Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-4, 7-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1-4, 7-17 recite an abstract idea of organizing human. The claim limitations are not indicative of integration into a practical application and the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
Step 1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter
More specifically, regarding Step 1, of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, the claims are drawn to at least one of the four statutory categories of invention (i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition).
Step 2a1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims are analyzed to determine whether it is directed to a judicial exception.
Claims 1-4, 7-8 recite: a valuation system of game events, providing a contest game for a plurality of players to play, the valuation system of game events comprising:
a data storage unit configured to acquire a contest information of a substantial contest to be performed and contest data of the substantial contest after the substantial contest ends, the contest information containing a plurality of contest members engaged in the substantial contest, the contest data comprising a plurality of item data of the plurality of contest members in a plurality of scoring items respectively;
an item selection unit configured to select a specific quantity of the scoring items as a contest ranking item of the contest game by detecting a designation made by any one of the plurality of players via the user interface, or to randomly select a specific quantity of the plurality of scoring items as the contest ranking item;
a plurality of user units configured to be respectively provided for the plurality of players to play and operate the contest game, and be respectively provided for registering, logging in, modifying and storing member data, and the plurality of user units being respectively provided for the plurality of players to create a contest member before the substantial contest is performed, and a contest member list is generated by selecting at least one from a plurality of contest members;
a data calculation unit configured to calculate each of the plurality of item data of the contest ranking item according to a calculation rule, so as to obtain a valuation score, and the data calculation unit configured to count valuation scores of all contest members in each contest member list on the contest ranking item after the substantial contest ends, thereby generating a total score of each contest member list, and ranking according to a magnitude of the total score to generate a contest ranking; and
a central processing unit connected to the data storage unit, the item selection unit, the plurality of user units and the data calculation unit, the central processing unit configured to process operations of the data storage unit, the item selection unit, the plurality of user units and the data calculation unit to perform transmission and exchange of the contest information, the contest data, the contest ranking item, the valuation score, the member data, the contest member list and the contest ranking, and the central processing unit being configured to execute the following programs of:
acquiring the contest information and creating the contest game;
waiting for the plurality of players to join the contest game;
waiting for the item selection unit to create the contest ranking item;
waiting for the plurality of players to create the contest member list;
waiting for the substantial contest to start until ending;
acquiring the contest data; and
acquiring the contest ranking through the data calculation unit,
wherein the valuation system of game event further comprises a processor configured to function as a data storage unit, the item selection unit and the data calculation unit.
Claims 9-17 recites, a valuation method,
the valuation method comprising:
providing a valuation system of game events, the valuation system of game events comprising:
a data storage unit configured to acquire a contest information of a substantial contest to be performed and contest data of the substantial contest after the substantial contest ends, the contest information containing a plurality of contest members engaged in the substantial contest, the contest data comprising a plurality of item data of the plurality of contest members in a plurality of scoring items respectively;
an item selection unit configured to select a specific quantity of the scoring items as a contest ranking item of the contest game by detecting a designation made by any one of the plurality of players via the user unit, or to randomly select a specific quantity of the plurality of scoring items as the contest ranking item;
a plurality of user units configured to be respectively provided for the plurality of players to play and operate the contest game, and be respectively provided for registering, logging in, modifying and storing member data, and the plurality of user units being respectively provided for the plurality of players to create a contest member before the substantial contest is performed, and a contest member list is generated by selecting at least one from a plurality of contest members;
a data calculation unit configured to calculate each of the plurality of item data of the contest ranking item according to a calculation rule, so as to obtain a valuation score, and the data calculation unit configured to count valuation scores of all contest members in each contest member list on the contest ranking item after the substantial contest ends,
thereby generating a total score of each contest member list, and ranking according to a magnitude of the total score to generate a contest ranking; and
a central processing unit connected to the data storage unit, the item selection unit, the plurality of user units and the data calculation unit, the central processing unit configured to process operations of the data storage unit, the item selection unit, the plurality of user units and the data calculation unit to perform transmission and exchange of the contest information, the contest data, the contest ranking item, the valuation score, the member data, the contest member list and the contest ranking;
a creating contest program S1, acquiring the contest information of the substantial contest through the data storage unit so as to create the contest game;
a joining contest program S2, waiting for the plurality of players to choose to join the contest game through the plurality of user units;
a creating rating item program S3, waiting for the item selection unit to select a specific quantity of the plurality of scoring items as the contest ranking item;
a selecting member program S4, providing a selection time for the plurality of players to create the contest member list through the plurality of user units before the substantial contest starts;
a waiting contest program S5, waiting for the substantial contest to start until ending by the central process unit;
an acquiring data program S6, acquiring the contest data through the data storage unit by the central process unit after the substantial contest ends; and
a calculating ranking program S7, obtaining the valuation score through the data calculation unit, and then generates the total score through the data calculation unit and acquires the contest ranking
wherein a processor is configured to function as the data storage unit, the item selection unit and the data calculation unit.
The underlined limitations recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity. The claimed limitations recite steps of managing game, and therefore organizing human activity.
Step 2a2 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
The second prong of step 2a is the consideration of whether the claim recites additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application.
An additional element or combination of additional elements that are indicative of integrating the abstract idea into a practical application include:
-Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
-Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
-Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b)
-Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
-Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo
Additional element or combination of additional elements that are not indicative of integration of the abstract idea into a practical application include:
-Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f)
-Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)
-Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h)
Claims 1-4, 7-17 do not apply a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment, and do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing.
Claims 1-4, 7-17 are not directed to an improvement to a function of a computer. There is no improvement to a technical field. In addition, the claims do not apply the judicial exception with, or by use of a particular machine. The claims do not apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way.
The additional elements of: a data storage unit, item selection unit, user inputs, data collection unput and a central processing unit to perform the steps are generic computer(s) or component(s) of a generic computer used to performed the abstract idea. The additional elements generally link the abstract idea to a computer embodiment.
For the reasons discussed above, the additional elements identified above considered alone and in combination fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2b of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims as a whole is analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception.
Claims 1-4, 7-17 recite the additional elements of: a data storage unit, item selection unit, user inputs, data collection unput and a central processing unit to perform the steps. Chen (US 2006/0116208 discloses it is well known in the art for gaming machines to comprise a processor, and memory device to implement a game (paragraph 5).
Dependent claims 2-4, 7-8, 10-17 further recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified abstract idea. Looking at the additional elements as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For example, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons discussed above with respect to the conclusion that the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The dependent clams merely include limitations that further define the abstract idea and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract. The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
The claim limitations individually and as a whole do not amount to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4, 7-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites: a central processing unit connected to the data storage unit, the item selection unit, and the data calculation unit and wherein the valuation system of game event further comprises a processor configured to function as a data storage unit, the item selection unit and the data calculation unit. It appears that the central processing unit is the processor. The claim is indefinite because it is not clear how the processing unit is connected to the data storage unit, the item selection unit, and the data calculation unit, which the processing unit is configured to function as the data storage unit, the item selection unit, the data calculation unit.
Claims 2-4, 7-8 are rejected by dependency. Claims 9-17 incorporate similar limitations and are rejected for the same reason as discussed above.
Claim 9 recites a valuation method comprising the step of providing a valuation system of game events. The claim is indefinite because it is not clear what are the claimed steps for the method other than providing a valuation system. The claim further includes a creating contest program S1, a joining contest program S2, a creating rating item program S3, and additional programs S4, S5, S6 and S7. As claimed, the claim recite them as separate programs, and not steps for the claimed method.
Claims 10-17 are rejected by dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 7-13, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholas (US 9,358,469) as applied to claims 1, 9 above, and further in view of Kuklok (US 2017/0197151).
Claim 1. Nicholas discloses a valuation system (Fig. 1) of game events, providing a contest game for a plurality of players to play, the valuation system of game events comprising:
a data storage unit (Database(s) in Fig. 1) configured to acquire a contest information of a substantial contest to be performed and contest data of the substantial contest after the substantial contest ends (statistical data of athletes, col. 8:28-39), the contest information containing a plurality of contest members engaged in the substantial contest, the contest data comprising a plurality of item data of the plurality of contest members in a plurality of scoring items respectively (item data, or event data of the player such as point score, rebounds, assists, steals, turnovers, blocks, etc.; col. 11:36-12:4),
an item selection unit configured to select a specific quantity of the scoring items as a contest ranking item of the contest game (select points for teach item; col. 11:36-12:4),
a plurality of user units (users view their computing devices 145 in Fig. 1; col. 10:44-46) configured to be respectively provided for the plurality of players to play and operate the contest game (col. 10:37-55), and be respectively provided for registering, logging in (user register or log in or participate in the contest; cols. 8:40-49), modifying and storing member data, and the plurality of user units being respectively provided for the plurality of players to create a contest member before the substantial contest is performed, and a contest member list is generated by selecting at least one from a plurality of contest members (user select draft members/athletes for the team and modify active and non active players, cols. 8:19-10:64, 18:13-30);
a data calculation unit configured to calculate each of the plurality of item data of the contest ranking item according to a calculation rule, so as to obtain a valuation score, and the data calculation unit configured to count valuation scores of all contest members in each contest member list on the contest ranking item after the substantial contest ends, thereby generating a total score of each contest member list, and ranking according to a magnitude of the total score to generate a contest ranking (steps 225-240 in Fig. 2, col. 11:36-12:4),; and
a central processing unit (115 in Fig. 1) connected to the data storage unit, the item selection unit, the plurality of user units and the data calculation unit, the central processing unit configured to process operations of the data storage unit, the item selection unit, the plurality of user units and the data calculation unit to perform transmission and exchange of the contest information, the contest data, the contest ranking item, the valuation score, the member data, the contest member list and the contest ranking, and the central processing unit being configured to execute the following programs of:
acquiring the contest information and creating the contest game (i.e. acquire game parameters to begin the contest; cols. 1:43-47, 7:59-8:17);
waiting for the plurality of players to join the contest game (col. 1:43-47);
waiting for the item selection unit to create the contest ranking item (col. 11:36-12:4);
waiting for the plurality of players to create the contest member list (user select draft members/athletes for the team and modify active and non active players, cols. 8:19-10:64, 18:13-30);
waiting for the substantial contest to start until ending; acquiring the contest data (steps 205-220 in Fig. 2); and
acquiring the contest ranking through the data calculation unit (255 in Fig. 2; col. 2:2-9);
wherein the valuation system of game events further comprises a processor configured to function as the data storage unit, the item selection unit and the data calculation unit (115 in Fig. 1; cols. 4:49-67, 5:43-66).
Nicholas discloses the claimed invention as discussed but fails to teach that the item selection unit is configured to detect a designation made by any one of the plurality of players via the user unit, or to randomly select a specific quantity of the plurality of scoring items as the contest ranking item. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. In an analogous art to fantasy sports systems, Kuklok discloses a in which the fantasy sports contest is score according various items/categories (paragraph 11). Kuklok discloses the system allows a user to select a plurality of scoring categories (paragraph 11). This allow users to play a contest that is customized to their preference. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify Nicholas’ invention and select a specific quantity of the plurality of scoring items as the contest ranking items in order to provide the predictable result of allowing the user to customized contest.
Claim 2. Nicholas discloses the valuation system of game events according to claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of contest members is provided with a selection point, and a contest point is required to be paid when the plurality of players create the contest member list, the contest point is a sum of selection points of all contest members in the contest member list (Players are given salary in which the total members/athletes are within the “salary cap”; col. 9:4-25).
Claim 3. Nicholas discloses the valuation system of game events according to claim 2, wherein the data calculation unit generates a contest award point according to a sum of contest points respectively paid by the plurality of players, and the data calculation unit allocates the contest award point to the plurality of players according to the contest ranking (Players are given salary in which the total members/athletes are within the “salary cap”; col. 9:4-25. Player pay the salary or the for each athlete.).
Claim 4. Nicholas discloses the valuation system of game events according to claim 1, wherein the substantial contest is any one selected from ball games, races, athletics, water sports, outdoor sports, winter sports and fighting (col. 8:5-17).
Claim 7. Nicholas discloses the valuation system of game events according to claim 1, wherein the central processing unit wirelessly links the plurality of user units via an internet unit (cols. 6:59-7:9).
Claim 8. Nicholas discloses the valuation system of game events according to claim 7, wherein the plurality of user units are any one selected from smart phones, tablet computers, notebook computers, personal computers and personal digital assistants (cols. 10:13, 19:19-35).
Claims 9-12. See rejection for claims 1-4 above.
Claim 13. Kuklok discloses a in which the fantasy sports contest is score according various items/categories (paragraph 11). Kuklok discloses the system allows a user to select a plurality of scoring categories (paragraph 11). This allow users to play a contest that is customized to their preference. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify Nicholas’ invention and select a specific quantity of the plurality of scoring items as the contest ranking items in order to provide the predictable result of allowing the user to customized contest.
Claim 15. Nicholas discloses the valuation method according to claim 9, wherein in the selecting member program S4, the plurality of players select at least one from the plurality of contest members according to a selection rule to create the contest member list (i.e. rule of “salary cap”; col. 9:4-25).
Claim 16. Nicolas discloses The valuation method according to claim 15, wherein the selection rule is not limited to a role character played by the plurality of contest members in the substantial contest (i.e. rule of “salary cap” which does not limit the role; col. 9:4-25).
Claim 17. Nicolas discloses the valuation method according to claim 15, wherein when the contest member list is provided with more than one, the selection rule allows different contest members play a same role character in the substantial contest (different sports can play the same role or same contest; cols. 2:31-38. In addition, user can select a position from players regardless of their position or sports, cols. 3:35-46, 9:45-50).
Response to Arguments
35 USC 101
Applicant's arguments with respect to the 35 USC 101 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the valuation system includes a tangible physical architecture comprising a plurality of user units interactive with a specialized processor. The claim does not merely claim an abstract mathematical formula executed in a vacuum.
However, the claims recite an abstract idea of organizing human activity. The claimed limitations recite steps of managing game, and therefore organizing human activity. The valuation system and the processor are generic computers or components of a generic computer used to performed the abstract idea. The additional elements generally link the abstract idea to a computer embodiment.
Applicant argues that the claims solve a concrete, technical problem of fantasy sports systems having a rigid, over-styled gameplay structures because they evaluate all-round player performance across all fixed metrics, which lead to low variation in participant strategies. The present application solves this by integrating an interactive hardware interface mechanism (via the user units) that allows individual players selecta custom set of metrics or random selection.
However, the allowing individual players to select a custom set of metrics or random selection is a management of a game. The claim does not claim a specific improved hardware interface/user device that provides a technical improvement or solution. The interactive hardware interface mechanism or the user interface is a generic user device used to make the selection electronically. The user interface generally links the abstract idea to a computer embodiment. The claims limitations considered alone and in combination fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
35 USC 112
New rejection under 35 USC 112 have been made to address the amended limitations.
Regarding claims 9-17 rejected under 35 USC 112 2nd, no specific arguments have been made. The rejection in maintained.
Prior Art
New grounds of rejection has been made to address the amended limitations.
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 Jasson H Yoo whose telephone number is (571)272-5563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter Vasat can be reached at 571 270-7625. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JASSON H YOO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights