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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1-20 recite an abstract idea of organizing of human activity. The claim limitations are not indicative of integration into a practical application and the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
Step 1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter
More specifically, regarding Step 1, of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, the claims are drawn to at least one of the four statutory categories of invention (i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition).
Step 2a1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims are analyzed to determine whether it is directed to a judicial exception.
Claims 1-10 recite a system comprising:
a processor circuit; and a memory coupled to the processor circuit, the memory comprising machine-readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit, cause the processor circuit to:
receive, at a computing device, a request to access a player account associated with a player;
determine a set of available achievements, each available achievement of the set of available achievements associated with a game event in an available wagering game;
determine, for each available achievement, whether the associated game event has occurred;
display, at a display device of the computing device:
the set of available achievements;
an indication, for each available achievement, of whether the associated game event has occurred; and
an achievement award for the available achievement;
receive a player selection of a first available achievement of the set of available achievements, wherein the game event associated with the first available achievement has occurred; and
based on the player selection, award the achievement award associated with the first available achievement to the player and associate the first available achievement with a cryptographic token.
Claims 11-20 recite similar limitations as claim 1 above.
The underlined limitations recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity. The claimed limitations recite steps of awarding an award to a player for an achievement associated with a game. These limitations recite steps of managing a game, which is a management of a social activity or organization of human activity.
Step 2a2 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
The second prong of step 2a is the consideration of whether the claim recites additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application.
An additional element or combination of additional elements that are indicative of integrating the abstract idea into a practical application include:
-Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
-Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
-Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b)
-Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
-Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo
Additional element or combination of additional elements that are not indicative of integration of the abstract idea into a practical application include:
-Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f)
-Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)
-Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h)
Claims 1-20 not apply a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment, and do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing.
Claims 1-20 are not directed to an improvement to a function of a computer. There is no improvement to a technical field. In addition, the claims do not apply the judicial exception with, or by use of a particular machine. The claims do not apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way.
The additional elements of: a processor circuit; a memory coupled to the processor circuit, and a display device are directed to a generic computer or generic computer components used to implement the abstract idea in a computer embodiment.
For the reasons discussed above, the additional elements identified above considered alone and in combination fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2b of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims as a whole is analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception.
Claims 1-20 recite the additional elements of a processor circuit; a memory coupled to the processor circuit, and a display device. These components are well known, routine and conventional components used to perform a game electronically. Chen et al. (US 2006/0116208) discloses it is well known for gaming machine to comprise a processor, memory, and display device (paragraphs 5, 43-44).
In addition, the additional element of associating data with a cryptographic token is well known in the art. Xavier (US 2022/0398569) discloses that cryptographic tokens such as non-fungible tokens (NFT) is well-known in the art (paragraph 68). Xavier discloses that an NFT is a unit of data stored on a digital ledger, called a blockchain, that certifies a digital asset to be unique and therefore not interchangeable. NFTs can be used to represent items such as photos, videos, audio, and other types of digital files (paragraph 68). The use of a computer (system comprising a processor and a memory) to mint or create and modify a blockchain of an NFT is well known in the art. The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Dependent claims 2-10, 12-19 further recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified abstract idea. Looking at the additional elements as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For example, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons discussed above with respect to the conclusion that the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The dependent clams merely include limitations that further define the abstract idea and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract. The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-5, 7-9, 11-15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cohen (US 2018/0225924) in view of Mikulich (US 2023/0177921).
Claim 1. Cohen discloses a system (Fig. 2) comprising:
a processor circuit; and a memory coupled to the processor circuit, the memory comprising machine-readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit (server including memory and processor is configured to implement the promotional gaming structures on the gaming devices, paragraph 212), cause the processor circuit to:
receive, at a computing device, a request to access a player account associated with a player (paragraphs 53, 56, 66, 69-72, 88, 124);
determine a set of available achievements, each available achievement of the set of available achievements associated with a game event in an available wagering game (missions associated with a wagering game; Figs. 12a, 12b, 17a-17b, 19b; paragraphs 74, 135, 160, 176, 187);
determine, for each available achievement, whether the associated game event has occurred (paragraphs 172, 186-187, 191);
display, at a display device of the computing device:
the set of available achievements (Figs. 12a, 12b, 17a-17b, 19b);
an indication, for each available achievement, of whether the associated game event has occurred; and an achievement award for the available achievement (paragraphs 172, 186-187, 191);
receive a player selection of a first available achievement of the set of available achievements, wherein the game event associated with the first available achievement has occurred (player selects missions, paragraphs 126, Fig. 17a-17b, 19b); and
based on the player selection, award the achievement award associated with the first available achievement to the player (paragraphs 172-175, 187, 229-240).
