Acknowledgements
This communication is in response to applicant’s response filed on 03/02/2026.
Claims 1, 3-5, 10, 12, and 14-16 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Regarding applicant’s arguments:
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 7-8, filed 03/02/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1-20 under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 that even if somehow directed to the alleged abstract, the claims integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because claim 1 offers an improved way to create on-demand non-monetary promotional currencies that are freely convertible to each other without the need to change the code of any gaming establishment system thereby improving the technology, have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Examiner respectfully argues converting non-monetary promotional currencies is not an improvement in technology but rather a mathematical calculation. There is no improvement to the functioning of the system itself, and the claims do not move beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 is maintained.
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 8-9, filed 03/02/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1 and 12 under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1) that Sanford does not teach the amended limitations, specifically, “maintain, in association with a first defined promotional currency counter, a first integer value of a first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency not redeemable for any play of any game at any electronic gaming machine, and responsive to an occurrence of a promotional currency conversion event: debit, in association with the first defined promotional currency counter, a second integer value of the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency, the second integer value being no more than the first integer value, and credit, in association with a second, different defined promotional currency counter, a third integer value of a second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency redeemable for a play of a game at an electronic gaming machine” have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is in view of Kuznetsov (US 20150126270).
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 1-9 and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Under Step 1 of the Section 101 analysis, claim 1 is directed to a system and claim 12 is directed to a method (an apparatus and a process).
Under Step 2A Prong One, Claims 1 and 12 recite: maintain, in association with a first defined promotional currency counter, a first integer value of a first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency not redeemable for any play of any game at any electronic gaming machine, and responsive to an occurrence of a promotional currency conversion event: debit, in association with the first defined promotional currency counter, a second integer value of the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency, the second integer value being no more than the first integer value, and credit, in association with a second, different defined promotional currency counter, a third integer value of a second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency redeemable for a play of a game at an electronic gaming machine.
Claims 1 and 12 as drafted include language (see underlined language above) that recite an abstract idea of exchanging a not redeemable non-monetary currency value in return for redeemable gaming currency value, which falls under certain methods of organizing human activity (i.e., commercial interactions).
Under Step 2A Prong Two, the additional claim element(s), considered individually, do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception and in a manner that integrates the exception into a practical application of the exception. The additional claim elements(s) “a system comprising: a processor; and a memory device,” generally “apply” the concept of exchanging a not redeemable non-monetary currency value in return for redeemable gaming currency value. The claimed computer components are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as tools to perform the abstract idea. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Under Step 2A Prong Two, the additional claim element(s), considered in combination, do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception and in a manner that integrates the exception into a practical application of the exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a system comprising: a processor; and a memory device amounts to no more than applying the abstract idea of exchanging a not redeemable currency value in return for redeemable gaming currency value. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Under Step 2B, the additional claim element(s), considered individually and in combination, do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself for similar reasons outlined under Step 2A Prong Two.
