[,]] comprising a movement”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the Specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 8 recites in part “a change of another one of the symbols on the first reel to a wild symbol displayed on the first reel due to the movement of the first magnetized symbol; and […] a change of another one of the symbols on the second reel to a wild symbol displayed on the second reel due to the movement of the second magnetized symbol”, wherein the movement of the first magnetized symbol is away from the respective mechanical polarity indicator based on a repulsion between the magnetized symbol and the respective mechanical polarity indicator, and the movement of the second magnetized symbol is toward the respective polarity indicator based on an attraction between the magnetized symbol the respective mechanical polarity indicator. However, the Specification does not disclose wherein both a movement based on an attraction and a movement based on a repulsion result in changing one of the symbols on first and second reels to a wild symbol. Rather, the Specification discloses wherein either an attraction causes a symbol on the respective reel to change to a multiplier while a repulsion causes a symbol on the respective reel to change to a wild symbol, or vice versa (see Figs. 2A-2H; [0032]; [0058]; [0072]; [0074]; [0077]).
Claims 9-11 are rejected by virtue of their dependencies on claim 8.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, 8-11, 16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites in part “a change of another one of the symbols on the first reel to a multiplier symbol [...] and […] a change of another one of the symbols on the second eel to a wild symbol”. It is indefinite as to whether “the symbols” on the first reel and the second reel are intended to be one of the “magnetized symbols”, or rather, another symbol on the reels.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected for similar reasoning.
All dependent claims are rejected by virtue of their dependencies on claims 1, 8, and 16.
For examination purposes, the claim limitation is interpreted as changing a symbol on the first reel and a symbol on the second reel that are not magnetized symbols (see Specification, Figs. 2C-2D & 2F-2H; [0059]; [0072-0076], e.g., symbol “A”, “K”, “M1”, “M2”, or the like).
A suggested amendment is as follows (using claim 1 as an example): “a change of a symbol on the first reel to a multiplier symbol […] and […] a change of a symbol on the second reel to a wild symbol”.
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, 4-5, 8-11, 16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding claim 1, analyzed as representative claim:
[Step 1] Claim 1 recites “An electronic gaming machine”, which falls within the “machine” statutory category of invention.
[Step 2A – Prong 1] In Step 2A – Prong 1, it must be determined whether the claimed invention recites a judicially recognized exception. According to the Specification, “the systems and methods of the present disclose provide polarity attraction and repulsion for magnetized symbols on symbol displays in a gaming environment”, wherein “[g]aming machines may provide awards […] based on winning symbols or winning symbol combinations” (Specification, [0001-0002]; see also [0026]).
Representative claim 1 recites: An electronic gaming machine comprising:
a housing comprising an access door;
a security monitoring circuit supported by the housing, that monitors the access door;
a plurality of output devices comprising at least a display device supported by the housing and mechanical polarity indicators supported by the housing;
a plurality of input devices comprising a plurality of input buttons mounted on a deck supported by the housing and a touch screen input device supported by the housing and operable with the display device;
a processor supported by the housing; and
a trusted memory device supported by the housing and configured to provide a gaming regulatory authority a root trusted authority that can be tracked and verified as original, the trusted memory device storing a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
cause a display, by the display device, of reels adjacent to the mechanical polarity indicators;
randomly determine a quantity of the mechanical polarity indicators to activate, and for each said activated mechanical polarity indicator randomly determine a polarity for the mechanical polarity indicator to indicate selected from different polarities;
cause each activated mechanical polarity indicator to indicate the polarity selected from the different polarities for that mechanical polarity indicator;
randomly determine, using a random number generator, magnetized symbols to display on the reels;
cause a display, by the display device, of the magnetized symbols on the reels, each magnetized symbol indicating one of the different polarities;
determine and cause a display, by the display device, of an indication of an attraction between one of the activated mechanical polarity indicators associated with a first reel of the reels and one of the magnetized symbols displayed on the first reel based on the respective polarities of said magnetized symbol and said activated mechanical polarity indicator, a movement of said magnetized symbol over the first reel toward said activated mechanical polarity indicator, and a change of another one of the symbols on the first reel to a multiplier symbol displayed on the first reel due to the movement of the magnetized symbol; and
determine and cause a display, by the display device, of an indication of a repulsion between another one of the activated mechanical polarity indicators associated with a second reel of the reels and another one of the magnetized symbols displayed on the second reel based on the respective polarities of said magnetized symbol and said activated mechanical polarity indicator, a movement of said magnetized symbol over the second reel away from said activated mechanical polarity indicator, and a change of another one of the symbols on the second reel to a wild symbol displayed on the second reel due to the movement of the magnetized symbol.
