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 .
Status of Claims
The office action is in response to arguments and amendments entered on November 10, 2025 for the patent application 18/545,759 originally filled on December 19, 2023. Claims 1, 4, 6, 10, 11, 14, and 17-20 are amended. Claims 1, 4-14, and 17-20 are pending. The third office action of August 08, 2025 is fully incorporated by reference into this final action.
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, 4-14, and 17-20 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.
Claim 1 is directed to “method” (i.e., a process), claim 11 is directed to a “method” (i.e., a process), and claim 14 is directed to a “computer device” (i.e., a machine) hence the claims are directed to one of the four statutory categories (i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). In other words, Step 1 of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “Yes.”
Claims 1, 11, and 14 are drawn to an abstract idea of managing alliances which requires the following limitations:
Per Claim 1:
“A game controlling method, wherein a scene of a game comprises a plurality of game camps, a plurality of virtual objects and a connection relationship among the virtual objects, and the method comprises: in response to a battleground establishment event being triggered, establishing a game battleground, the game battleground comprising at least one game camp, wherein the game battleground refers to an alliance of the game camps; in response to an interaction request of interacting with a first target virtual object in the plurality of virtual objects, determining a belonging target battleground according to a game camp of a requester, and determining whether an interaction condition is met according to virtual object occupation information of each game camp in the belonging target battleground and the connection relationship among the virtual objects; and in response to the interaction condition being met, sending an interaction request success response, the interaction request success response being used for indicating that an interaction operation on the first target virtual object is permitted, wherein the plurality of virtual objects comprises a first virtual object occupied by a first game camp and a second virtual object which is not occupied by any game camp, the first virtual object has a direct connection relationship with the second virtual object, the first game camp does not belong to any game battleground, and in response to the battleground establishment event being triggered, establishing the game battleground comprises :in response to an attack initiated by the first game camp to the second virtual object, causing the second virtual object to be occupied by the first game camp, and establishing the game battleground, wherein the game battleground comprises the first game camp wherein the method further comprises at least one of: after the game battleground is established, assigning a new game camp to the game battleground; or in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground.”
Per Claim 11:
“A game controlling method, wherein a scene of a game comprises a plurality of game camps, a plurality of virtual objects and a connection relationship among the virtual objects, each game camp comprises a plurality of virtual characters, and the method comprises: in response to an interaction request of a target virtual character interacting with a first target virtual object in the plurality of virtual objects being triggered, sending the interaction request to a server; and in response to an interaction request success response fed back by the server based on the interaction request, enabling an interaction permission of the target virtual character interacting with the first target virtual object; wherein the interaction request success response is determined by the server according to virtual object occupation information of each game camp in a target battleground to which a game camp of the target virtual character belongs, and the connection relationship among the virtual objects, wherein the target battleground refers to an alliance of the game camps, wherein the plurality of virtual objects comprises a first virtual object occupied by a first game camp and a second virtual object which is not occupied by any game camp, the first virtual object has a direct connection relationship with the second virtual object, the first game camp does not belong to any game battleground, and wherein in response to an attack initiated by the first game camp to the second virtual object, the second virtual object is occupied by the first game camp, and the target game battleground comprising the first game camp is established. after the game battleground is established, a new game camp is assigned to the game battleground; and/or in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground.”
Per Claim 14:
“A computer device, comprising a processor and a memory, the memory storing machine-readable instructions executable to the processor, the processor being used for executing the machine-readable instructions stored in the memory, the machine-readable instructions, when executed by the processor, causing the processor to: in response to a battleground establishment event being triggered, establish a game battleground, the game battleground comprising at least one game camp; in response to an interaction request of interacting with a first target virtual object in a plurality of virtual objects, determine a belonging target battleground according to a game camp of a requester, and determine whether an interaction condition is met according to virtual object occupation information of each game camp in the belonging target battleground and a connection relationship among the virtual objects; and in response to the interaction condition being met, send an interaction request success response, the interaction request success response being used for indicating that an interaction operation on the first target virtual object is permitted, wherein a scene of a game comprises a plurality of game camps, the plurality of virtual objects and the connection relationship among the virtual objects, and wherein the game battleground refers to an alliance of the game camps, wherein the plurality of virtual objects comprises a first virtual object occupied by a first game camp and a second virtual object which is not occupied by any game camp, the first virtual object has a direct connection relationship with the second virtual object, the first game camp does not belong to any game battleground, and the instructions causing the processor to, in response to the battleground establishment event being triggered, establish the game battleground further cause the processor to: in response to an attack initiated by the first game camp to the second virtual object, cause the second virtual object to be occupied by the first game camp, and establish the game battleground, wherein the game battleground comprises the first game camp wherein the memory further comprises instructions to cause the processor to perform at least one of: after the game battleground is established, assigning a new game camp to the game battleground; or in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground.”
These aforementioned limitations of claims 1, 11, and 14 are drawn to an abstract idea of managing alliances which fall under the abstract grouping “certain methods of organizing human activity” in the form of managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) as per MPEP 2106.04(a)(2). These limitations simply recite rules for game interaction, which is partially analogous to “rules for playing games" (i.e., In re Marco Guldenaar Holding B.V., 911 F.3d 1157, 1161, 129 USPQ2d1008, 1011 (Fed. Cir. 2018)). Hence, these limitations are akin to an abstract idea which has been identified among non-limiting examples to be an abstract idea. In other words, Step 2A, Prong 1 of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “Yes.”
Furthermore, the Applicant’s claimed elements of a “processor” and ”memory” are merely claimed to generally link the use of a judicial exception to (1) a particular technological environment or (2) field of use, per MPEP §2106.05(h); and are applying 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, per MPEP §2106.05(f). In other words, the claimed abstract idea, managing alliances, is not providing a practical application, thus Step 2A, Prong 2 of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “No.”