A similar analysis can be applied to dependent claims 2 and 13 which claim “wherein the promotional currency conversion event is associated with a conversion rate” which merely elaborate on the abstract idea without reciting any new additional elements. When the limitations are considered individually and as a whole in combination with the independent claims from which they depend from, the claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
A similar analysis can be applied to dependent claims 3 and 14 which claims “wherein, based on the conversion rate, the second integer value of the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency is different from the third integer value of the second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency” which merely elaborate on the abstract idea without reciting any new additional elements. When the limitations are considered individually and as a whole in combination with the independent claims from which they depend from, the claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
A similar analysis can be applied to dependent claims 4 and 15 which claims “wherein the conversion rate is based on the second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency relative to the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency” which merely elaborate on the abstract idea without reciting any new additional elements. When the limitations are considered individually and as a whole in combination with the independent claims from which they depend from, the claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
A similar analysis can be applied to dependent claims 5 and 16 which claims “wherein different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currencies are associated with different conversion rates” which merely elaborate on the abstract idea without reciting any new additional elements. When the limitations are considered individually and as a whole in combination with the independent claims from which they depend from, the claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
A similar analysis can be applied to dependent claims 6 and 17 which claims “wherein the promotional currency conversion event occurs responsive to an input received by an input device” which merely elaborate on the abstract idea without reciting any new additional elements. When the limitations are considered individually and as a whole in combination with the independent claims from which they depend from, the claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
A similar analysis can be applied to dependent claims 7 and 18 which claims “wherein the input is associated with an externally controlled interface displayed by a display device of the electronic gaming machine” which merely elaborate on the abstract idea without reciting any new additional elements. When the limitations are considered individually and as a whole in combination with the independent claims from which they depend from, the claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
A similar analysis can be applied to dependent claims 8 and 19 which claims “wherein the first defined promotional currency counter and the second, different defined promotional currency counter are each maintained independent of any modification to any instructions stored by a memory device of a gaming establishment patron management system” which merely elaborate on the abstract idea without reciting any new additional elements. When the limitations are considered individually and as a whole in combination with the independent claims from which they depend from, the claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
A similar analysis can be applied to dependent claims 9 and 20 which claims “wherein the first defined promotional currency counter and the second, different defined promotional currency counter are each maintained independent of any modification to the instructions stored by the memory device” which merely elaborate on the abstract idea without reciting any new additional elements. When the limitations are considered individually and as a whole in combination with the independent claims from which they depend from, the claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Under Step 1 of the Section 101 analysis, claim 10 is directed to a system (an apparatus).
Under Step 2A Prong One, Claim 10 recite: responsive to an occurrence of a first promotional currency conversion event associated with a conversion, based on a first conversion rate, of a first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency that is not redeemable for any play of any game at any electronic gaming machine to a second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency that is redeemable for a play of a game at an electronic gaming machine: debit a first amount of the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency from a first defined promotional currency counter, and credit a second amount of the second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency to a second, different defined promotional currency counter, and responsive to an occurrence of a second, different promotional currency conversion event associated with a conversion, based on a second, different conversion rate, of a third gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency that is not redeemable for any play of any game at any electronic gaming machine and is different from the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency to the second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency: debit a third amount of the third gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency from a third, different defined promotional currency counter, and credit the second amount of the second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency to the second, different defined promotional currency counter.
Claim 10 as drafted include language (see underlined language above) that recite an abstract idea of exchanging a not redeemable currency value in return for different redeemable gaming currency values, which falls under certain methods of organizing human activity (i.e., commercial interactions).
Under Step 2A Prong Two, the additional claim element(s), considered individually, do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception and in a manner that integrates the exception into a practical application of the exception. The additional claim elements(s) “a system comprising: a processor; and a memory device” generally “apply” the concept of exchanging a not redeemable currency value in return for different redeemable gaming currency values. The claimed computer components are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as tools to perform the abstract idea. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Under Step 2A Prong Two, the additional claim element(s), considered in combination, do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception and in a manner that integrates the exception into a practical application of the exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a system comprising: a processor; and a memory device amounts to no more than applying the abstract idea of exchanging a not redeemable currency value in return for different redeemable gaming currency values. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Under Step 2B, the additional claim element(s), considered individually and in combination, do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself for similar reasons outlined under Step 2A Prong Two.
A similar analysis can be applied to dependent claim 11 which claim “wherein at least one of the first promotional currency conversion event and the second, different promotional currency conversion event automatically occurs based on a credit balance of the electronic gaming machine” which merely elaborate on the abstract idea without reciting any new additional elements. When the limitations are considered individually and as a whole in combination with the independent claims from which they depend from, the claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 8-10, 12-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuznetsov (US 20150126270).
Regarding Claims 1 and 12, Kuznetsov teaches maintain, in association with a first defined promotional currency counter, a first integer value of a first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency not redeemable for any play of any game at any electronic gaming machine (Paragraphs 0020 and 0025 teach each of the one or more players may have a player account wherein point totals of points accrued may be tabulated; the gaming system may also include two or more exchangeable gaming currencies each convertible to, and each convertible from, universal points using respective two or more conversion factors; the two or more exchangeable gaming currencies may be at least two of: the points earned through play of a first of the two or more games, the points earned through play of a second of the two or more games; a player may convert the universal points to equivalent points for a particular game to be considered points as if they were earned through play of the particular game; Claim 1 teaches establishing an account for each player by the administrator which represents the total of points earned for each game played and of monetary units), and responsive to an occurrence of a promotional currency conversion event: debit, in association with the first defined promotional currency counter, a second integer value of the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency, the second integer value being no more than the first integer value (Claim 1 teaches exchanging game points earned by playing at least one of the games for game points earned by playing at least another one of the games or for the commonly recognized monetary units; performing a trade wherein the trade comprises: receiving from a user's account a quantity of trade-in points which may have been earned by the user through play of one or more recognized games, or receiving a value equal to a quantity of a currency from the user's account), and credit, in association with a second, different defined promotional currency counter, a third integer value of a second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency redeemable for a play of a game at an electronic gaming machine (Paragraphs 0037-0038 teach receiving from a user's account a quantity of trade-in points which may have been earned by the user through play of one or more recognized games, or receiving a value equal to a quantity of a currency from the user's account; the method may also include returning to the user's account, in exchange for the quantity of trade-in points, one or both of currency, or equivalent points; the equivalent points considered as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game; earning a quantity of points for one or more accomplishments achieved through play of a first game; and trading all or a portion of the quantity of points for equivalent points as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game, and/or trading all or a portion of the quantity of points for a tradable currency; Claim 1 teaches returning to the user's account, in exchange for the quantity of trade-in points, one or both of currency, or equivalent points, wherein the equivalent points are considered as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game, whereby a player can link, and carry over, the accomplishments of one of the games to another one of the games).
Regarding Claim 1, Kuznetsov teaches a system comprising: a processor; and a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform operations (Paragraphs 0020-0021 teach the two or more conversion factors may be determined by a point monetization/normalization module which may be a software module that maybe executed by a computing device that may be, or may include, a processor; All or parts of the gaming system may be computer and/or processor enabled).
Regarding Claim 12, Kuznetsov teaches a method of operating a system (Claim 1 teaches a method of operating a gaming system comprising the steps of: playing at least two games on at least one data processing device which is in communication with a network by one or more players, wherein each of the games is configured to enumerate a number of points earned through play of the respective at least two games; establishing an account for each player by the administrator which represents the total of points earned for each game played and of monetary units; and exchanging game points earned by playing at least one of the games for game points earned by playing at least another one of the games or for the commonly recognized monetary units; performing a trade wherein the trade comprises: receiving from a user's account a quantity of trade-in points which may have been earned by the user through play of one or more recognized games, or receiving a value equal to a quantity of a currency from the user's account; and returning to the user's account, in exchange for the quantity of trade-in points, one or both of currency, or equivalent points, wherein the equivalent points are considered as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game, whereby a player can link, and carry over, the accomplishments of one of the games to another one of the games).
Regarding Claims 2 and 13, Kuznetsov teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 12 above; and Kuznetsov further teaches wherein the promotional currency conversion event is associated with a conversion rate (Paragraphs 0024 and 0028 teach the two or more conversion factors may be determined by predetermined gaming system market factors such as a relative popularity of each of the two or more games, or a trading history of points from the one or more games; each one of the two or more games may be converted into universal points using respective conversion factors).
Regarding Claims 3 and 14, Kuznetsov teaches all the limitations of claims 2 and 13 above; and Kuznetsov further teaches wherein, based on the conversion rate, the second integer value of the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency is different from the third integer value of the second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency (Paragraph 0011 teaches for example, 500,000 points from Game A, 1000 points from Game B, or 75,000 points from Game C, may all equal the same as 10,000 universal points; Claim 1 teaches performing a trade wherein the trade comprises: receiving from a user's account a quantity of trade-in points which may have been earned by the user through play of one or more recognized games, or receiving a value equal to a quantity of a currency from the user's account; and returning to the user's account, in exchange for the quantity of trade-in points, one or both of currency, or equivalent points, wherein the equivalent points are considered as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game, whereby a player can link, and carry over, the accomplishments of one of the games to another one of the games).