The underlined portions of claim 1 generally encompass the abstract idea. It is clear that the inventive concept here is a set of rules for a game. The disclosed invention makes clear that the primary game encompasses the display of polarity indicators associated with displayed reels and magnetized symbols on the reels, in which the outcome of the game may be provided as claimed (the determination of an attraction and/or repulsion between the activated mechanical polarity indicators and the magnetized symbols and causing movement of the magnetized symbols and changes to symbols on the respective reels) (see Specification, [0013], “In various embodiments, the game is a primary game such as a primary wagering game. In various embodiments, the game is a secondary game such as a secondary game triggered from a play of a primary wagering game.”; see also [0016], [0041], & [0048]; see further [0149], where the reels may be simulated reels with simulated movement, and the movement of the symbols on the reels may be simply generated and displayed (i.e., animation representing the operation of the game rules)). The claimed processing of randomly selected polarities and magnetized symbols, determination of attraction/repulsion based on the respective polarities, and resulting movement/change of symbols constitutes rules for playing the game. Therefore, the abstract idea is a certain method of organizing human activity, wherein the claim limitations encompass a fundamental economic practice, i.e., rules for a wagering game (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)). Accordingly, the claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, recite an abstract idea.
[Step 2A – Prong 2] The claim does not include additional limitations to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Rather, the additional elements of the claimed electronic gaming machine comprising a housing, processor, memory, security monitoring circuit, display device, input devices, and mechanical polarity indicators merely provide the technological environment in which the rules for the game are implemented. These additional hardware/software elements do not affect an improvement in any technology or technical field and are recited in generic ways. Similarly, the additional element of a random number generator to randomly determine symbols (i.e., magnetized symbols) used to determine an outcome (e.g., a match of a polarity indicator to a magnetized symbol indicates a win) is recited at a high level of generality for performing its routine function, such that it does not amount to a particular machine or technical improvement thereof, nor represent an improvement in any other technology. The claim does not (i) improve the functioning of a computer or other technology (e.g., electronic gaming machine), (ii) is not applied with any “particular machine” (only generic components), (iii) does not effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state, or (iv) is not applied in any meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (e.g., a casino or other gaming establishment), such that the claim, as a whole, is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (See MPEP 2106.05(a)-(c) & (e)-(h)). Further, to the extent that the additional elements merely enable presentation or execution of the claimed game rules, its use constitutes insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(b) & 2106.05(g)). Therefore, the claim is directed to the abstract idea.
[Step 2B] As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the claim does not further include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The random number generator is recited at a high level of generality for performing its well-understood, routine, conventional functionality such that it does not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. The Specification demonstrates that the random number generator is recited for its well-understood, routine, and conventional functionality, wherein the Specification refers to the random number generator in a manner that indicates that it is sufficiently well-known that it does not need to describe the particulars of such element to satisfy 35 U.S.C. 112(a) (see Specification, [0107], “In certain embodiments, the at least one memory device 1016 is configured to store program code and instructions executable by the at least one processor of the EGM to control the EGM. The at least one memory device 1016 of the EGM also stores other operating data, such as image data, event data, input data, random number generators (RNGs) or pseudo-RNGs, paytable data or information, and/or applicable game rules that relate to the play of one or more games on the EGM.”; [0144], “In certain embodiments, the gaming system randomly determines any game outcome(s) (such as a win outcome) and/or award(s) (such as a quantity of credits to award for the win outcome) for a play of a primary game and/or a play of a secondary game based on probability data. In certain such embodiments, this random determination is provided through utilization of an RNG, such as a true RNG or a pseudo RNG, or any other suitable randomization process.”). Additionally, the use of random number generators in gaming systems such as that claimed are well-known (see, e.g., U.S. Pub. 2023/0316860 A1, [0004], “Typical games use a random number generator (RNG) to randomly determine the outcome of each game.” & U.S. Pub. 2018/0061186 A1, [0083], “chance-based gaming systems such as slot machines are governed by random numbers and processors, as facilitated by a random number generator (RNG). The fixed and dynamic symbols generated as part of a gaming activity may be produced using one or more RNGs. RNGs as known in the art may be implemented using hardware, software operatable in connection with the processor, or some combination of hardware and software.”).
Moreover, the additional elements of an electronic gaming machine comprising: a housing comprising an access door, a security monitoring circuit supported by the housing, that monitors the access door, a plurality of output devices comprising at least a display device and mechanical polarity indicators supported by the housing, a plurality of input devices comprising a plurality of input buttons mounted on a deck supported by the housing and a touch screen input device supported by the housing and operable with the display device, a processor supported by the housing, and a trusted memory device supported by the housing and configured to provide a gaming regulatory authority a root trusted authority that can be tracked and verified as original, when viewed as a whole, do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Rather, the claimed features are generic, conventional, and well-known in the art of wager gaming and/or are devices and techniques that represent extra-solution activity, as explained below.
