DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In light of Applicant's submission filed September 25, 2025, the Examiner has maintained and updated the 35 USC § 101 and 103 rejections.
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 –7, 9, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) the following limitations that are considered to be abstract ideas:
Claims 1 and 9
receives, a setting request for a benefit provision period including a specific interval at which a benefit that can be used in a game is provided to a user,: a slide button that is slidable in response to a user operation and indicates a length of the benefit provision period, depending on the length of the benefit provision period indicated by the slide button that has slid upon detection of the user, setting a number of times of providing benefits to the user, calculating a number of benefits provided at the specific interval by dividing a total number of benefits provided over a course of the benefit provision period by the number of times of providing benefits to the user, wherein the total number of benefits provided over the course of the benefit provision period is increased as the length of the benefit provision period becomes long; in response to the slide button sliding to the position, automatically updating the length of the benefit provision period, the number of benefits provided at the specific interval, and total number of benefits on the selection screen to reflect a result of the calculating: upon receiving the setting request on the selection screen after the user operation of the slide button, setting the benefit provision period
in response to the setting request, setting the benefit provision period;
registering the number of benefits at the specific interval and a total number of benefits; and
upon determining that a specific condition is satisfied, and in response to an acquisition request from the user, causing the user to acquire the benefit provided at the specific interval and use the benefit in the game
The limitations of independent claim 1 and 9 as detailed above, as drafted, falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas namely “commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations)” because the claims (in summary)disclose displaying information that includes a slide button…, scaling a benefit based on a user using a slide button…, response to said information setting a benefit provision period, registering the benefit provided, upon satisfying a condition, providing said benefit to the user. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular the claims recite the additional elements of using terminal device, non-transitory computer readable recording medium, screen, display, control device. The aforementioned additional generic computing elements perform the steps of the claims at a high level of generality (i.e. As a generic medium performing generic computer function of displaying, calculating, setting, registering, determining) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does 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.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of terminal device, non-transitory computer readable recording medium, screen, display, control device amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of the computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation.
Thus, taken individually and in combination, the additional elements do not amount to
significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). (i.e. “PEG”
Step 2B=No) The dependent claims 2-7, 11 and 12 appear to merely further limit the abstract and as such, the analysis of dependent claims 2-7, 10 and 11 results in the claims “reciting” an abstract idea The claims the claims do not recite additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application the additional elements do not amount to an inventive concept (significantly more) other than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Thus, based on the detailed analysis above, claims 1 - 11 are not patent eligible.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asuna et al.(2021/0197086) in view of Mantyla (WO 2018/085604) Claims 1 and 9: Asuna discloses a non-transitory computer readable recording medium storing instructions that cause a computer to execute:
Displaying on a touch panel of terminal device; ([0430]. Touch panel)
registering the number of benefits provided at the specific interval, and total number of benefits with respect to the length of the benefit provision period; (the applicant’s “registering” per the specification is merely storing the information (see applicant’s specification at [0053] see for example Asuna discloses at[0119] control a storage storing, as advantage option information, information of a specification of the advantage option including at least mission information defining a mission accomplishment condition indicating a condition of a mission to be accomplished within a given valid period by the player for which the advantage option is set and a reward to be acquired by the player upon accomplishing the mission;) and upon determining that a specific condition is satisfied, and in response to an acquisition request from the user, causing the user to acquire the benefit provided at the specific interval and use the benefit in the game. (see for example [0121] execute reward control processing of setting, when the option set player is determined to have satisfied the mission accomplishment condition defined in the mission information within the valid period, the reward defined in the mission information to be acquirable by the option set player) but does not explicitly disclose, a selection screen that