Regarding Claims 4 and 15, Kuznetsov teaches all the limitations of claims 2 and 13 above; and Kuznetsov further teaches wherein the conversion rate is based on the second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency relative to the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency (Paragraph 0020 teaches the gaming system may also include two or more exchangeable gaming currencies each convertible to, and each convertible from, universal points using respective two or more conversion factors).
Regarding Claims 5 and 16, Kuznetsov teaches all the limitations of claims 2 and 13 above; and Kuznetsov further teaches wherein different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currencies are associated with different conversion rates (Paragraph 0020 teaches the gaming system may also include two or more exchangeable gaming currencies each convertible to, and each convertible from, universal points using respective two or more conversion factors).
Regarding Claims 8 and 19, Kuznetsov teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 12 above; and Kuznetsov further teaches wherein the first defined promotional currency counter and the second, different defined promotional currency counter are each maintained independent of any modification to any instructions stored by a memory device of a gaming establishment patron management system (Paragraphs 0020-0021 teach each game may be configured to enumerate a number of points earned through play of the respective two or more games; each of the one or more players may have a player account wherein point totals of points accrued may be tabulated; the gaming system may also include two or more exchangeable gaming currencies each convertible to, and each convertible from, universal points using respective two or more conversion factors; the two or more conversion factors may be determined by a point monetization/normalization module which may be a software module that maybe executed by a computing device that may be, or may include, a processor; the two or more exchangeable gaming currencies may be at least two of: the points earned through play of a first of the two or more games and the points earned through play of a second of the two or more games; all or parts of the gaming system may be computer and/or processor enabled; the system may be managed, or administered by an administrator which may be, in some embodiments, be referred to as a currency exchange; the one or more players may make a player to administrator trade by exchanging points earned while playing one of the two or more games; the gaming currencies may be convertible to and from the universal points during a player to administrator trade; the gaming currencies may also be convertible to and from the universal points during a player to player trade).
Regarding Claims 9 and 20, Kuznetsov teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 12 above; and Kuznetsov further teaches wherein the first defined promotional currency counter and the second, different defined promotional currency counter are each maintained independent of any modification to the instructions stored by the memory device (Paragraphs 0020-0021 teach each game may be configured to enumerate a number of points earned through play of the respective two or more games; each of the one or more players may have a player account wherein point totals of points accrued may be tabulated; the gaming system may also include two or more exchangeable gaming currencies each convertible to, and each convertible from, universal points using respective two or more conversion factors; the two or more conversion factors may be determined by a point monetization/normalization module which may be a software module that maybe executed by a computing device that may be, or may include, a processor; the two or more exchangeable gaming currencies may be at least two of: the points earned through play of a first of the two or more games and the points earned through play of a second of the two or more games; all or parts of the gaming system may be computer and/or processor enabled; the system may be managed, or administered by an administrator which may be, in some embodiments, be referred to as a currency exchange; the one or more players may make a player to administrator trade by exchanging points earned while playing one of the two or more games; the gaming currencies may be convertible to and from the universal points during a player to administrator trade; the gaming currencies may also be convertible to and from the universal points during a player to player trade).
Regarding Claim 10, Kuznetsov teaches a system comprising: a processor; and a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor (Paragraphs 0020-0021 teach the two or more conversion factors may be determined by a point monetization/normalization module which may be a software module that maybe executed by a computing device that may be, or may include, a processor; All or parts of the gaming system may be computer and/or processor enabled), cause the processor to: responsive to an occurrence of a first promotional currency conversion event associated with a conversion, based on a first conversion rate, of a first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency that is not redeemable for any play of any game at any electronic gaming machine to a second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency that is redeemable for a play of a game at an electronic gaming machine: debit a first amount of the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency from a first defined promotional currency counter (Claim 1 teaches exchanging game points earned by playing at least one of the games for game points earned by playing at least another one of the games or for the commonly recognized monetary units; performing a trade wherein the trade comprises: receiving from a user's account a quantity of trade-in points which may have been earned by the user through play of one or more recognized games, or receiving a value equal to a quantity of a currency from the user's account), and credit a second amount of the second, different gaming establishment non- monetary promotional currency to a second, different defined promotional currency counter (Paragraphs 0037-0038 teach receiving from a user's account a quantity of trade-in points which may have been earned by the user through play of one or more recognized games, or receiving a value equal to a quantity of a currency from the user's account; the method may also include returning to the user's account, in exchange for the quantity of trade-in points, one or both of currency, or equivalent points; the equivalent points considered as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game; earning a quantity of points for one or more accomplishments achieved through play of a first game; and trading all or a portion of the quantity of points for equivalent points as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game, and/or trading all or a portion of the quantity of points for a tradable currency; Claim 1 teaches returning to the user's account, in exchange for the quantity of trade-in points, one or both of currency, or equivalent points, wherein the equivalent points are considered as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game, whereby a player can link, and carry over, the accomplishments of one of the games to another one of the games), and responsive to an occurrence of a second, different promotional currency conversion event associated with a conversion, based on a second, different conversion rate, of a third gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency that is not redeemable for any play of any game at any electronic gaming machine and is different from the first gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency to the second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency: debit a third amount of the third gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency from a third, different defined promotional currency counter (Paragraph 0020 and Fig. 1 teach the gaming system may also include two or more exchangeable gaming currencies each convertible to, and each convertible from, universal points using respective two or more conversion factors; (i.e., two or more would imply there is a third non-monetary promotional currency for a third game as illustrated in Fig. 1); Claim 1 teaches exchanging game points earned by playing at least one of the games for game points earned by playing at least another one of the games or for the commonly recognized monetary units; performing a trade wherein the trade comprises: receiving from a user's account a quantity of trade-in points which may have been earned by the user through play of one or more recognized games, or receiving a value equal to a quantity of a currency from the user's account), and credit the second amount of the second, different gaming establishment non-monetary promotional currency to the second, different defined promotional currency counter (Paragraph 0020 and Fig. 1 teach the gaming system may also include two or more exchangeable gaming currencies each convertible to, and each convertible from, universal points using respective two or more conversion factors; (i.e., two or more would imply there is a third non-monetary promotional currency for a third game as illustrated in Fig. 1); Paragraphs 0037-0038 teach receiving from a user's account a quantity of trade-in points which may have been earned by the user through play of one or more recognized games, or receiving a value equal to a quantity of a currency from the user's account; the method may also include returning to the user's account, in exchange for the quantity of trade-in points, one or both of currency, or equivalent points; the equivalent points considered as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game; earning a quantity of points for one or more accomplishments achieved through play of a first game; and trading all or a portion of the quantity of points for equivalent points as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game, and/or trading all or a portion of the quantity of points for a tradable currency; Claim 1 teaches returning to the user's account, in exchange for the quantity of trade-in points, one or both of currency, or equivalent points, wherein the equivalent points are considered as if the equivalent points were earned through play of another game, whereby a player can link, and carry over, the accomplishments of one of the games to another one of the games).
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 6-7 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuznetsov (US 20150126270) in view of Sanford (US 20200334952).
Regarding Claims 6 and 17, Kuznetsov teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 12 above; however, Kuznetsov does not explicitly teach wherein the promotional currency conversion event occurs responsive to an input received by an input device.
