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 .
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 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims recite a computer readable storage medium in claims 8-14 but are broad enough in scope to cover transitory media such as signals. As the broadest reasonable interpretation of machine readable media can encompass non-statutory transitory forms of signal transmission, such as a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal per se. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 84 USPQ2d 1495 (Fed. Cir. 2007) a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 is appropriate (MPEP § 2106.03(II)).
Claims 9-14 are also rejected as being dependent upon claim 8.
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 1-3, 8-10 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. (U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0036692, hereinafter referred to as Gupta) in view of Huske et al. (U.S. Patent 11,451,883, hereinafter referred to as Huske) in view of Lockton (U.S. Patent 11,551,529).
As per claims 1, 8 and 15
Gupta discloses establishing a persistent network connection with a plurality of remote player devices participating in the interactive game (0007 “a mobile support system for providing wagering game play to a plurality of mobile devices is provided”, 0041 “In some embodiments, in a Class II implementation, following a remote gaming device establishing a gaming session with the remote game system and initiating a game instance (e.g., pressing a spin button), the allocated virtual gaming service joins a multiplayer game (e.g., an electronic bingo game)”, 0105 “At operation 612, the mobile device 404 transmits a play request (e.g., a spin request) to the game host server 420 (e.g., via a websocket API), which in turn transmits a spin request through to the resolution platform 450 at operation 614”))
Gupta does not explicitly disclose issuing trivia game events to the plurality of remote player devices simultaneously based on: a local timing manager of the trivia service. Huske teaches issuing trivia game events to the plurality of remote player devices simultaneously based on: a local timing manager of the trivia service (7:57-63 “In an alternative embodiment, the system described herein is used to schedule and control duplicate activities of skill or chance with a common scheduled start time, played simultaneously, which are self-contained, for example, not related to a television program. Examples of such include a trivia game, or classic card, dice, word games or games based on television clips”)
Huske teaches a schedule of trivia events (7:57-63 “In an alternative embodiment, the system described herein is used to schedule and control duplicate activities of skill or chance with a common scheduled start time, played simultaneously, which are self-contained, for example, not related to a television program. Examples of such include a trivia game, or classic card, dice, word games or games based on television clips”, 9:1-8 “Regardless of what type of device is used and on whichever service, the present invention ensures that the application in each user's device receives all of the specific assets necessary for that particular genre of activity for a specific scheduled event while minimizing capacity and latency issues by assuring that only the necessary assets which are not resident on the device for the event are delivered on a timely basis to each cell phone”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the mobile gaming system for remote game play of Gupta with the method and system for managing client resources and assets of Huske for the purpose of ensuring that potentially millions of simultaneous users have the necessary and proper software resident on their cell phones in order to participate in scheduled interactive programs (2:34-37).
Neither Gupta nor Huske explicitly disclose verifying scores for the plurality of remote player devices based on the local timing manager, enabling synchronized play of the interactive trivia game by the plurality of remote player devices. Lockton teaches verifying scores for the plurality of remote player devices based on the local timing manager, enabling synchronized play of the interactive trivia game by the plurality of remote player devices (4:16-23, “As it must be determined and verified that the scores achieved in the two contests are by the same individual, the combined contest server compares the cell phone numbers and other account registration information required to be supplied to the daily fantasy operator with the similar information separately collected by the two screen real-time game provider to verify that the scores were generated by the identical entrant”, 10:911 “the method and system are able to be utilized with any event such as card games, dice games, trivia games, esports”, 10:32-63 “In some implementations, the statistical information may be received before the video content (e.g., the statistical information is received at a user device within 1 second from when it actually occurs live, and the video content is received at the user device in 7 seconds from when it occurred live). In some embodiments, the difference in receipt time is computed (similar to the calculation of other delays described herein) to account for such a difference. For example, if the difference between video receipt and statistical information receipt is 6 seconds (7 seconds−1 second), then a system (e.g., server, other network device, user device or a combination thereof) is able to delay transmission and/or display of the statistical information. For example, the game server receives the statistical information and then holds the statistical information for 6 seconds before passing the statistical information on to the user device so that the statistical information and the video content arrive at the same time (or approximately the same time). In another example, the user device receives the statistical information in 1 second, but then the user device (e.g., the game application) holds the statistical information and does not display the statistical information until another 6 seconds have passed so that the video content and statistical information are displayed at the same time (or approximately the same time). In some embodiments, the statistical information is delayed to be displayed before or after the video content. For example, in some implementations, the statistical information is not updated and displayed until 2 seconds after the video content is displayed. In some embodiments, the delay amount of the statistical information is static, and in some embodiments, the delay amount is dynamic”, 11:17-24 “In some embodiments, a lockout signal is sent or triggered based on the receipt of the statistical information. For example, when the statistical information is received at a user device, a lockout signal is triggered. Furthering the example, the earliest receipt of the statistical information triggers the lockout signal (e.g., a lockout signal is sent to all user devices and/or an application prevents a selection of a response after the lockout is triggered)”,11:56-67 “Time-sensitive distributed gaming faces additional problems such as ensuring players do not have any unfair competitive advantages such as providing answers/selections after a designated time. Others have addressed the timing problems by asking questions well in advance, so that the users answer the questions or make their selections well before any advantageous information is revealed. By utilizing time-sensitive lockouts as described herein, which lock out players based on some threshold (e.g., a time, a detected action, a user-triggered action), improper competitive advantages and cheating are avoided”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the mobile gaming system for remote game play of Gupta with the method and system for managing client resources and assets of Huske with the method of generating separate contests of skill or chance of Lockton for the purpose of ensuring fair gameplay for millions of competitors is also addressed by determining and responding to any delays in receipt of content such as by the use of lockout signals (2:35-38).
As per claims 2-3, 9-10 and 16
Gupta discloses establishing the persistent network connection via a WebSocket API (0105 “At operation 612, the mobile device 404 transmits a play request (e.g., a spin request) to the game host server 420 (e.g., via a websocket API), which in turn transmits a spin request through to the resolution platform 450 at operation 614”))
Gupta discloses displaying join information enabling the plurality of remote player devices to establish a WebSocket connection to the service (0106 “For example, the resolution platform 450 may store and maintain a database of assignments (not shown) that, for each mobile device, identifies which particular game source adapters 462 and game source servers 464 that mobile device is assigned, and may additionally include which virtual EGM ID is assigned to each mobile device. As mobile devices 404 begin and end game play sessions, the resolution platform 450 may update this database to track these assignments. In some embodiments, game source adapters 462 may have a preconfigured maximum number of supported devices. As such, if there are no available spots on any existing game source adapters 462 (e.g., no available virtual EGM IDs for any of the adapter/server pairs 460), the resolution platform 450 may automatically initiate a new game source adapter 462 and game source server 464 pair 460 during operation 615, thereby starting a new bingo instance to which more mobile devices 404 can join”)
Gupta does not explicitly disclose a trivia game. Huske teaches a trivia game (7:57-63 “In an alternative embodiment, the system described herein is used to schedule and control duplicate activities of skill or chance with a common scheduled start time, played simultaneously, which are self-contained, for example, not related to a television program. Examples of such include a trivia game, or classic card, dice, word games or games based on television clips”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the mobile gaming system for remote game play of Gupta with the method and system for managing client resources and assets of Huske for the purpose of ensuring that potentially millions of simultaneous users have the necessary and proper software resident on their cell phones in order to participate in scheduled interactive programs (2:34-37).
Claims 4, 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta in view of Huske in view of Lockton as applied to claims 3, 10 and 16 above, and further in view of Tyler (U.S. Patent 7,169,050).
As per claims 4, 11 and 17
Huske teaches implementing the local timing manager (7:57-63 “In an alternative embodiment, the system described herein is used to schedule and control duplicate activities of skill or chance with a common scheduled start time, played simultaneously, which are self-contained, for example, not related to a television program. Examples of such include a trivia game, or classic card, dice, word games or games based on television clips”)
Huske teaches checking the schedule of trivia events to determine whether a next trivia game event is scheduled to be issued (7:57-63 “In an alternative embodiment, the system described herein is used to schedule and control duplicate activities of skill or chance with a common scheduled start time, played simultaneously, which are self-contained, for example, not related to a television program. Examples of such include a trivia game, or classic card, dice, word games or games based on television clips”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the mobile gaming system for remote game play of Gupta with the method and system for managing client resources and assets of Huske for the purpose of ensuring that potentially millions of simultaneous users have the necessary and proper software resident on their cell phones in order to participate in scheduled interactive programs (2:34-37).
