Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/636,254

GAMING DEVICES AND METHODS FOR POKER GAMES HAVING ENHANCED AWARDS THROUGH COLLECTION OF BONUS ITEMS

Non-Final OA §101§103
Filed
Apr 15, 2024
Examiner
THAI, XUAN MARIAN
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
King Show Games Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
2%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 11m
To Grant
8%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 2% of cases
2%
Career Allow Rate
4 granted / 175 resolved
-67.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
203
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
§103
37.0%
-3.0% vs TC avg
§102
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 175 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §103
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. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea. As summarized in the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, examiners must perform a Two-Part Analysis for Judicial Exceptions. Step 1 In Step 1, it must be determined whether the claimed invention is directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter. The instant invention encompasses a gaming device in claim 1 (i.e., machines). So claim 1 is directed to one of the four statutory categories and meet the requirements of step 1. Step 2A Prong One The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Present invention is directed to “an apparatus, system, computer readable storage media, and/or method that involve or otherwise facilitate enhancing awards through aggregation of bonus items over the course of multiple gaming events” (p. 2, lines17-19). Claim 1. A gaming device comprising: a display including a video screen having a poker game play grid having a plurality of card positions, a first collection vessel associate with a first bonus award type, and a second collection vessel associate with a second bonus award type; a player interface including at least one button, the button configured to generate a signal in response to being activated; a memory configured to store a deck of virtual cards and a credit amount; a wager input device structured to receive physical items associated with currency values; and a processor operable to: receive a signal indicating receipt of a physical item associated with a currency value; increase the credit amount stored in the memory based on the currency value associated with the received physical item; receive a game initiation signal including a wager amount to initiate a poker gaming event, the wager amount deducted from the credit amount stored in the memory; randomly determine a sequence of virtual playing cards to use in the poker gaming event from the deck of virtual playing cards stored in the memory of the gaming device; randomly determine if any of the determined virtual playing cards to be used in the poker gaming event are associate with a bonus game item; visually move the bonus game item to one of the first collection vessel or second collection vessel based at least in part on a characteristic of the bonus game item; randomly determine if the received bonus game item triggers a bonus game event that corresponds to a respective one of the first bonus award type or the second bonus award type; when the bonus game event is triggered, randomly determine a bonus value related to the respective one of the first bonus award type or the second bonus award type for a bonus award; implement the bonus award for the poker gaming event; evaluate a final poker hand for awards based on the bonus value associated with the bonus event; and increase the credit amount stored in the memory based on any awards determined from the evaluation of the final poker hand. The bold and underlined portions of claim 1 encompass the abstract idea. Claim 1 recites the steps and rules to collect different types of bonus game item and determine a bonus award based on a bonus game event triggered by a type of bonus game item, which is fundamental economic principles or practices or commercial or legal interactions that can be implemented with human beings with pen and pencil. Therefore, the claimed invention is grouped as certain methods of organizing human activity and mental processes. Prong Two This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because mere instruction to implement on a computer or mobile device, or merely using a computer or mobile device as a tool to perform the abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, and/or generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a technological environment or field of use is not considered integration into a practical application. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the present claim includes the additional elements other than the abstract idea which include a gaming device comprising a display with a video screen, a memory, and processor and a wager input device. Mere computer-based implementation, without more, is not sufficient to render claims directed to patent-eligible subject matter. The addition of a gaming machine to carry out these routine steps and rules does not make the claim any less abstract. The claim is drafted in a result-oriented fashion, without the requisite specificity needed to provide a nonabstract technological solution. This gaming machine as presented is directed to the generic machines amount to merely field of use type limitations and/or extra solution activity to provide computer-based implementation to implement the steps and rules for players to collect different types of bonus game item and determine a bonus award based on a bonus game event triggered by a type of bonus game item. Step 2B Step 2B in the analysis requires us to determine whether the claims do significantly more than simply describe that abstract method. Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1297. We must examine the limitations of the claims to determine whether the claims contain an "inventive concept" to "transform" the claimed abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter. Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2357 (quoting Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294, 1298). The transformation of an abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter "requires 'more than simply stat[ing] the [abstract idea] while adding the words 'apply it."' Id. (quoting Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294) (alterations in original). "A claim that recites an abstract idea must include 'additional features' to ensure 'that the [claim] is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the [abstract idea].'" Id. (quoting Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1297) (alterations in original). Those "additional features" must be more than "well-understood, routine, conventional activity." Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1298. The present claims include the additional elements other than the abstract idea which include a gaming device comprising a display with a video screen, a memory, and processor and a wager input device. By failing to explain the details of the gaming device, it is reasonable that the broadest reasonable interpretation of the system is limited to a generic computer implementation with generic network connection. And gaming machines are conventional, well known in the industry (Vancura, [US20030001335], [0041], “Gaming machines such as slot machine 10 are conventionally available and any of a number of such conventional gaming machines could be used. The conventional casinos gaming equipment for accepting wagers, accounting for and displaying credits during the play of the game, activating play of the game, ending the game and delivering pay outs to players, are all well known in the industry. Upon the occurrence of an end-game state in the play of the slot machine 10 a signal is generated and sent on line 300 to the slot machine interface board 200. The slot machine interface board 200 includes a microprocessor-based controller capable of handling timing as well as input/output via a data flow manager with specific protocol. Such a slot machine interface board 200 is sold, under the name SMIB by Mikohn Gaming of Las Vegas, Nev., assignee of this invention”). The “generic computer implementation with generic network connection” are "well understood, routine, conventional activity." The computer implementation merely helps to automate the commercial or legal interactions during wager gaming playing using the applied advance of money or value. The claim fails to improve the recited technological field. The claims are generally linked to implement an abstract idea on a computer. When looked at individually and as a whole, the claim limitations are determined to be an abstract idea without "significantly more", and thus not patent eligible. 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. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BERMAN [US20200160663], hereinafter BERMAN’663, in view of Kane et al. [US20070265068 ], hereinafter Kane. Regarding claim 1, BERMAN’663 discloses a gaming device (Fig. 1) comprising: a display including a video screen having a poker game play grid having a plurality of card positions, a first collection vessel (Figs. 4 and 5, container 406 and 512); a player interface including at least one button, the button configured to generate a signal in response to being activated (Fig. 1); a memory configured to store a deck of virtual cards and a credit amount; a wager input device structured to receive physical items associated with currency values (Fig. 2); and a processor operable to: receive a signal indicating receipt of a physical item associated with a currency value; increase the credit amount stored in the memory based on the currency value associated with the received physical item ([0051], “inputting currency or other payment information to establish a credit amount or wager amount”); receive a game initiation signal including a wager amount to initiate a poker gaming event, the wager amount deducted from the credit amount stored in the memory (Fig. 6B, [0097], “A user interface 606 is provided that includes at least one user input 608 to enable a player to initiate and participate in poker hands 604 presented via the display 602”); randomly determine a sequence of virtual playing cards to use in the poker gaming event from the deck of virtual playing cards stored in the memory of the gaming device (Fig. 6B, 632); randomly determine if any of the determined virtual playing cards to be used in the poker gaming event are associate with a bonus game item (Fig. 6B, 634); visually move the bonus game item to the first collection vessel (Figs. 4 and 5, container 406 and 512); randomly determine if the received bonus game item triggers a bonus game event that corresponds to a respective one of a first bonus award type or a second bonus award type ([0060], “In one embodiment, the trigger condition is a number of the aggregated items reaching a static or dynamic threshold” and [0077], “In other embodiments, the type of items collected may impact the award or benefit provided to the player. For example, some or all of the coins or other game items 402 may include indicia indicative of a value associated with that collected coin/game item 402, such as multiplier values, Wild cards available, credit values, free game counts, etc.”); when the bonus game event is triggered, randomly determine a bonus value related to the respective one of the first bonus award type or the second bonus award type for a bonus award ([0078], “In another embodiment, the coins or other game items 402 may include indicia indicating that it is part of a set, that provides an award, payout modifier, Wild card(s) and/or other player benefit if a minimum threshold number of the parts to the set are collected during the collection period. For example, some of the coins may include indicia or other indications that the respective coin represents a portion of a set to obtain a progressive jackpot or other credit award, and if the requisite number of those coins are collected during the collection period, then the progressive jackpot or other credit award is provided. As another example, a particular multiplier or other payout modifier may be awarded to the player for use on the hand-x 410 and/or other hand(s) when three coins/game items 402 having that particular payout modifier identified thereon are collected during the collection period. Thus, some embodiments involve game items 406 that are of particular types that may be used in a manner dependent on the game item type(s) obtained”); implement the bonus award for the poker gaming event; evaluate a final poker hand for awards based on the bonus value associated with the bonus event; and increase the credit amount stored in the memory based on any awards determined from the evaluation of the final poker hand (Fig. 6B, 640, 642 and 644). The difference between the gaming device disclosed by BERMAN’663 and the claimed invention is that BERMAN’663 does not explicitly disclose the first collection vessel associate with the first bonus award type a second collection vessel associate with the second bonus award type; and the bonus game item are moved based at least in part on a characteristic of the bonus game item. Nevertheless, in a related disclosure, Kane teaches using multiple vessels to collect game items during game play ([0018], “For instance, the second level game includes a series of boxes (or other element type) which are opened (and their hidden items revealed) with items collected during the play of the dice game”). And BERMAN’663 teaches in different embodiments different type of coins or other game items collected over the collection period dictates, or at least affects, the benefit provided to the player ([0076]). Accordingly, the prior art references tach all of the claimed elements. The combination of the known elements is achieved by a known method of choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. Furthermore, all the claimed elements would continue to operate in the same manner. Specifically, the gaming device disclosed by BERMAN’663 has the structure/elements to conduct the process of using different type of coins or other game items collected to determine different type of awards. A person of ordinary skill has good reason to apply the multiple vessels to collect game items corresponding to different type of awards during game play, as disclosed by Kane, in order to provide easier tracking to the players. Therefore, the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. Based on the above findings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the game of BERMAN’663 with the multiple vessels to collect game items as suggested by Kane, as merely performing the same function as it does separately and being no more “than the predictable use of prior-art elements according to their established functions,” and make it simpler implementation of the bonus game. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YINGCHUAN ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1375. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 4:30 M-F. 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, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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. /YINGCHUAN ZHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 15, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12551797
VIRTUAL OBJECT CONTROL METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 8657605
VIRTUAL TESTING AND INSPECTION OF A VIRTUAL WELDMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 25, 2014
Patent 8398404
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ELEVATED SPEED FIREARMS TRAINING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 19, 2013
Patent null
Video display of high contrast graphics for newborns and infants
Granted
Patent null
Device including a lens array
Granted
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
2%
Grant Probability
8%
With Interview (+5.9%)
3y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 175 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month