receives, a setting request for a benefit provision period including a specific interval at which a benefit that can be used in a game 1s provided to a user, the selection screen showing: a slide button that is slidable in response to a user operation and indicates a length of the benefit provision period, depending on the length of the benefit provision period indicated by the slide button that has slid upon detection of the user, setting a number of times of providing benefits to the user, calculating a number of benefits provided at the specific interval by dividing a total number of benefits provided over a course of the benefit provision period by the number of times of providing benefits to the user, wherein the total number of benefits provided over the course of the benefit provision period is increased as the length of the benefit provision period becomes long; in response to the slide button sliding to the position, automatically updating the length of the benefit provision period, the number of benefits provided at the specific interval, and total number of benefits on the selection screen to reflect a result of the calculating: upon receiving the setting request on the selection screen after the user operation of the slide button, setting the benefit provision period
However Mantyla discloses a selection screen that receives, a setting request for a benefit provision period including a specific interval at which a benefit that can be used in a game 1s provided to a user, the selection screen showing: a slide button that is slidable in response to a user operation and indicates a length of the benefit provision period, depending on the length of the benefit provision period indicated by the slide button that has slid upon detection of the user, setting a number of times of providing benefits to the user, calculating a number of benefits provided at the specific interval by dividing a total number of benefits provided over a course of the benefit provision period by the number of times of providing benefits to the user, wherein the total number of benefits provided over the course of the benefit provision period is increased as the length of the benefit provision period becomes long; in response to the slide button sliding to the position, automatically updating the length of the benefit provision period, the number of benefits provided at the specific interval, and total number of benefits on the selection screen to reflect a result of the calculating: upon receiving the setting request on the selection screen after the user operation of the slide button, setting the benefit provision period; (see for example [0067] Referring now to FIG. 4C, an example text entry 460 in the field 424 associated with selecting the maximum number of discount levels is shown, in accordance with an example embodiment. More specifically, FIG. 4C depicts a screenshot of the second UI 400 explained with reference to FIG. 4A, with user input corresponding to the predefined time interval and the discount factor interval already received and the user in the process of selecting the maximum number of discount levels. Further, as explained with reference to FIG. 4A, the field 424 corresponds to the maximum number of discount levels. The user of the system 200 may slide a scale included in the sliding scale option 462 to set the maximum number of discount levels possible for the discount rewards program to be extended to the customer of the merchant establishment. As an illustrative example, the user of the system 200 is depicted to have selected a value of 'five' on the sliding scale option 462 to set the maximum number of discount levels to be five levels as exemplarily depicted in the text box 460. Further, a predefined optimum value, as per industry settings, may also be suggested to the user as depicted by the text box 464 (labeled as 'custom'). As an illustrative example, a suggested value of maximum number of discount levels is depicted to be five. It is noted that the user may use the suggestion or select a value for the discount factor interval based on own volition. [0068] In FIG. 4C, the second UI 400 is also depicted to display a summary section 466 outlining the options selected by the user of the system 200 corresponding to the parameters for predefined time interval, discount factor interval, maximum number of discount levels, and maximum discount. For the purposes of the description, user input corresponding to each of these parameters is referred to herein as first input. Accordingly, the first input provided by the user is summarized in the summary section 466. The first input is depicted to be one month predefined time interval, 10% discount factor interval and a maximum of five discount levels (thereby configuring the maximum discount to be 50%). More specifically, the five discount levels associated with the discount rewards program based on such a first input may be first, second, third, fourth, and fifth discount levels respectively. Further, a predefined discount factor of the first discount level may be identified by computing a mathematical product of the first discount level (i.e. one) and a value of the discount factor interval (i.e. 10%), which equals 10%. Similarly, the predefined discount factor of the second, third, fourth, and fifth discount levels may be computed as 20%, 30%, 40% and 50% respectively. Also see [0069, 0070 and 0075]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have modified the non-transitory computer readable medium, information processing device, and non-transitory computer readable recording medium of Asuna so as to have included displaying a selection screen that receives, from a user, a setting request for a benefit provision period