Neither Gupta nor Huske or Lockton explicitly disclose using a cron command line utility as a job scheduler configured to issue clock ticks at a fixed schedule to determine whether an event is to be run. Tyler teaches using a cron command line utility as a job scheduler configured to issue clock ticks at a fixed schedule to determine whether an event is to be run (8:62-9:12 “As noted above, for scheduled execution, a program (e.g., Cron) can be used to schedule the client program 113 (e.g., client.pl) to run automatically. For example, a Cron job to run the client program 113 can be scheduled. Although it does not really matter how often the client program 113 is run, running the client program 113 once daily is adequate for most game servers 103. Advantageously, such a schedule will ensure that the master file 117 is updated daily and that new cheaters are logged every time the client program 113 runs. For example, for scheduling the running of the client program 113 once daily, a crontab of the Cron program can be given by: # Run client program once daily @daily /path/to/client-os where the real path to the client program 113 executable is used in place of path, and the actual name and version for the client program 113 is used in place of client”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the mobile gaming system for remote game play of Gupta with the method and system for managing client resources and assets of Huske with the method of generating separate contests of skill or chance of Lockton further with the online gaming cheating prevention system of Tyler for the purpose of aiding in the detection and identification of cheating players on individual game servers (1:34-36).
Claims 5, 12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta in view of Huske in view of Lockton in view of Tyler as applied to claims 4, 11 and 17 above, and further in view of Lewin et al. (U.S. Patent Publication 2021/0373979, hereinafter referred to as Lewin)
As per claims 5, 12 and 18
Huske teaches trivia game events (7:57-63 “In an alternative embodiment, the system described herein is used to schedule and control duplicate activities of skill or chance with a common scheduled start time, played simultaneously, which are self-contained, for example, not related to a television program. Examples of such include a trivia game, or classic card, dice, word games or games based on television clips”, 9:1-8 “Regardless of what type of device is used and on whichever service, the present invention ensures that the application in each user's device receives all of the specific assets necessary for that particular genre of activity for a specific scheduled event while minimizing capacity and latency issues by assuring that only the necessary assets which are not resident on the device for the event are delivered on a timely basis to each cell phone”) however neither Gupta, Huske, Lockton or Tyler explicitly disclose issuing the events using data transfer objects (DTOs) including data the remote devices are configured to execute using local instructions. Lewin teaches issuing the events using data transfer objects (DTOs) including data the remote devices are configured to execute using local instructions (0032 “Dispatcher 114 may include code configured to dispatch mock upload event 110, with mock data transfer object 112 included as an argument, to an execution flow of web page 106 to perform processing and an upload operation on the files designated (or included) in mock data transfer object 112, according to mock upload event 110. For example, upload event listener 116 may receive mock upload event 110 and mock data transfer object 112 from dispatcher 114 and forward them to event handler 118 to propagate the execution flow based on mock upload event 110 and mock data transfer object 112. In some embodiments, event handler 118 may include a plurality of event handlers, (e.g., a chain of event handlers through which mock upload event 110 and/or mock data transfer object 112 are propagated)”, 0041 “In step 208, the mock upload event is executed”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the mobile gaming system for remote game play of Gupta with the method and system for managing client resources and assets of Huske with the method of generating separate contests of skill or chance of Lockton further with the online gaming cheating prevention system of Tyler further with the file upload modifications for client side applications of Lewin for the purpose of being able to modify an upload operation such that only a subset of the files will be transmitted while another subset will be blocked (0019).
Claims 6, 13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta in view of Huske in view of Lockton in view of Tyler in view of Lewin as applied to claims 5, 12 and 18 above, and further in view of Rasmussen (U.S. Patent Publication 2005/0098955)
As per claims 6, 13 and 19
Gupta, Huske, Lockton, Tyler and Lewin, while disclosing the limitations of claims 5, 12 and 18, do not explicitly disclose receiving an answer message from a remote player device responsive to a question from the interactive trivia game, the answer message including a numerical value representing how quickly a user responded to the question; and verifying a score for the remote player device based on comparing the numerical value to an elapsed time measured by the local timing manager. Rasmussen teaches receiving an answer message from a remote player device responsive to a question from the interactive trivia game, the answer message including a numerical value representing how quickly a user responded to the question; and verifying a score for the remote player device based on comparing the numerical value to an elapsed time measured by the local timing manager (0065 “The central processor examines the received polled data to determine which of the players selected the correct answer to the presented question. From the group of correct answers, the RTC timestamp from the player terminals is examined to determine the order in which the players correctly answered i.e. first correct answer from Terminal 4, Second Correct Answer from Terminal B and Third Correct answer from Terminal Blue, etc.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the mobile gaming system for remote game play of Gupta with the method and system for managing client resources and assets of Huske with the method of generating separate contests of skill or chance of Lockton further with the online gaming cheating prevention system of Tyler with the file upload modifications for client side applications of Lewin further with the interactive knowledge based game system of Rasmussen for the purpose of providing an interesting knowledge based skill game to players (0013).
Claims 7, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta in view of Huske in view of Lockton in view of Tyler in view of Lewin in view of Rasmussen as applied to claims 6, 13 and 19 above, and further in view of Mixter et al. (U.S. Patent Publication 2018/0144590, hereinafter referred to as Mixter).
As per claims 7, 14 and 20
Gupta, Huske, Lockton, Tyler, Lewin and Rasmussen, while disclosing the limitations of claims 6, 13 and 19, do not explicitly disclose receiving a user input from a first remote player device including an indication of an action configured to impact a user interface of the interactive trivia game at a second remote player device; and sending a command to the second remote player device to execute the action. Mixter teaches receiving a user input from a first remote player device including an indication of an action configured to impact a user interface of the interactive trivia game at a second remote player device; and sending a command to the second remote player device to execute the action (0048 “In some implementations, a user may want to take a current media session with them as they move through the house and can request such a service from one or more of the voice-activated devices 104. This requires the voice assistant service 140 to transfer the current media session from a first cast device to a second cast device that is not directly connected to the first cast device or has no knowledge of the existence of the first cast device. Subsequent to the media content transfer, a second output device coupled to the second cast device continues to play the media content previously a first output device coupled to the first cast device from the exact point within a music track or a video clip where play of the media content was forgone on the first output device”, 0049 “For example, the voice-activated device 104 may run a trivia game application, and interface with game participants using voice prompts, voice output, and optionally visual output (e.g., light patterns displayed using the group of LEDs)”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the mobile gaming system for remote game play of Gupta with the method and system for managing client resources and assets of Huske with the method of generating separate contests of skill or chance of Lockton further with the online gaming cheating prevention system of Tyler with the file upload modifications for client side applications of Lewin with the interactive knowledge based game system of Rasmussen further with the service-provided visual output at a voice interface device of Mixter for the purpose of directing a target device to control media playback at the target device (0004).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Metzger et al. “An Introduction to Online Video Game QoS and QoE Influencing Factors”, IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, Vol. 24, No. 3, Third Quarter 2022, August 21, 2022, pp. 1894-1925 describes the tailoring of the gaming environment to deliver ideal gaming Quality of Experience (QoE). Discussed are synchronization, network performance and protection against cheating.
A Cron Expressions retrieved from https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E12058_01/doc/doc.1014/e12030/cron_expressions.htm, 2009, 2 pages, explains how the cron function works and lists the parameters and includes sample expressions.
“What is WebSocket? How Does it Work?”, retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20231223114122/https://gcore.com/learning/what-is-websocket, December 23, 2023, 13 pages describes the function of a WebSocket.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES D NIGH whose telephone number is (571)270-5486. The examiner can normally be reached 6:00 to 9:45 and 10:30 to 2:45.
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 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.
/JAMES D NIGH/ Senior Examiner, Art Unit 3699