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 § 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 1-5, 8-12, 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lui (U.S. PGPUB 2009/0104980) in view of Peters (U.S. PGPUB 20120040751).
Re claims 1, 8, and 14: Lui discloses an electronic gaming system comprising:
a server comprising a database (see paragraph [0135]: “The server 205 may manage the player accounts of players in the database 130.”);
an electronic gaming device (Fig. 7, objects 10: databases); and
a player interface module associated with the electronic gaming device and in communication with the server (see paragraph [0063]: card reader and input buttons), wherein the player interface module is configured to:
receive a player account identifier (ID) associated with a player account associated with the electronic gaming device (see paragraph [0063]: the card reader receives a player tracking card, i.e. a player account identifier that is associated with a player account, and by extension the electronic gaming device as it is then associated with the account once the user inserts the card);
receive a player lock input (see paragraph [0089]: “Some time after commencing play, the player presses the "Reserve" button 25.”);
determine that the player account is authorized to lock the electronic gaming device (see paragraph [0089]: “...the gaming machine 10 then checks the player's eligibility to reserve gaming machines 10 or causes the player's eligibility to be checked (step 84). The eligibility of a player to reserve gaming machines may be indicated by data on the player card 27, or by the system”); and
based upon the player account being authorized to lock the electronic gaming device:
cause the electronic gaming device to lock (see paragraph [0089]).
Lui fails to disclose transmit a message to the server, the message comprising a credit amount at the electronic gaming device when the player lock input was received, the player account ID, and a device ID associated with the electronic gaming device, wherein the server is configured to store a credit preservation record in the database upon receipt of the message, the credit preservation record comprising the credit amount, the player account ID, and the device ID.
However, Peters discloses a credit amount, the player ID, and the device ID as shown in Fig. 7, object 702, and as disclosed in paragraph [0034]: “Other data may be stored in database 212 and there may be corresponding fields in format 400. For example, if the player is using a player tracking card or loyalty card, in one embodiment, a player identifier may also be stored in database 212.” Additionally, Peters states “A ticket containing some or all of the reservation data is printed and provided to the player and the data is stored in a database.” (see paragraph [0009]). Thus, Peters teaches that the information that would be on the ticket including credits, a device ID, is stored in the database, along with a player ID or loyalty card ID, which is all transmitted to the central server, when a player presses the reservation button. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to modify the reservation system of Lei with the player ID, device ID, and credits transmission message of Peters, for the purpose of storing credit data and other game state data in a secured remote environment, instead of on the gaming machine as taught by Lei which is in contact with many casino patrons.
Re claim 2, 9, 15: Lui discloses with respect to the electronic gaming system of claim 1, wherein the player interface module is further configured to:
receive a player unlock input (see paragraph [0068, 0069, 0127]: “Where an identified player reserves a gaming machine, that player may be able to unlock the gaming machine 10 using either the printed ticket or their player identifier.”); and
verify that the player unlock input corresponds to the player account ID that was utilized to lock the electronic gaming device (see paragraph [0068, 0069, 0127]: the system verifies that the player account ID is the same as that which locked the device, wherein the unlock input occurs at the same device where the player identifier is location).
Re claims 3, 10, 11, and 16: Lui fails to disclose with respect to the electronic gaming system of claim 2, wherein the player interface module is further configured to, based upon verifying that the player unlock input corresponds to the player account ID:
transmit a credit retrieval message to the server, the credit retrieval message comprising the player account ID and the device ID; receive a credit return message from the server, the credit return message comprising the credit amount; and cause the credit amount to be applied to the electronic gaming device.
However, Peters teaches that when a user returns to the game machine, the player inserts and verifies their player identifier card to resume the game wherein it is inherent that a player ID must be verified as being in association with said player identifier card in order for the card to work (see paragraph [0039]: “In another embodiment, when the player is using a player tracking card, the data generated may be stored on the card instead of on a physical ticket.…In these cases the player may return to the machine and enter his player tracking identifier to continue playing on the machine.”). Thus, it is inherent that when the game machine of Peters sends a credit retrieval message upon insertion of the card into the game machine to unreserve the machine and receives a credit return message from the server that includes the machine’s credits (see paragraph [0043]), the retrieval message would include the player identifier to probably identify the player, and the game device identifier, to properly identify the location to send the reservation data. See claim 1 for reasons to combine Lei and Peters.
Re claims 4 and 17: Lei fails to disclose with respect to the electronic gaming system of claim 3, wherein the server is configured to:
identify the credit preservation record corresponding to the credit retrieval message based on the player account ID and the device ID;
transmit the credit return message; and
update the credit preservation record to reflect return of the credit amount to the electronic gaming device.
However, Peters discloses storing player account ID and device ID information in the server (see Fig. 7, object 702, and paragraph [0040]), wherein at least the device ID is stored in a credit preservation record corresponding to the credit retrieval message. Although Peters does not specifically disclose that the Player ID is also part of the same record, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to modify the preservation record with the Player ID, as such would have been obvious to combine as both data values are stored in the same database and are related to the same player at the specific game machine. See claim 1 for reasons to combine Lei and Peters.
Re claims 5, 12, and 18. Lui discloses with respect to the electronic gaming system of claim 1, wherein the player interface module is further configured to determine that the player account is authorized to lock the electronic gaming device by:
transmitting a lock query message to the server (see paragraph [0089]: “...the gaming machine 10 then checks the player's eligibility to reserve gaming machines 10 or causes the player's eligibility to be checked (step 84). The eligibility of a player to reserve gaming machines may be indicated by data on the player card 27, or by the system”); and
receiving a lock answer message from the server, wherein the lock answer message indicates that the player account is authorized to lock the electronic gaming device (see paragraph [0089]: a lock query message is sent to the server to inquiry regarding the player’s eligibility, and the server responds with a message indicating a player’s account ability to lock the machine).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 7, 13, 19, and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINALD A RENWICK whose telephone number is (571)270-1913. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at (571)270-1344. 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.
REGINALD A. RENWICK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3714
/REGINALD A RENWICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715