including a specific interval at which a benefit that can be used in a game is provided to a user, the selection screen showing: a slide button that is slidable in response to a user operation and indicates a length of the benefit provision period, and at least one of a number of benefits provided at the specific interval and a total number of benefits provided over a course of the benefit provision period; sliding the slide button to a position indicating the length of the benefit provision period that has been changed based on the user operation; depending on the length of the benefit provision period, changing at least one of the number of benefits and the total number of benefits in order to motivate longer engagement through visual reward scaling pushers users to choose longer durations. ([0067 and 0068], Mantyla) Furthermore because each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit in different references or embodiments, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself that is in the substitution of a slider/scaling reward system as disclosed by Mantyla for the reward system to be used in Asuna. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Claim 2: Asuna and Mantyla discloses the non-transitory computer readable recording medium according to claim 1, wherein the specific condition is that the user has paid a certain fee. [0137] Asuna
Claim 3: Asuna and Mantyla discloses the non-transitory computer readable recording medium according to claim 1, wherein the specific condition is that the user carries out a mission within the game. [0119-0121] Asuna
Claim 4: Asuna and Mantyla discloses the non-transitory computer readable recording medium according to claim 1, wherein the benefit provided at the specific interval is made more advantageous in inverse proportion to the length of the benefit provision period. [0127] Asuna
Claim 5: Asuna and Mantyla discloses the non-transitory computer readable recording medium according to claim 4, wherein the number of benefits provided at the specific interval is increased in inverse proportion to the length of the benefit provision period. [0127] Asuna
Claim 6: Asuna and Mantyla discloses the non-transitory computer readable recording medium according to claim 4, wherein a type of benefit provided at the specific interval is upgraded in inverse proportion to the length of the benefit provision period.[0138, 0145, 0269] Asuna
Claim 7: Asuna and Mantyla discloses the non-transitory computer readable recording medium according to claim 1, wherein the benefit is acquired by the user in response to the acquisition request has been received from the user after login to the game. [0233 and [0316] Asuna
Claim 11: Asuna and Mantyla discloses the non-transitory computer readable recording medium according to claim 1, wherein the selection screen indicates: a message that a total number of benefits provided over a course of the benefit provision period is increased as the benefit provision period is long, and a button that receives the setting request. [0439, 0491, 0498] Asuna
Claim 12: Asuna discloses the non-transitory computer readable recording medium according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the information processing device executes, after the benefit is provided to the user and the total number of benefits decreases, either: in response to the length of the benefit provision period decreasing by a predetermined period by the user operation on the slide button, recalculating the number of benefits provided at the specific interval by subtracting a predetermined number corresponding to the predetermined period from the total number of benefits, and dividing a subtraction result by a decremented number of times of providing benefits; and in response to the length of the benefit provision period increasing by a predetermined period by the user operation on the slide button, recalculating the number of benefits provided at the specific interval by adding a predetermined number corresponding to the predetermined period to the total number of benefits, and dividing an addition result by an incremented number of times of providing benefits, and automatically updating the length of the benefit provision period, the number of benefits provided at the specific interval, and total number of benefits on the selection screen to reflect a result of the recalculating. However Mantyla discloses wherein the information processing device executes, after the benefit is provided to the user and the total number of benefits decreases, either: in response to the length of the benefit provision period decreasing by a predetermined period by the user operation on the slide button, recalculating the number of benefits provided at the specific interval by subtracting a predetermined number corresponding to the predetermined period from the total number of benefits, and dividing a subtraction result by a decremented number of times of providing benefits; and in response to the length of the benefit provision period increasing by a predetermined period by the user operation on the slide button, recalculating the number of benefits provided at the specific interval by adding a predetermined number corresponding to the predetermined period to the total number of benefits, and dividing an addition result by an incremented number of times of providing benefits, and automatically updating the length of the benefit provision period, the number of benefits provided at the specific interval, and total number of benefits on the selection screen to reflect a result of the recalculating.[0045, 0058, 0059, 0061, 0065]