Furthermore, the claimed “processor” (described in para. [0201]) and “memory” (described in para. [0201]) are reasonably interpreted as generic hardware and provide no details of anything beyond its use as ubiquitous standard equipment. Therefore, Step 2B, of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “No.”
Claims 4-10 are dependent from independent claim 1, claims 12-13 are dependent from claim 11, and 17-20 are dependent from independent claim 14. The dependent claims 4-10, 12-13, and 17-20 include all the limitations of their respective independent claims. Therefore, the dependent claims recite the same abstract idea. The limitation of the dependent claims fails to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For Example:
The limitations of claims 4 and 15-17 clarify how game camps join a game battleground. As such, these claims merely further recite the type of data included in the method and are therefore insignificant extra-solution activity. The limitations fail to provide any teaching that integrates the judicial exceptions into a practical application or amounts to significantly more than a judicial exception. For this reason, the analysis performed on the independent claims is also applicable on these claims.
The limitations of claims 5-7, 12, and 18-20 clarify the how virtual objects are interacted with. As such, this claim merely displays data related to the performance of the abstract idea and further recite the types of data displayed. The limitations fail to provide any teaching that integrates the judicial exceptions into a practical application or amounts to significantly more than a judicial exception. For this reason, the analysis performed on the independent claims is also applicable on these claims.
The limitations of claims 8-10 and 13 clarify the how resources are allocated. As such, this claim merely displays data related to the performance of the abstract idea and further recite the types of data displayed. The limitations fail to provide any teaching that integrates the judicial exceptions into a practical application or amounts to significantly more than a judicial exception. For this reason, the analysis performed on the independent claims is also applicable on these claims.
Independent claims 1, 11, and 14 do not provide a practical application and are insufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Additionally, dependent claims 4-10, 12-13, and 17-20 recite an abstract idea without significantly more and are not drawn to eligible subject matter. Therefore, claims 1, 4-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject-matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 5-14, and 18-20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maietti (Document ID 20170361232 A1; 2017-12-21) in view of “Conquest of Elysium 4 - Multiplayer Co-op Gameplay” 2020-01-28 (hereinafter “Elysium”), “17. Starting your Kingdom - Mount and Blade Warband New Player Guide” 2015-04-07 (hereinafter “Warband”), and Hay Day (Fandom Wiki page archived by wayback machine titled "Neighborhood”; 2020-02-03).
Regarding claim 1, Maietti teaches:
A game controlling method, wherein a scene of a game comprises a plurality of game camps, a plurality of virtual objects and a connection relationship among the virtual objects (Para. [0059] and fig. 4, show an online space consisting of multiple players, i.e. the game camps, as well as territories, i.e. virtual object, that are all connected together on a grid based system, i.e. a connection relationship among the virtual objects), and
According to various exemplary embodiments, an Alliance Engine 305 generates an online game for a virtual online gaming environment that is accessed by a plurality of players. The Alliance Engine 305 causes display of a user interface of the online game on a client device associated with each of the plurality of players. In an alternative, the Alliance Engine 305 interacts and communicates with one or more modules that generate the online game. The online game includes a territory grid composed of a plurality of territory tiles. There are various types of territory tiles, where territorial control of a first type of tile provides access to a first type of in-game resource and territorial control of a second type of tile provides access to a second type of in-game resource. As such, a certain type of tile may be more desirable and beneficial to a particular player than other types of tiles. Each tile has one or more adaptive properties, such as an adaptive visual display property and an adaptive resource property. Each player in the online game is granted control over a unique territory tile, which thereby becomes a headquarters tile for a respective player.
PNG
media_image1.png
690
526
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the method comprises: in response to a battleground establishment event being triggered, establishing a game battleground, the game battleground comprising at least one game camp, wherein the game battleground refers to an alliance of the game camps (Para. [0060], show that a group of players may choose to establish an alliance, i.e. a game battle ground, that consists of a multitude of players);
The Alliance Engine 305 receives a selection from a subgroup of players to enter an alliance. For example, an alliance is a team of players that join together voluntarily. Each player in the alliance can maintain membership in the alliance for any duration of time and can select to terminate membership in the alliance at any time in the online game. The Alliance Engine 305 grants to each player in the alliance an enforcer asset. Each player in the alliance can further earn additional enforcer assets based on game play of the player or game play of one or more other players in the alliance.
in response to an interaction request of interacting with a first target virtual object in the plurality of virtual objects, determining a belonging target battleground according to a game camp of a requester, and determining whether an interaction condition is met according to virtual object occupation information of each game camp in the belonging target battleground and the connection relationship among the virtual objects (Para. [0075]-[0078], show a process of trading resources between players, i.e. an interaction request, and that the allies belong to the same alliance, i.e. determine the target battleground; Para. [0078], additionally verifies that the respective tiles belong to two separate players, i.e. virtual object occupation information, and that the tiles are adjacent to each other, i.e. the connection relationship among virtual objects); and
FIG. 5 is a flowchart 500 illustrating an example method for adapting resource properties, according to an example embodiment.
At operation 505, the Alliance Engine 305 receives a selection, by a first player, of a first file to be controlled by a first enforcer asset on behalf of the first player. The first tile provides access to a first type of in-game resource to the first player. Prior to operation 505, the
Alliance Engine 305 grants the first enforcer asset to the first player and a second enforcer asset to a second player based on the first and second players joining a player alliance.
At operation 510, the Alliance Engine 305 detects that the first tile is adjacent to a second tile. The second tile is controlled by a second enforcer asset on behalf of a second player, The first player and the second player belong to a player alliance. The second tile providing access to a second type of in-game resource to the second player. In one embodiment, the Alliance Engine 305 updates an adaptive visual display property for both the first tile and the second tile based at least on the detected adjacency. For example, the Alliance Engine 305 concurrently adjusts at least one of: a shape, color, size, and intensity of both respective adjacent tiles.
in response to the interaction condition being met, sending an interaction request success response, the interaction request success response being used for indicating that an interaction operation on the first target virtual object is permitted (Para. [0079], shows that the interaction request was a success in the form of transferring the resources to respective players).
At operation 515, based on the detected adjacency, the Alliance Engine 305 transfers a portion of the first type of in-game resource of the first tile to the second player. The Alliance Engine 305 transfers a portion of the second type of in-game resource of the second tile to the first player. It is understood, that in some embodiments, the first and the second tiles are included in a plurality of tiles in a territory grid of an online game. The first player has territorial control of a first headquarters tile of the territory grid and the second player has territorial control of a second headquarters tile of the territory grid.
wherein the method further comprises at least one of: after the game battleground is established, assigning a new game camp to the game battleground (Para. [0021], shows that upon creation of the alliance both a first and second player, i.e. game camps, are part of said alliance, i.e. added to the alliance); or in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground (Para. [0021], shows that upon creation of the alliance both a first player, i.e. first game camp, and a second player, i.e. second game camp, may agree to join in an alliance, i.e. a battleground joining event).
Maietti et al. does not explicitly teach:
wherein the plurality of virtual objects comprises a first virtual object occupied by a first game camp and a second virtual object which is not occupied by any game camp, the first virtual object has a direct connection relationship with the second virtual object, the first game camp does not belong to any game battleground, and
in response to the battleground establishment event being triggered, establishing the game battleground comprises: in response to an attack initiated by the first game camp to the second virtual object, causing the second virtual object to be occupied by the first game camp, and establishing the game battleground, wherein the game battleground comprises the first game camp.
in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground
Elysium teaches:
wherein the plurality of virtual objects comprises a first virtual object occupied by a first game camp and a second virtual object which is not occupied by any game camp, the first virtual object has a direct connection relationship with the second virtual object (0:36, shows a virtual object occupied by a first game camp, i.e. the pink army, that has a direct connection relationship, i.e. a valid movement path, with an unoccupied second virtual object, i.e. the neutral farm square.
in response to an attack initiated by the first game camp to the second virtual object, causing the second virtual object to be occupied by the first game camp (1:17, shows that the pink army, i.e. first virtual object, has attacked the second virtual object, i.e. the farm square, and now the first game camp occupies the second virtual object as indicated by the pink highlights on the farm square).
It would be obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for someone of ordinary skill to apply the known techniques of Elysium, regarding battle scenes, territory acquisition, and resource acquisition timers, to the similar device of Maietti, an alliance engine, to yield the predictable result of yielding a more engaging engine. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motived to incorporate the known technique of Elysium with the similar device of Maietti as battle scenes create a more captivating experience for the user as opposed to simply a transfer of ownership if a static force number is higher, and the resource acquisition timer creates an expected window for when resources are gained for players to strategize around.
Warband teaches:
Wherein the plurality of virtual objects comprises a first virtual object occupied by a first game camp and a second virtual object (9:15, show an army with 81 troops possessed by the player, i.e. the first virtual object occupied by a first game camp, and a second virtual object, i.e. Sharwa Castle).
in response to the battleground establishment event being triggered, establishing the game battleground comprises: in response to an attack initiated by the first game camp to the second virtual object (9:56, shows the army is assaulting Sharwa castle, i.e. an attack on the second virtual object), causing the second virtual object to be occupied by the first game camp (18:01 and 18:21, show that the first game camp has successfully occupied the Sharwa castle), and establishing the game battleground, wherein the game battleground comprises the first game camp (18:21 and 18:29, show that the first game camp is able to form a kingdom, i.e. a game battleground or alliance).
It would be obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for someone of ordinary skill to apply the known techniques of Warband, regarding the linking of kingdom formation to land acquisition, to the similar device of Maietti, an alliance engine, to yield the predictable result of yielding a more gradual progression system. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motived to incorporate the known technique of Warband with the similar device of Maietti as requiring the player to go acquire the “headquarters tile” or some other form of territory that unlocks the ability for other game camps to join your alliance allows for a progression system in which players need to acquire x amount of territory or a specific territory in order for other players to join under them, which make for a more rewarding and engaging system.
Hay Day teaches:
in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground (Page 1, section “Searching for a neighborhood”, shows that a player, i.e. game camp, cannot be a member of multiple neighborhoods, i.e. battlegrounds, at the same time).
It would be obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for someone of ordinary skill to apply the known techniques of Hay Day, regarding the limitation of the player to a single alliance, to the similar device of Maietti, an alliance engine, to yield the predictable result of yielding a more closely knit alliance. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motived to incorporate the known technique of Hay Day with the similar device of Maietti as restricting the player to only joining a single alliance limits player trading activities to a smaller ground of people which encourages a player to interact with a smaller group of people and to think wisely when choosing a group.
Regarding claim 5, Maietti further teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 1, wherein in response to the interaction request of interacting with the first target virtual object in the plurality of virtual objects, determining the belonging target battleground according to the game camp of the requester, and determining whether the interaction condition is met according to the virtual object occupation information of each game camp in the belonging target battleground and the connection relationship among the virtual objects comprises: in response to the interaction request of interacting with the first target virtual object in the plurality of virtual objects (Para. [0061], shows that a player can move an enforcer to different tiles, i.e. virtual objects, to interact with them i.e. initiate an interaction request),
An enforcer asset of a player occupies a tile different than the player's headquarters tile in the territory grid. For example, a first player in the alliance selects placement of a first enforcer asset on a first tile. The first player thereby has temporary territorial control over the first tile via the first enforcer asset. In addition, the first player may also have temporary territorial control over the headquarters' tile based on proximity to the first enforcer asset and strength level of the first enforcer asset. If the first tile is currently controlled by a particular player that is not a member of the alliance, the first player can select an option for the first enforcer asset to attack and to defeat the particular player in order to acquire temporary territorial control of the first tile.
determining the belonging target battleground according to the game camp of the requester; in response to the target battleground being successfully determined, determining whether the interaction condition is met according to the virtual object occupation information of each game camp in the target battleground and the connection relationship among the virtual objects (Para. [0065], shows that if the players belong to the same alliance, i.e. the target battleground being successfully determined, the transference of resources, i.e. the interaction condition, is possible if both respective enforcer assets have control of adjacent tiles, i.e. making the determination based on virtual object occupation information of each game camp and the connection relationship among the virtual objects); and
In an exemplary embodiment, the Alliance Engine 305 transfers various types of virtual objects, in-game points, in-game health and in-game resources between the first player and a second player in the alliance based on their respective enforcer assets having territorial control over adjacent tiles. For example, the first enforcer asset of the first player has territorial control over the second tile and a second enforcer asset of the second player has territorial control over a fourth tile. The Alliance Engine 305 detects the second tile and the fourth tile are adjacent tiles in the territory grid.
in response to the target battleground failing to be determined, determining whether the interaction condition is met according to the virtual object occupation information of the game camp corresponding to the interaction request and the connection relationship among the virtual objects (Para. [0061], shows that an attack action, i.e. an interaction condition, is possible if the players are not of the same alliance, i.e. the target battleground failing to be determined; the tile is occupied by another player, i.e. virtual object occupation information; and the enforcer is on the tile, i.e. a connection relationship among the virtual objects).
An enforcer asset of a player occupies a tile different than the player's headquarters tile in the territory grid. For example, a first player in the alliance selects placement of a first enforcer asset on a first tile. The first player thereby has temporary territorial control over the first tile via the first enforcer asset. In addition, the first player may also have temporary territorial control over the headquarters' tile based on proximity to the first enforcer asset and strength level of the first enforcer asset. If the first tile is currently controlled by a particular player that is not a member of the alliance, the first player can select an option for the first enforcer asset to attack and to defeat the particular player in order to acquire temporary territorial control of the first tile.
Regarding claim 6, Maietti further teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 5, wherein in response to the target battleground being successfully determined, determining whether the interaction condition is met according to the virtual object occupation information of each game camp in the target battleground and the connection relationship among the virtual objects comprises: determining whether the first target virtual object has a direct connection relationship with a virtual object occupied by a game camp in the target battleground according to the virtual object occupation information of each game camp in the target battleground and the connection relationship among the virtual objects; and in response to determining that the first target virtual object has the direct connection relationship with the virtual object occupied by the game camp in the target battleground, determining that the interaction condition is met (Para. [0061] and [0065], show that if the first tile, i.e. first target virtual object, is occupied by the first enforcer asset, i.e. a virtual object occupied by a game camp has a direct connection relationship with a target virtual object; the tile belongs another player, i.e. occupation information of a virtual object; and the other player is an ally, i.e. information regarding the target battle ground, the players can transfer resources, i.e. the interaction conditions are met).
An enforcer asset of a player occupies a tile different than the player's headquarters tile in the territory grid. For example, a first player in the alliance selects placement of a first enforcer asset on a first tile. The first player thereby has temporary territorial control over the first tile via the first enforcer asset. In addition, the first player may also have temporary territorial control over the headquarters' tile based on proximity to the first enforcer asset and strength level of the first enforcer asset. If the first tile is currently controlled by a particular player that is not a member of the alliance, the first player can select an option for the first enforcer asset to attack and to defeat the particular player in order to acquire temporary territorial control of the first tile.
In an exemplary embodiment, the Alliance Engine 305 transfers various types of virtual objects, in-game points, in-game health and in-game resources between the first player and a second player in the alliance based on their respective enforcer assets having territorial control over adjacent tiles. For example, the first enforcer asset of the first player has territorial control over the second tile and a second enforcer asset of the second player has territorial control over a fourth tile. The Alliance Engine 305 detects the second tile and the fourth tile are adjacent tiles in the territory grid.
Regarding claim 7, Maietti further teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 6, wherein the plurality of virtual objects comprise: a first virtual object located in a first area, and a second virtual object located in a second area (Para. [0062], shows resources i.e. a first virtual object, in a first tile, i.e. a first area; Para. [0064], shows additional resources, i.e. second virtual objects, associated with adjacent tiles, i.e. a second area); and
While the first tile is occupied by the first enforcer asset, the first player receives in-game benefits based on a strength level of the first enforcer asset and the tile type of the first. For example, if the first tile represents a portion of a commercial district of a virtual city, the first enforcer asset transfers to the first player a certain percentage of virtual profits earned by simulated businesses in the portion of the commercial district. In some embodiments, such transfer of profits is allowed by the Alliance Engine 305 based on the first enforcer asset reaching and maintaining a threshold strength level. According to another embodiment, if the first tile represents a portion of a virtual farming land, the first enforcer asset transfers to the first player a certain amount of crops harvested in the portion of the virtual farming land. In some embodiments, virtual profits or crops transferred to the first player are converted by the Alliance Engine 305 to in-game points, in-game health, in-game resources or various types of virtual objects…
Based on satisfying a threshold strength level, the first enforcer asset acquires temporary territorial control of additional tiles (a second tile, a third tile) adjacent to the first tile. If another player that is not a member of the alliance occupies the second tile, the first player transfers in-game points, in-game health, in-game resources and various types of virtual objects to the first enforcer asset such that the strength level of the first enforcer asset is sufficient enough to attack and defeat the other player currently occupying the second tile. For example, the first player transfers a certain amount of army soldiers to the first enforcer asset for use in acquiring the territorial control of the second tile. While a member of the alliance, each player can further earn additional enforcer assets based on game play (and game play of other players in the alliance) in a particular game level and based on accumulation of various types of virtual objects, in-game points, in-game health and in-game resources. Therefore, the first player can have a plurality of enforcer assets, where each enforcer asset is controlling one or more tiles of varying tile types in the territory grid. By utilizing multiple enforcer assets, the first player continually receives the in-game benefits of all the types of tiles currently controlled by his multiple enforcer assets.
determining whether the first target virtual object has the direct connection relationship with the virtual object occupied by the game camp in the target battleground according to the virtual object occupation information of each game camp in the target battleground and the connection relationship among the virtual objects comprises: determining whether the first target virtual object is located in the first area (Para. [0062], shows consideration for what resources such as virtual profits, i.e. first target virtual object, are in in the first tile, i.e. the first area); and
While the first tile is occupied by the first enforcer asset, the first player receives in-game benefits based on a strength level of the first enforcer asset and the tile type of the first. For example, if the first tile represents a portion of a commercial district of a virtual city, the first enforcer asset transfers to the first player a certain percentage of virtual profits earned by simulated businesses in the portion of the commercial district…
in response to the first target virtual object being located in the first area, determining whether the first target virtual object has the direct connection relationship with the virtual object occupied by the game camp in the target battleground according to the virtual object occupation information of each game camp in the target battleground and the connection relationship among the virtual objects (Para. [0062] and Para. [0065], shows that if the resources, i.e. first target virtual object, as well as the enforcer, i.e. the virtual object occupied by the game camp, are in the same tile, i.e. have a direct connection relationship, and the first tile belongs to an allied player, i.e. occupation information of each game camp in the target battleground, resources are transferred).
While the first tile is occupied by the first enforcer asset, the first player receives in-game benefits based on a strength level of the first enforcer asset and the tile type of the first. For example, if the first tile represents a portion of a commercial district of a virtual city, the first enforcer asset transfers to the first player a certain percentage of virtual profits earned by simulated businesses in the portion of the commercial district…
In an exemplary embodiment, the Alliance Engine 305 transfers various types of virtual objects, in-game points, in-game health and in-game resources between the first player and a second player in the alliance based on their respective enforcer assets having territorial control over adjacent tiles. For example, the first enforcer asset of the first player has territorial control over the second tile and a second enforcer asset of the second player has territorial control over a fourth tile. The Alliance Engine 305 detects the second tile and the fourth tile are adjacent tiles in the territory grid.
Regarding claim 8, Maietti further teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 1, further comprising: in response to a resource allocation event being triggered, determining resource allocation information of each game camp in the game battleground based on the virtual object occupation information of each game camp in the game battleground; and allocating game resources based on the resource allocation information (Para. [0065], shows that each player, i.e. game camp, in an alliance, i.e. battleground, receive resources based off of the tiles, i.e. virtual objects, each player occupies via their enforcer).
In an exemplary embodiment, the Alliance Engine 305 transfers various types of virtual objects, in-game points, in-game health and in-game resources between the first player and a second player in the alliance based on their respective enforcer assets having territorial control over adjacent tiles. For example, the first enforcer asset of the first player has territorial control over the second tile and a second enforcer asset of the second player has territorial control over a fourth tile. The Alliance Engine 305 detects the second tile and the fourth tile are adjacent tiles in the territory grid.
Regarding claim 9, Maietti further teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 8, wherein the game resources comprise: camp resources allocated to each game camp in the game battleground, and/or, game character resources allocated to game characters in each game camp in the game battleground (Para. [0066], shows that the resources a player, i.e. game camp, in an alliance, i.e. battle ground gets, is defined by a pre-defined percentage; Para. [0063], additionally shows that players, i.e. game camps, can spend resources on their enforcer assets, i.e. allocate resources to game characters within a camp).
Based on the adjacency of the second and fourth tiles, the Alliance Engine 305 provides the first and second players with a selectable option to transfer various types of virtual objects, in-game points, in-game health and in-game resources to each other—and to each other's various enforcer assets. For example, if the second tile is a type of tile that provides a water resource and the fourth tile is a type of tile that provides a currency resource, the first and second players can transfer a certain pre-defined percentage (5%, 10%, etc.) of the water resource and the currency resource between each other—or to any of each others' enforcer assets.
The first player can increase a strength level of the first enforcer asset. For example, the Alliance Engine 305 receives game actions selected by the first player (or by other players in the alliance) that increases the first player's levels of in-game points, in-game health, in-game resources and various types of virtual objects. The Alliance Engine 305 provides the first player with a selectable option to transfer any of the acquired in-game points, in-game health, in-game resources and various types of virtual objects to the first enforcer asset in order to increase a strength level of the first enforcer asset. For example, based on the first player satisfying a certain level of in-game points, the first player can transfer a certain amount of the in-game points to the first enforcer asset. Based on the first player satisfying a certain level of in-game health, the first player can transfer a certain amount of the in-game health to the first enforcer asset.
Regarding claim 10, Elysium further teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 8, wherein the resource allocation event comprises at least one of: the current time reaching preset resource settlement time; or a third target virtual object in the virtual objects being occupied by any game camp (1:55, shows the resources that are earned at the end of turn, i.e. when the current time reaches a preset resource settlement time).
Regarding claim 11, Maietti further teaches:
A game controlling method, wherein a scene of a game comprises a plurality of game camps, a plurality of virtual objects and a connection relationship among the virtual objects, each game camp comprises a plurality of virtual characters(Para. [0059] and fig. 4, show an online space consisting of multiple players, i.e. the game camps, as well as territories, i.e. virtual object, that are all connected together on a grid based system, i.e. a connection relationship among the virtual objects; Para. [0060], shows that each player, i.e. game camp, may have multiple enforcers, i.e. virtual characters), and
According to various exemplary embodiments, an Alliance Engine 305 generates an online game for a virtual online gaming environment that is accessed by a plurality of players. The Alliance Engine 305 causes display of a user interface of the online game on a client device associated with each of the plurality of players. In an alternative, the Alliance Engine 305 interacts and communicates with one or more modules that generate the online game. The online game includes a territory grid composed of a plurality of territory tiles. There are various types of territory tiles, where territorial control of a first type of tile provides access to a first type of in-game resource and territorial control of a second type of tile provides access to a second type of in-game resource. As such, a certain type of tile may be more desirable and beneficial to a particular player than other types of tiles. Each tile has one or more adaptive properties, such as an adaptive visual display property and an adaptive resource property. Each player in the online game is granted control over a unique territory tile, which thereby becomes a headquarters tile for a respective player.
The Alliance Engine 305 receives a selection from a subgroup of players to enter an alliance. For example, an alliance is a team of players that join together voluntarily. Each player in the alliance can maintain membership in the alliance for any duration of time and can select to terminate membership in the alliance at any time in the online game. The Alliance Engine 305 grants to each player in the alliance an enforcer asset. Each player in the alliance can further earn additional enforcer assets based on game play of the player or game play of one or more other players in the alliance.
the method comprises: in response to an interaction request of a target virtual character interacting with a first target virtual object in the plurality of virtual objects being triggered, sending the interaction request to a server; and in response to an interaction request success response fed back by the server based on the interaction request, enabling an interaction permission of the target virtual character interacting with the first target virtual object; wherein the interaction request success response is determined by the server according to virtual object occupation information of each game camp in a target battleground to which a game camp of the target virtual character belongs, and the connection relationship among the virtual objects, wherein the target battleground refers to an alliance of the game camps (Para. [0061], shows that a player may send an enforcer, i.e. target virtual character, to attack a tile, i.e. interact with a target virtual object, if the tile is controlled by a player not in an alliance with the player, i.e. interaction based on occupation information of each game camp in a target battleground to which a game camp of the target virtual character belongs; Para. [0064], shows that based on adjacency and proximity of surrounding tiles, i.e. the connection relationship among virtual objects, the enforcer may occupy, i.e. interact with, additional tiles; Para. [0033], additionally show that these decisions may be made by a server).
An enforcer asset of a player occupies a tile different than the player's headquarters tile in the territory grid. For example, a first player in the alliance selects placement of a first enforcer asset on a first tile. The first player thereby has temporary territorial control over the first tile via the first enforcer asset. In addition, the first player may also have temporary territorial control over the headquarters' tile based on proximity to the first enforcer asset and strength level of the first enforcer asset. If the first tile is currently controlled by a particular player that is not a member of the alliance, the first player can select an option for the first enforcer asset to attack and to defeat the particular player in order to acquire temporary territorial control of the first tile.
Based on satisfying a threshold strength level, the first enforcer asset acquires temporary territorial control of additional tiles (a second tile, a third tile) adjacent to the first tile. If another player that is not a member of the alliance occupies the second tile, the first player transfers in-game points, in-game health, in-game resources and various types of virtual objects to the first enforcer asset such that the strength level of the first enforcer asset is sufficient enough to attack and defeat the other player currently occupying the second tile. For example, the first player transfers a certain amount of army soldiers to the first enforcer asset for use in acquiring the territorial control of the second tile. While a member of the alliance, each player can further earn additional enforcer assets based on game play (and game play of other players in the alliance) in a particular game level and based on accumulation of various types of virtual objects, in-game points, in-game health and in-game resources. Therefore, the first player can have a plurality of enforcer assets, where each enforcer asset is controlling one or more tiles of varying tile types in the territory grid. By utilizing multiple enforcer assets, the first player continually receives the in-game benefits of all the types of tiles currently controlled by his multiple enforcer assets.
In particular embodiments, player 101 may access an online game and control the game's progress via client system 130 (e.g., by inputting commands to the game at the client device). Client system 130 can display the game interface, receive inputs from player 101, transmitting user inputs or other events to the game engine, and receive instructions from the game engine. The game engine can be executed on any suitable system (such as, for example, client system 130, social networking system 120a, or game networking system 120b). As an example and not by way of limitation, client system 130 can download client components of an online game, which are executed locally, while a remote game server, such as game networking system 120b, provides backend support for the client components and may be responsible for maintaining application data of the game, processing the inputs from the player, updating and/or synchronizing the game state based on the game logic and each input from the player, and transmitting instructions to client system 130. As another example and not by way of limitation, each time player 101 provides an input to the game through the client system 130 (such as, for example, by typing on the keyboard or clicking the mouse of client system 130), the client components of the game may transmit the player's input to game networking system 120b.
after the game battleground is established, a new game camp is assigned to the game battleground (Para. [0021], shows that upon creation of the alliance both a first and second player, i.e. game camps, are part of said alliance, i.e. added to the alliance); and/or in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground(Para. [0021], shows that upon creation of the alliance both a first player, i.e. first game camp, and a second player, i.e. second game camp, may agree to join in an alliance, i.e. a battleground joining event).
Maietti et al. does not explicitly teach:
wherein the plurality of virtual objects comprises a first virtual object occupied by a first game camp and a second virtual object which is not occupied by any game camp, the first virtual object has a direct connection relationship with the second virtual object, the first game camp does not belong to any game battleground, and in response to an attack initiated by the first game camp to the second virtual object, the second virtual object is occupied by the first game camp, and the target battleground comprising the first game camp is established.
in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground
Elysium teaches:
wherein the plurality of virtual objects comprises a first virtual object occupied by a first game camp and a second virtual object which is not occupied by any game camp, the first virtual object has a direct connection relationship with the second virtual object (0:36, shows a virtual object occupied by a first game camp, i.e. the pink army, that has a direct connection relationship, i.e. a valid movement path, with an unoccupied second virtual object, i.e. the neutral farm square), and in response to an attack initiated by the first game camp to the second virtual object, the second virtual object is occupied by the first game camp (1:17, shows that the pink army, i.e. first virtual object, has attacked the second virtual object, i.e. the farm square, and now the first game camp occupies the second virtual object as indicated by the pink highlights on the farm square).
It would be obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for someone of ordinary skill to apply the known techniques of Elysium, regarding battle scenes, territory acquisition, and resource acquisition timers, to the similar device of Maietti, an alliance engine, to yield the predictable result of yielding a more engaging engine. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motived to incorporate the known technique of Elysium with the similar device of Maietti as battle scenes create a more captivating experience for the user as opposed to simply a transfer of ownership if a static force number is higher, and the resource acquisition timer creates an expected window for when resources are gained for players to strategize around.
Warband teaches:
Wherein the plurality of virtual objects comprises a first virtual object occupied by a first game camp and a second virtual object (9:15, show an army with 81 troops possessed by the player, i.e. the first virtual object occupied by a first game camp, and a second virtual object, i.e. Sharwa Castle).
in response to an attack initiated by the first game camp to the second virtual object (9:56, shows the army is assaulting Sharwa castle, i.e. an attack on the second virtual object), the second virtual object is occupied by the first game camp, and the target battleground comprising the first game camp is established (18:21 and 18:29, show that the first game camp is able to form a kingdom, i.e. a game battleground or alliance).
Hay Day teaches:
in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground (Page 1, section “Searching for a neighborhood”, shows that a player, i.e. game camp, cannot be a member of multiple neighborhoods, i.e. battlegrounds, at the same time).
Regarding claim 12, Maietti teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 11, wherein the interaction request is an attack request of attacking the first target virtual object (Para. [0061], shows the interaction as the enforcer attacking a tile, i.e. an attack request).
An enforcer asset of a player occupies a tile different than the player's headquarters tile in the territory grid. For example, a first player in the alliance selects placement of a first enforcer asset on a first tile. The first player thereby has temporary territorial control over the first tile via the first enforcer asset. In addition, the first player may also have temporary territorial control over the headquarters' tile based on proximity to the first enforcer asset and strength level of the first enforcer asset. If the first tile is currently controlled by a particular player that is not a member of the alliance, the first player can select an option for the first enforcer asset to attack and to defeat the particular player in order to acquire temporary territorial control of the first tile.
Maietti does not explicitly teach:
The method further comprises: in response to the attack request succeeding, controlling the target virtual character to enter an attack scene of attacking the first target virtual object.
Elysium teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 11, wherein the interaction request is an attack request of attacking the first target virtual object, and the method further comprises: in response to the attack request succeeding, controlling the target virtual character to enter an attack scene of attacking the first target virtual object (2:04 and 2:09, show that when the attack request is a success a commander and army, i.e. the target character, are entered into an attack scene attacking the occupying force at the farm, i.e. the target virtual object).
Regarding claim 13, Maietti teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 11, wherein the method further comprises: obtaining a game resource allocated by the server to the target virtual character (Para. [0064], shows that the tiles occupied by the enforcer gains resources and that the player may allocate these resources to the enforcer);
Based on satisfying a threshold strength level, the first enforcer asset acquires temporary territorial control of additional tiles (a second tile, a third tile) adjacent to the first tile. If another player that is not a member of the alliance occupies the second tile, the first player transfers in-game points, in-game health, in-game resources and various types of virtual objects to the first enforcer asset such that the strength level of the first enforcer asset is sufficient enough to attack and defeat the other player currently occupying the second tile. For example, the first player transfers a certain amount of army soldiers to the first enforcer asset for use in acquiring the territorial control of the second tile. While a member of the alliance, each player can further earn additional enforcer assets based on game play (and game play of other players in the alliance) in a particular game level and based on accumulation of various types of virtual objects, in-game points, in-game health and in-game resources. Therefore, the first player can have a plurality of enforcer assets, where each enforcer asset is controlling one or more tiles of varying tile types in the territory grid. By utilizing multiple enforcer assets, the first player continually receives the in-game benefits of all the types of tiles currently controlled by his multiple enforcer assets.
Maietti does not explicitly teach:
wherein the game resource is determined by the server based on the virtual object occupation information corresponding to each game camp in the target battleground after a resource allocation event is triggered.
Elysium teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 11, wherein the method further comprises: obtaining a game resource allocated by the server to the target virtual character; wherein the game resource is determined by the server based on the virtual object occupation information corresponding to each game camp in the target battleground after a resource allocation event is triggered (1:55, shows the total resources, the box at the top right corner, that game camp gains at the end of each turn based off of the virtual objects the game camp occupies at the end of the turn; 29:38, shows that game resources earned by each camp gets allocated to virtual characters in the battleground in the form of upgrades and additional troops).
Regarding claims 14 and 18-20, they are mirrored claims to claims 1 and 5-7 respectively and are rejected in like manner.
Claims 4 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maietti (Document ID 20170361232 A1; 2017-12-21) in view of “Conquest of Elysium 4 - Multiplayer Co-op Gameplay” 2020-01-28 (hereinafter “Elysium”), “17. Starting your Kingdom - Mount and Blade Warband New Player Guide” 2015-04-07 (hereinafter “Warband”), Hay Day (Fandom Wiki page archived by wayback machine titled "Neighborhood”; 2020-02-03) and in further view of Van Luchene (Document ID 20120077599 A1; 2012-03-29).
Regarding claim 4, Maietti teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 1, wherein in response to the battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered, and the first game camp agreeing with the second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground comprises : in response to the battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered, and the first game camp agreeing with the second game camp to join, determining whether a number of game camps included in the game battleground reaches a preset number threshold; and in response to the number of the game camps included in the game battleground not reaching the preset number threshold and the first game camp agreeing with the second game camp to join the game battleground, controlling the second game camp to join the game battleground (Para. [0060], shows that to join an alliance that both players, i.e. game camps, must agree to enter an alliance, i.e. battleground).
The Alliance Engine 305 receives a selection from a subgroup of players to enter an alliance. For example, an alliance is a team of players that join together voluntarily. Each player in the alliance can maintain membership in the alliance for any duration of time and can select to terminate membership in the alliance at any time in the online game. The Alliance Engine 305 grants to each player in the alliance an enforcer asset. Each player in the alliance can further earn additional enforcer assets based on game play of the player or game play of one or more other players in the alliance.
Maietti does not explicitly teach:
determining whether a number of game camps included in the game battleground reaches a preset number threshold.
Van Luchene teaches:
The game controlling method according to Claim 1, wherein in response to the battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered, controlling the second game camp that triggers the battleground joining event to join the game battleground comprises: in response to the battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered, determining whether a number of game camps included in the game battleground reaches a preset number threshold and determining whether the first game camp agrees with the second game camp to join the game battleground; and in response to the number of the game camps included in the game battleground not reaching the preset number threshold and the first game camp agreeing with the second game camp to join the game battleground, controlling the second game camp to join the game battleground (Para. [0233], shows that a guild owner may not add more characters to a guild unless certain conditions are met, i.e. at certain points there is a preset number threshold of one for how many game camps may join an alliance; Para. [0233], additionally shows that both player join via a negotiated contract, i.e. both game camps agree to enter the alliance).
Guilds--Player characters in a virtual environment may decide to form one or more guilds. Traditionally, though not necessarily, guilds are formed by players who have similar skill sets (e.g. an artists guild) or who perform the same type of work (e.g. an assassins guild.) A guild may or may not include some form of hierarchical leadership structure. The methods and systems by which a guild can grow or create membership may be dictated by various rules and requirements. For example, in one example, a player character in charge of a guild may not be able to add other player characters to the guild unless either he or his guild have obtained a certain level in the game, completed certain game parameters, or acquired enough game attributes to qualify to add characters to the guild. New player characters coming into the guild can do so with a contract that can be negotiated before they join the game environment. Players in a guild can renegotiate contracts with their guild, or can be recruited to other guilds who offer competitive contracts.
It would be obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for someone of ordinary skill to apply the known techniques of Van Luchene, regarding limiting the number of members in a guild, to the similar device of Maietti, an alliance engine, to yield the predictable result of yielding a more engaging engine. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motived to incorporate the known technique of Van Luchene with the similar device of Maietti as limiting the number of members in an alliance/guild prevent a single alliance/guild from acquiring an overwhelming amount of power and resources.
Regarding claim 17, it is a mirrored claim to claim 4 and is rejected in like manner.
Summary
No claim is allowed
Claims 1, 4-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 USC § 101
Claims 1, 4-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 USC § 103
Response to Arguments
The Applicants arguments filed on November 10, 2025 related to claims 1-20 are fully considered.
Rejections under 35 USC § 101
Applicant respectfully argues that amended claim 1 includes the following additional element(s) that integrates the judicial exception into a practical application of gaming control:
"wherein the method further comprises at least one of: after the game battleground is established, assigning a new game camp to the game battleground; or in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground.”
Applicant further argues that the added elements denoted above describe the following technical solution of amended claim 1:
“the problem that there is a big difference in the combat power of players in different game camps, which in turn causes a big difference in the overall combat power of different game camps and leads to a greater tilt in the allocation of in game resources towards a smaller number of players and disrupts the balance of the game can be solved, the game battleground formed by different camps can be added based on game camps, and the formation of battlegrounds is more flexible, which enhances the fun of games.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees and does not find this argument persuasive. The Applicant’s claims are not considered a “Practical Application,” because the claims do not provide any of the following:
Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field – see MPEP 2106.05(a);
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); or
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).
Furthermore, there are also several factors that reasonably explain that the Applicant’s claims are not indicative of integration into a practical application, which 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);
Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h).
Here, the Applicant’s claims are not providing any technological advancement as described in the first four bulleted factors, and Applicant’s claims are merely claimed to use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and to generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The claim limitation “wherein the method further comprises at least one of: after the game battleground is established, assigning a new game camp to the game battleground; or in response to a battleground joining event corresponding to joining the game battleground being triggered and the first game camp agreeing with a second game camp to join, controlling the second game camp that has not joined other game battlegrounds and that has triggered the battleground joining event to join the game battleground” simply describes simply recite rules for game interaction, which is partially analogous to “rules for playing games" (i.e., In re Marco Guldenaar Holding B.V., 911 F.3d 1157, 1161, 129 USPQ2d1008, 1011 (Fed. Cir. 2018)) and are drawn to an abstract idea of managing alliances which fall under the abstract grouping “certain methods of organizing human activity” in the form of managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) as per MPEP 2106.04(a)(2). As such, the arguments are not persuasive.
Rejections under 35 USC § 103
Applicant respectfully argues that “It can be seen that in the scheme described by Maietti, the alliance is a team of players that join together voluntarily, and the players can independently decide when to join the alliance, how long to remain in it, and choose to leave the alliance at any time, which is different from the scheme described in the above distinguishing features recited in amended claim 1.”
Examiner agrees that Maietti characterizes and alliance in this fashion. However, under broadest reasonable interpretation, a player requesting to joining an alliance would constitute “battleground joining event”. The “battleground joining event” requiring both the “first game camp agreeing with a second camp to join” for the system to add the second game camp to the first game camp’s battleground.
Applicant respectfully argues “Warband only discloses establishment of Kingdom and territorial acquisition, and does not mention how a game camp joins in the game battleground after the game battleground is established. Thus Warband also fails to disclose the above distinguishing technical features recited in claim 1.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim limitations denote that “in response to an attack initiated by the first game camp to the second virtual object, causing the second virtual object to be occupied by the first game camp, and establishing the game battleground, wherein the game battleground comprises the first game camp” and the claim limitations further describe a game battleground as “comprising at least one game camp” and “an alliance of the game camps”. Under broadest reasonable interpretation the player’s warband would constitute a “game camp” and the kingdom, which is formed upon capture of the castle as shown a times 18:21 and 18:29, constitute a “battleground” (i.e., an alliance of warbands/game-camps).
Examiner agrees that Elysium and Van Lucene both fail to teach the “distinguishing features” added to the amended claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY JAMES BULTHUIS whose telephone number is (703)756-1060. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:30-5:30.
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.
/A.J.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/KANG HU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715