Cohen discloses the claimed invention as discussed above but fails to teach associating the first available achievement with a cryptographic token. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. In an analogous art to gaming systems, Mikulich discloses that players are rewards cryptographic tokens (Non-Fungible Tokens) for player achievements and they player progress advance levels and complete quests (paragraphs 21, 26). Mikulich discloses that system is programmed to mint new tokens/charms and award them to members through the blockchain (paragraph 38). This allows the transactional data of the token to be managed through a secure blockchain ledger and ensures the validity of transactions and the token and provides security. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Cohen’s invention and associate achievement with a cryptographic token in order to provide a predictable result of ensuring the validity of transactions and virtual good/item and provide security.
Claim 2. Cohen discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the determination of set of available achievements is further based on a player status of the player (based on player’s level, characterization paragraphs 159-164).
Claim 3. Cohen discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the determination of set of available achievements is further based on an identity of the player (Missions may be promotional, and related to client characteristics; paragraphs 79, 165-168. Promotions and awards are based on the player tracking/identity; paragraph 66).
Claim 4. Cohen discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the game event associated with the first available achievement comprises play of a predetermined number of new games by a player associated with the cryptographic token (Cohen discloses number of new games plays associated with the award, paragraph 194. As indicated above, Mikulich discloses an award associated with the cryptographic token).
Claim 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the game event associated with the first available achievement comprises play of wagering by the player for a predetermined amount of time (Cohen discloses number of games or amount of time played, paragraph 194. Promotion/mission may be time dependent, paragraph 168).
Claim 7. Mikulich discloses the system of claim 1, wherein association of the first available achievement with the cryptographic token comprises minting the cryptographic token (As indicated above, Mikulich discloses that system is programmed to mint new tokens/charms and award them to members through the blockchain; paragraph 38).
Claim 8. Mikulich discloses the system of claim 1, wherein association of the first available achievement with the cryptographic token comprises modifying a cryptographic token associated with the player to include an indication of the first available achievement (As indicated above, Mikulich discloses that system is programmed to modify/update tokens/charms, paragraph 105).
Claim 9. Mikulich discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the award of the achievement award associated with the first available achievement comprises transferring the cryptographic token to a player wallet associated with the player (paragraphs 51, 57). It would have been obvious to modify Cohen’s invention to transfer the cryptographic token to a player wallet associated with the player in order to provide the predictable result of allowing the player to access the token.
Claim 11. See rejection for claim 1 above. In addition, Cohen discloses a kiosk device comprising: an input device; a display device, a processor circuit; and a memory coupled to the processor circuit (Fig. 1)
Claims 12-15, 17-20. See rejections above.
Claims 6, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cohen (US 2018/0225924) in view of Mikulich (US 2023/0177921) applied to claims 1, 11 above, and further in view of Walker (US 2003/0224852)/
Claims 6, 16. Cohen discloses the claimed invention as discussed above but fails to teach that the game event associated with the first available achievement comprises a predetermined amount of play by the player with another player. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. In an analogous art to gaming systems, Walker discloses game systems in which users are award for accomplishing game objectives. Walker discloses the objective can comprise a predetermined amount of play by the player with another player (paragraphs 96, 97, 164; Fig. 7). This will encourage a plurality of users to play with each other. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Cohen’s invention and modify the available achievement to comprise a predetermined amount of play by the player with another player in order to provide the predictable result of users to play with each other.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jasson H Yoo whose telephone number is (571)272-5563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Peter Vasat can be reached at 571 270-7625. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JASSON H YOO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715