Furthermore, because each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit in different references or embodiments, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself that is in the substitution of a slider/scaling reward system as disclosed by Mantyla for the reward system to be used in Asuna. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 10, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues the 101 rejection that the amendments to the claims are similar to USPTO Example 37, the Examiner respectfully disagrees the applicant’s claims needs human interaction with the slide button to trigger an action, whereas in example 37 the processor automatically moved the most icons to a position on the GUI. Example 37 uses previous movement history to determine what position to move the icons. The applicant’s slide button merely performs a calculation and does not actually improve the GUI, nor does it improve the functioning of the computer, technology or other technical field. The updating of a selection screen based on a result of the calculating is not equivalent to example 37. The applicant’s generic user interface configuration merely receives numerical input from a user via moving of a slide button. The slide button merely replaces a traditional user interface inputs with a known alternative form of user input. x. An improved user interface for electronic devices that displays an application summary of unlaunched applications, where the particular data in the summary is selectable by a user to launch the respective application. Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L., v. LG Electronics, Inc., 880 F.3d 1356, 1362-63, 125 USPQ2d 1436, 1440-41 (Fed. Cir. 2018); - MPEP 2106.05(a) Core Wireless was considered an improvement to user interfaces by allowing users to more quickly access data and applications. The claims related to display interfaces for electronic devices, particularly smally screens like mobile phones allowed users to more quickly access data and applications. Thus, the court affirmed that the claims were directed to a specific improvement that enhanced usability. viii. Arranging transactional information on a graphical user interface in a manner that assists traders in processing information more quickly, Trading Technologies - MPEP 2106.05(a) Trading Technologies was considered NOT an improvement because it merely arranged information on a display and did not improve the user interface. The courts decided that the invention merely aimed to enhance the user experience for traders, rather than improve computer functionality. While the applicant’s claims merely display information and performs calculations. Which does not improve the functioning of the computer, technology or other technical field. The applicant also argues that the claims can not be achieved with normal capabilities of the general purpose computer, the Examiner respectfully disagrees the applicant’s specification at [0023] “Each terminal device 12 is an information processing device belonging to a user, and is an information processing device that provides a game to a player by executing the game program 14 received from the server device 10 after the instructions have been installed. Examples of these terminal devices 12 include video game machines, arcade game machines, mobile phones, smartphones, tablets, personal computers, and various other such devices.” All of which are generic computing devices.
Limitations that are indicative of integration into a practical application:
Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b)
Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo
The applicant’s claims do not appear to have limitations that are indicative of a practical application, thus the 101 rejection is maintained.
In regards to the 103 rejection, the reference Mantyla discloses at [0067-0070], discloses the applicant’s claim amendments. Mantyla discloses predefined time intervals, discount levels associated with level intervals, per purchase transaction within the predefined time interval which is substantially equivalent to the applicant’s specific interval at which benefits are provided. The predefined discount disclosed at [0068] defines multiple benefit amounts being determined by time intervals. (e.g. total number of benefits) Also discloses that a subsequent purchase is made within the predefined time interval (see [0070]), the current discount level incremented to the second discount level, a third purchase transaction increments to the third discount level. As stated in [0068] ”Further, a predefined discount factor of the first discount level may be identified by computing a mathematical product of the first discount level (i.e. one) and a value of the discount factor interval (i.e. 10%), which equals 10%. Similarly, the predefined discount factor of the second, third, fourth, and fifth discount levels may be computed as 20%, 30%, 40% and 50% respectively.” A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that this is equivalent to the applicant’s calculation. The applicant’s calculating is merely a calculation of a percentage. The progressive discount levels is equivalent to the applicant’s that the length of the provision period increases, the number of benefits also increases. Thus, the applicant’s argument is unpersuasive. The 103 rejection is maintained.
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 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 DARNELL A POUNCIL whose telephone number is (571)270-3509. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 - 6:00.
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, Ilana Spar can be reached at (571) 270-7537. 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.
/D.A.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3622
/ILANA L SPAR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3622