Sanford from same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the promotional currency conversion event occurs responsive to an input received by an input device (Paragraph 0072 teaches as illustrated, the “redeem points” option has been selected; at screen 1018B, the user is prompted to identify if the value from the redeemed points will be loaded to an “existing” stored value payment vehicle or if a “new” stored value payment vehicle will need to be issued prior to loading. As illustrated, the “existing card” option has been selected; at screen 1018C player identification information is received, such as name, address, and so forth; next, a screen 1018D is provided which provides an available points balance based on a loyalty account associated with the player).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to have modified Kuznetsov to incorporate the teachings of Sanford for the promotional currency conversion event to occur responsive to an input received by an input device.
There is motivation to combine Oakes into the combination of Sanford and Toohey because user input allows the system to compute real-time conversions of non-monetary currency to then wager at a different gaming machine.
Regarding Claims 7 and 18, the combination of Kuznetsov and Sanford teaches all the limitations of claims 6 and 17 above; however, the combination does not explicitly teach wherein the input is associated with an externally controlled interface displayed by a display device of the electronic gaming machine.
Sanford further teaches wherein the input is associated with an externally controlled interface displayed by a display device of the electronic gaming machine (Paragraph 0072 teaches still referring to FIG. 10, example simplified screen displays 1018A-1018E of the computing device associated with the casino cage are shown).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Kuznetsov and Sanford to incorporate the further teachings of Sanford for the promotional currency conversion event to occur responsive to an input received by an input device.
There is motivation to further combine Sanford into the combination of Kuznetsov and Sanford because of the same reasons listed above for claims 6 and 17.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuznetsov (US 20150126270) in view of Oakes (US 20130237304).
Regarding Claim11, Kuznetsov teaches all the limitations of claim 10 above; however, Kuznetsov does not explicitly teach wherein at least one of the first promotional currency conversion event and the second, different promotional currency conversion event automatically occurs based on a credit balance of the electronic gaming machine.
Oakes from same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein at least one of the first promotional currency conversion event and the second, different promotional currency conversion event automatically occurs based on a credit balance of the electronic gaming machine (Paragraph 0234 teaches the players may purchase tokens with their initial deposits; they may set up electronic fund transfers and/or automatic credit card payments to refill their accounts with tokens; a player's account may be replenished automatically as soon as its balance falls below a preset lower limit; for example, a player may exchange credit card cash-back bonus points for tokens).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to have modified Kuznetsov to incorporate the teachings of Oakes for at least one of the first promotional currency conversion event and the second, different promotional currency conversion event to automatically occur based on a credit balance of the electronic gaming machine.
There is motivation to combine Oakes into Kuznetsov because players can continue their session seamlessly without the need to manually insert more cash, return to a cashiers' cage, or use a separate payment kiosk. The system provides immediate access to funds, such as from a casino credit or front money account, right at the machine.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Macke et al. (US 20250259508) teaches the gaming system can receive a request to enable a first gaming feature for a particular wagering game on a gaming device. The wagering game can be a first type of wagering game and the request can be associated with a first patron account. The gaming system can process a transaction to enable the first gaming feature for the first patron account. The gaming system can determine that a second gaming feature for a second type of wagering game corresponds to the first gaming feature. The gaming system can establish communication with the second gaming system and transmit a request to enable the second gaming feature. The second gaming system can enable the gaming feature. After determining that a predetermined period of time has elapsed, the first gaming system or the second gaming system can disable the first gaming feature or the second gaming feature.
Marks et al. (US 20220392312) teaches an electronic gaming system is described. The electronic gaming system includes a server computing device configured to receive an input from a first user computing device including a request to initiate an electronic game and assign a plurality of user devices to the electronic game. The server is further configured to identify a second player account as an initial play player account, wherein the initial play player account is designated to initiate a first play of the electronic game. The server is further configured to transmit content to a second user computing device that causes a gameplay user interface at the second user computing device to include a first display area including video images from a video stream from the second user computing device and a second display area including video images received by the server from a video stream received from the first user computing device.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY JONES whose telephone number is (469)295-9137. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 am - 4:30 pm CST (M-Th).
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, Neha Patel can be reached at (571) 270-1492. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/COURTNEY P JONES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699