For instance, U.S. 6,142,872 to Walker et al. teaches that slot machines may be embodied as “conventional hardware and software” shown in Fig. 3, including reels, a reel controller, a video display, and a random number generator.
Additionally, U.S. Pub. 2008/0026854 to Chen et al. describes a “conventional gaming machine” that may include a cabinet housing that supports a display, several input devices, a current acceptor, and encloses the electrical components, such as a processor and random number generator, with a door having a lock for the cabinet to prevent unauthorized access along with doors being in communication with a controller to alert a user if the door is opened (see, e.g., Chen, [0027]; [0031]; [0033]; [0041]).
Also, U.S. Pub. 2010/0255902 to Goldstein et al. teaches a variety of security mechanisms, including tampering detection and prevention. Goldstein teaches that security monitoring circuits detect intrusion into an IGT gaming device by monitoring security switches attached to access doors in the gaming device cabinet (see, e.g., Goldstein, [0247], where access violations result in suspension of game play and can trigger additional security operations).
Finally, U.S. Pub. 2009/0203430 to Peek, teaches wherein gaming regulations require the use of trusted memory sources which have been properly verified and authenticated (see, e.g., Peek, [95]).
Further, it is noted that the Specification also demonstrates that the claimed elements are recited for their well-understood, routine, and conventional functionality, wherein the Specification refers to the elements in a manner that indicates that they are sufficiently well-known that it does not need to describe the particulars of such elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. 112(a) (see Specification, [0188], “Security monitoring circuits detect intrusion into an EGM by monitoring security switches attached to access doors in the EGM cabinet.”; [0112-0113], “In various embodiments, the display devices include, without limitation: a monitor, a television display, a plasma display, a liquid crystal display (LCD), a display based on light emitting diodes (LEDs), a display based on a plurality of organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs), a display based on polymer light-emitting diodes (PLEDs), a display based on a plurality of surface-conduction electron-emitters (SEDs), a display including a projected and/or reflected image, or any other suitable electronic device or display mechanism. In certain embodiments, as described above, the display device includes a touchscreen with an associated touch-screen controller. The display devices may be of any suitable sizes, shapes, and configurations.”; [0080], “It should be appreciated that while the above example display the use of video reels of the EGM, the EGM can include mechanical reels and the polarity indicators can also be on a mechanical display device.”; [0125-0126], “In various embodiments, the at least one input device 1030 includes a plurality of buttons that are programmable by the EGM operator to, when actuated, cause the EGM to perform particular functions. For instance, such buttons may be hard keys, programmable soft keys, or icons icon displayed on a display device of the EGM (described below) that are actuatable via a touch screen of the EGM (described below) or via use of a suitable input device of the EGM (such as a mouse or a joystick). […] In certain embodiments, the at least one input device 1030 includes a touchscreen coupled to a touch-screen controller or other touch-sensitive display overlay to enable interaction with any images displayed on a display device (as described below). One such input device is a conventional touch-screen button panel.”; [0099], “The at least one processor 1010 is any suitable processing device or set of processing devices, such as a microprocessor, a microcontroller-based platform, a suitable integrated circuit, or one or more application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs)”; [0189-0190], “Trusted memory devices and/or trusted memory sources are included in an EGM to ensure the authenticity of the software that may be stored on less secure memory subsystems, such as mass storage devices. […] In at least one embodiment, at least a portion of the trusted memory devices/sources may correspond to memory that cannot easily be altered (e.g., “unalterable memory”) such as EPROMS, PROMS, Bios, Extended Bios, and/or other memory sources that are able to be configured, verified, and/or authenticated (e.g., for authenticity) in a secure and controlled manner.”).
In light of these factual findings, the additional claim features are well-understood, routine, and conventional and/or constitute extra-solution activities.
Taking the claimed elements individually yields no difference from taking them in combination because each element simply performs its respective function as discussed above. The claim does not purport to improve the functioning of a computer itself, nor does it affect an improvement in any other technology (i.e., electronic gaming machines) or technical field. Instead, the additional elements merely amount to an instruction to apply the abstract idea using generic, functional, and conventional components well-known in the art, and/or generally link the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Therefore, claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Independent claims 8 and 16 are rejected for the same reasoning as claim 1 analyzed above.
Dependent claims 4-5, 9-11, and 18-19 further define the abstract idea by introducing various rules to the game and/or relate to implementing the game. However, the claims fail to recite additional limitations that would integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept). Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible.
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 ALYSSA N BIANCAMANO 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 BIANCAMANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights