DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
Claims 1-20 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Priority
The instant application has a filing date of April 22, 2024 and does not claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 24, 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
v Claim(s) 1-20 is/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.
Step 1:
Claim(s) 1-13 is/are drawn to methods (i.e., a process), claim(s) 14-19 is/are drawn to systems (i.e., a machine/manufacture), and claim(s) 20 is/are drawn to devices (i.e., a machine/manufacture). As such, claims 1-20 is/are drawn to one of the statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A - Prong One:
In prong one of step 2A, the claim(s) is/are analyzed to evaluate whether it/they recite(s) a judicial exception.
Claim 1 (representative of independent claim(s) 14 and 20) recites/describes the following steps;
presenting…a representation of the…game…wherein the representation of the…game includes displaying a plurality of game features;
executing…the…game;
determining, during execution of the…game, that a player of the…game has taken an action that corresponds to a responsible gaming action;
correlating the responsible gaming action to a reward for the player; and
presenting…information to the player that describes the reward for the player along with instructions for redeeming the reward
These steps, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, describe or set-forth a process for rewarding a player for taking an action that corresponds to a responsible gaming actions/behavior. More specifically, the process comprises presenting a representation of the game (wherein the representation of the game includes displaying a plurality of game features) and executing the game, determining, during execution of the…game, that a player of the…game has taken an action that corresponds to a responsible gaming action; correlating the responsible gaming action to a reward for the player; and presenting…information to the player that describes the reward for the player along with instructions for redeeming the reward, which amounts to a commercial or legal interactions (legal obligations; business relations); and managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). These limitations therefore fall within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” subject matter grouping of abstract ideas.
Additionally and/or alternatively, each of the above-recited steps/functions, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, encompass a human manually (e.g., in their mind, or using paper and pen) performing one or more concepts performed in the human mind, such as one or more observations, evaluations, judgments, opinions, but for the recitation of generic computer components. If one or more claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation(s) in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “mental processes” subject matter grouping of abstract ideas.
As such, the Examiner concludes that claim 1 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong One: YES).
Independent claim(s) 14 and 20 recite/describe nearly identical steps (and therefore also recite limitations that fall within this subject matter grouping of abstract ideas), and this/these claim(s) is/are therefore determined to recite an abstract idea under the same analysis.
Each of the depending claims likewise recite/describe these steps (by incorporation - and therefore also recite limitations that fall within this subject matter grouping of abstract ideas), and this/these claim(s) is/are therefore determined to recite an abstract idea under the same analysis. Any element(s) recited in a dependent claim that are not specifically identified/addressed by the Examiner under step 2A (prong two) or step 2B of this analysis shall be understood to be an additional part of the abstract idea recited by that particular claim. The same reasoning is similarly applicable to the limitations in the remaining dependent claims, and their respective limitations are not reproduced here for the sake of brevity.
Step 2A - Prong Two:
In prong two of step 2A, an evaluation is made whether a claim recites any additional element, or combination of additional elements, that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. An “addition element” is an element that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception (i.e., an element/limitation that sets forth an abstract idea is not an additional element). The phrase “integration into a practical application” is defined as requiring an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
The claim(s) recite the additional elements/limitations of
“…by a processor…by the processor…by the processor…” (claim 1)
“a system comprising a processor; and a memory coupled with and readable by the processor and having stored thereon instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to “(claim 14)
“a gaming device, comprising; a display device; a processor coupled with the display device; and a memory coupled with and readable by the processor and having stored thereon instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to” (claim 20)
“an electronic game on a display device…the electronic game…the electronic game…the electronic game…the electronic game…” (claims 1, 14, and 20)
“wherein the responsible gaming model comprises a recurrent neural network” (claims 8 and 9)
“wherein the display device is provided as part of an Electronic Gaming Machine (EGM)” (claim 12)
“wherein the display device is provided as part of a mobile device” (claim 13)
The requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions “…by a processor…by the processor…by the processor…” (claim 1) or “a system comprising a processor; and a memory coupled with and readable by the processor and having stored thereon instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to “(claim 14) or “a gaming device, comprising; a display device; a processor coupled with the display device; and a memory coupled with and readable by the processor and having stored thereon instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to” (claim 20) and/or “wherein the display device is provided as part of a mobile device” (claim 13) is equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer. Applicant’s own disclosure explains that these “additional” elements may be embodied as a general-purpose computer (e.g., the published specification at paragraphs [0151] “It should be understood that each block of the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer”, [0136] “A "gaming system" as used herein refers to various configurations of: (a) one or more central servers, central controllers, or remote hosts; (b) one or more electronic gaming machines such as those located on a casino floor; and/or ( c) one or more personal gaming devices, such as desktop computers, laptop computers, tablet computers or computing devices, personal digital assistants, mobile phones, and other mobile computing devices”).. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The recitation of “wherein the responsible gaming model comprises a recurrent neural network” (claims 8 and 9) provides nothing more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a generic computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and the July 2024 Subject Matter Eligibility Examples and corresponding analysis. MPEP 2106.05(f) provides the following considerations for determining whether a claim simply recites a judicial exception with the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), such as mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer: (1) whether the claim recites only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claim fails to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished; (2) whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process; and (3) the particularity or generality of the application of the judicial exception. The trained neural network is used to generally apply the abstract idea without placing any limits on how the trained neural network functions. Rather, these limitations only recite the outcome of “receiving an output…based on…in game actions” and do not include any details about how the generation of the output is accomplished. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and the July 2024 Subject Matter Eligibility Examples and corresponding analysis. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The recited additional element(s) of “an electronic game on a display device…the electronic game…the electronic game…the electronic game…the electronic game…” (claims 1, 14, and 20) and/or “wherein the display device is provided as part of an Electronic Gaming Machine (EGM)” (claim 12) and/or “wherein the display device is provided as part of a mobile device” (claim 13) serves merely to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Specifically, it/they serve(s) to limit the application of the abstract idea to computing environments, such as distributed computing environments and/or the internet, where information is represented digitally, exchanged between computers over a network, and presented using graphical user interfaces, and/or to Electronic Gaming Machine environments. This reasoning was demonstrated in Bilski, where it was determined that certain claim elements limiting the basic concept of hedging to commodities and energy markets (merely limiting an abstract idea to one field of use) did not make the concept patentable. This reasoning was demonstrated in Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (Fed. Cir. 2015), where the court determined "an abstract idea does not become nonabstract by limiting the invention to a particular field of use or technological environment, such as the Internet [or] a computer"). This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The recitation of “wherein the responsible gaming model comprises a recurrent neural network” (claims 8 and 9) also merely indicates a field of use or technological environment in which the judicial exception is performed. Although the additional element “wherein the responsible gaming model comprises a recurrent neural network” (claims 8 and 9) limits the identified judicial exceptions “receiving an output…based on…in game actions” using a trained neural networking model”, this type of limitation merely confines the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (neural networks) and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims. See MPEP 2106.05(h) and the July 2024 Subject Matter Eligibility Examples and corresponding analysis. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The recited element(s) of “presenting, by a processor, a representation of the electronic game on a display device, wherein the representation of the electronic game includes displaying a plurality of game features; executing, by the processor, the electronic game” (claims 1, 14, and 20), even if considered to be an “additional” element for the purpose of the eligibility analysis, would simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, in conjunction with an abstract idea). The term “extra-solution activity” is understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim. The recited additional element(s) do are deemed “extra-solution” because all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such game execution (e.g., inherently required for there to be actions taken by a player), and because such data gathering steps have long been held to be insignificant pre/post-solution activity. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h) and (g)).
Furthermore, although the claims recite a specific sequence of computer-implemented functions, and although the specification suggests certain functions may be advantageous for various reasons (e.g., business reasons), the Examiner has determined that the ordered combination of claim elements (i.e., the claims as a whole) are not directed to an improvement to computer functionality/capabilities, an improvement to a computer-related technology or technological environment, and do not amount to a technology-based solution to a technology-based problem. For example, Applicant’s published specification suggests that it is advantageous to implement the claimed business process because doing so can help decrease gambling risk and help gaming systems adhere to governmental restrictions and regulations (see, for example, Applicant’s published disclosure at paragraphs [0023]). These are non-technical business advantages/improvements. At most, the ordered combination of claim elements is directed to a non-technical improvement to an abstract idea itself (e.g., an improved process for rewarding players and/or for incentivizing responsible gaming actions).
Dependent claims 2-8, 10, 11, and 15-19 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective dependent claims 2-8, 10, 11, and 15-19 is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim). For example, claim 3 recites “wherein the improved gaming behavior indicates an ability of the player to better control an amount wagered during execution of the electronic game as compared to an ability of the player to control wagers made in the action history”. This is an abstract limitation which further sets forth the abstract idea encompassed by claim 3. This limitation is not an “additional element”, and therefore it is not subject to further analysis under Step 2A- Prong Two or Step 2B. The same logic applies to each of the other dependent claims, whose limitations are not being repeated here for the sake of brevity and clarity. With respect to the other dependent claims not specifically listed here - each of the limitations/elements recited in these dependent claims other than those identified as being “additional” elements above (at the beginning of the Prong One analysis), are further part of the abstract idea encompassed by each respective dependent claim (i.e. it should be understood that these limitations are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim).
The Examiner has therefore determined that the additional elements, or combination of additional elements, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claim(s) is/are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong two: NO).
Step 2B:
In step 2B, the claims are analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is/are sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. This analysis is also termed a search for an "inventive concept." An "inventive concept" is furnished by an element or combination of elements that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception, and is sufficient to ensure that the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 2355, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72-73, 101 USPQ2d at 1966)
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions “…by a processor…by the processor…by the processor…” (claim 1) or “a system comprising a processor; and a memory coupled with and readable by the processor and having stored thereon instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to “(claim 14) or “a gaming device, comprising; a display device; a processor coupled with the display device; and a memory coupled with and readable by the processor and having stored thereon instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to” (claim 20) and/or “wherein the display device is provided as part of a mobile device” (claim 13) is equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer. These limitations therefore do not qualify as “significantly more” (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the recitation of “wherein the responsible gaming model comprises a recurrent neural network” (claims 8 and 9) is equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer. These limitations therefore do not qualify as “significantly more” (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the recited additional element(s) of “an electronic game on a display device…the electronic game…the electronic game…the electronic game…the electronic game…” (claims 1, 14, and 20) and/or “wherein the display device is provided as part of an Electronic Gaming Machine (EGM)” (claim 12) and/or “wherein the display device is provided as part of a mobile device” (claim 13) serves merely to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. These limitations therefore do not qualify as “significantly more” (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the recitation of “wherein the responsible gaming model comprises a recurrent neural network” (claims 8 and 9) also serves merely to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. These limitations therefore do not qualify as “significantly more” (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the recited additional element(s) of “presenting, by a processor, a representation of the electronic game on a display device, wherein the representation of the electronic game includes displaying a plurality of game features; executing, by the processor, the electronic game” (claims 1, 14, and 20), even if considered to be an “additional” element for the purpose of the eligibility analysis, would simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea;). These additional element(s), taken individually or in combination, additionally amount to well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, appended to the judicial exception. These additional elements, taken individually or in combination, are well-understood, routine and conventional to those in the field of gambling/gaming. These limitations therefore do not qualify as “significantly more”. (see MPEP 2106.05(d)). This conclusion is based on a factual determination. Furthermore, Examiner takes Official Notice that these steps were well-understood, routine, and conventional at the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Furthermore, the lack of technical detail/description in Applicant’s own specification provides implicit evidence that these steps were well-understood, routine, and conventional.
Viewing the additional limitations in combination also shows that they fail to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. When considered as an ordered combination, the additional components of the claims add nothing that is not already present when considered separately, and thus simply append the abstract idea with words equivalent to “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer, generally link the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use, append the abstract idea with insignificant extra solution activity associated with the implementation of the judicial exception, (e.g., mere data gathering, post-solution activity), and appended with well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry.
Dependent claims 2-8, 10, 11, and 15-19 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective dependent claims 2-8, 10, 11, and 15-19 is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea identified by the Examiner to which each respective claim is directed).
The Examiner has therefore determined that no additional element, or combination of additional claims elements is/are sufficient to ensure the claim(s) amount to significantly more than the abstract idea identified above (Step 2B: NO).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
v Claims 1-7 and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anbazhagan et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2023/0137577, May 4, 2023 - hereinafter "Anbazhagan”) in view of Dalmia et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2023/0201725, June 29, 2023 - hereinafter "Dalmia”)
With respect to claims 1, 14, and 20, Anbazhagan teaches a method for operating an electronic game, a system, and a gaming device, comprising;
a processor; (claim 14) and ([0017] “a server for providing the user access to the functionality of one or more tools to reduce gaming risk”, [0069]-[0072] “The system 100 may use one or more servers 130 to provide access to games”, [0092] “CRM integration system 600 and its components, including the CRM software application 612”)
a memory coupled with and readable by the processor and having stored thereon instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to; (claim 14) ([0017] “a server for providing the user access to the functionality of one or more tools to reduce gaming risk”, [0069]-[0072] “The system 100 may use one or more servers 130 to provide access to games”, [0092] “CRM integration system 600 and its components, including the CRM software application 612”)
a display device; (claim 20) (Fig 1 tag 122 and 124 shows display device, [0004] “gaming online, such as betting on sporting events, playing card games (e.g., poker), accessing casino games (e.g., slots) using computers, laptops, phones, and tablets”)
a processor coupled with the display device; and (claim 20) (Fig 1 tag 122 and 124 shows display devices that have processors, [0004] “gaming online, such as betting on sporting events, playing card games (e.g., poker), accessing casino games (e.g., slots) using computers, laptops, phones, and tablets”)
a memory coupled with and readable by the processor and having stored thereon instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: (claim 20) (Fig 1 tag 122 and 124 shows display devices that have processors coupled to memories, [0004] “gaming online, such as betting on sporting events, playing card games (e.g., poker), accessing casino games (e.g., slots) using computers, laptops, phones, and tablets”)
presenting, by a processor, a representation of the electronic game on a display device, wherein the representation of the electronic game includes displaying a plurality of game features; ([0077] “one or more games provided by way of the gaming system 100, such as sports betting, poker, bingo, casino slot races, or other games. The promotion/loyalty system 300 can facilitate competition among a series of sequential games, such as casino slot races. The leaderboard provided by the promotion/loyalty system 300” – poker & bingo & slots all have a plurality of game features, [0124] “ providing game play functionality and interaction for other games as well. (e.g., casino games, casino slots, etc.….Data Center 1 160a, that local data center may provide gameplay for Game 1 to the user”, [0004] “able to join virtual gambling or other gaming online, such as betting on sporting events, playing card games (e.g., poker), accessing casino games (e.g., slots)”. [0193] “the system may provide a user interface for a game in which promotional offers and/or links to other various games are displayed.”, [0091] “electric casino games (e.g., casino slot races)”)
executing, by the processor, the electronic game; ([0077] “one or more games provided by way of the gaming system 100, such as sports betting, poker, bingo, casino slot races, or other games. The promotion/loyalty system 300 can facilitate competition among a series of sequential games, such as casino slot races. The leaderboard provided by the promotion/loyalty system 300” – poker & bingo & slots all have a plurality of game features, [0124] “ providing game play functionality and interaction for other games as well. (e.g., casino games, casino slots, etc.….Data Center 1 160a, that local data center may provide gameplay for Game 1 to the user”, [0004] “able to join virtual gambling or other gaming online, such as betting on sporting events, playing card games (e.g., poker), accessing casino games (e.g., slots)”. [0193] “the system may provide a user interface for a game in which promotional offers and/or links to other various games are displayed.”, [0091] “electric casino games (e.g., casino slot races)”)
determining, during execution of the electronic game, that a player of the electronic game has taken an action that corresponds to a responsible gaming action; ([0146] “detect patterns, and may consider several factors …if a player tends to spend more when losing; if a player spends/loses more at certain times; if a player deposits more when losing; if a player deposits more when winning, the specific games a player plays, the amounts of a player's bets, the outcomes of games, a player's entry into special events such as tournaments. The system may also check a user's credit to determine what the user is reasonably able to afford….may be based on historical data, real-time data, and, preferably, a combination thereof. A user may be tracked…monitor gameplay…promote responsible gameplay, and prevent detrimental gaming activity” – therefore the system analyzes various gaming/playing patterns to determine whether the user has taken irresponsible actions – and similarly when the system is not detecting irresponsible activity that is a determination the user has taken responsible gaming actions, [0190] “encouraging a user to take a break…intervening to prevent excessively long sessions…real-time analysis of the user’s current session length and the user’s previous session length…indicating that the user’s session length is unusual”, [0153]-[0155] “ The central data store 140a may monitor a number of different use cases involving each player, such as winnings and losses, active and passive usage or other use cases that are helpful in encouraging responsible gameplay…player break queue 150h may be informed by certain pre-determined information, such as player break configurations, pre-determined thresholds, or the like. The player break queue 150h can help encourage or require a player to take breaks, depending on the level of risk the player demonstrates…based on session activity time…prompting the user for a session break, providing more forceful intervention if the user's grace period has been exceeded or breached, and/or providing an appropriate message to the player…”, [0073] “ may provide offers to users of the gaming system 100 based on a number of different criteria, including play style, play frequency, geographic location, location within a certain facility, amounts spent, amounts won, or other criteria tracked by the system 100 that a company or entity operating the system wishes to reward”)
correlating a reward for the player; and ([0080]-[0082] “event detection…evaluated and can be applied in real time in the gaming system…dynamic, real-time event detection associated with the various games 402 monitored by the EDS 400….the data streams 150 may provide a real-time connection to a machine learning service 412 for the EDS 400….real-time rule analysis and application for the various games 402 monitored by the EDS 400….may in certain circumstances cause the system to initiate action to encourage the player to engage in more responsible gameplay, or prevent the player from engaging in further potentially detrimental activity”, [0075]-[0078] “promotion/loyalty system 300 may be used to award, track, and manage loyalty points to users using the loyalty subsystem 320…based on user activities, user activity level, or other user metrics that the operators of the gaming system 100 wish to track and reward…determine which loyalty offers and possibly which loyalty points system to use for a give player using the gaming system 100, and may be assisted by the loyalty reward service 324, which may fulfill the rewards determined… rewards for length of play or other engagement…administering the bonuses, loyalty points, rewards, and other incentives offered…provide system administrators or owners flexibility to reward and incentivize players using the gaming system as needed”, [0073] “ may provide offers to users of the gaming system 100 based on a number of different criteria, including play style, play frequency, geographic location, location within a certain facility, amounts spent, amounts won, or other criteria tracked by the system 100 that a company or entity operating the system wishes to reward”)
presenting, by the processor, information to the player that describes the reward for the player along with instructions for redeeming the reward ([0075]-[0078] “determine which loyalty offers and possibly which loyalty points system to use for a give player using the gaming system 100, and may be assisted by the loyalty reward service 324, which may fulfill the rewards determined…rewards could be made via in-game communications or other communications (e.g., SMS, email, etc.), such as by providing a user a link to claim the reward. Alternatively, the reward could automatically be added to a player's loyalty account (e.g., by adding points directly to a loyalty-based points system)…voucher management service 342 may provide the capability of providing players using the gaming system 100 with instant rewards based on special unique or ad hoc situations.” - a message/notification with a link to obtain/redeem the reward is information presented to the player that describes the reward along with visual (at least) instructions for redeeming the reward)
Although Anbazhagan clearly states that the system may initiate actions to encourage players to engage is responsible gameplay, although Anbazhagan clearly discloses determining that player’s have taken responsible gaming actions in real-time, and although Anbazhagan clearly discloses providing rewards to players based on tracked actions, Anbazhagan does not appear to explicitly disclose providing a reward to a player in response to detecting a responsible gaming action. Anbazhagan does not appear to disclose,
correlating the responsible gaming action to a reward for the player
However, Dalmia discloses
correlating the responsible gaming action to a reward for the player ([0271]-[0276] “a player can obtain…a reward for responsible gaming. For instance, a player can win…through responsible gameplay patterns. For instance, the responsible gameplay patterns can be indicative of a user gaming with reasonable wagers, limited time commitment…can be awarded in response to detecting a responsible gameplay pattern by the player on the gaming channel…can detect a responsible gameplay pattern by the player. For instance, the first gaming channel can detect that the player plays with responsible wagers, for a reasonable amount of time, a reasonable number of days, with a reasonable success rate, etc. For instance, the gaming channel may track various gameplay statistics of the player, such as, for example, time, spending, days, win/loss, among others. The player may be considered to follow a responsible gameplay pattern if the user has values within a responsible threshold for at least some of the gaming statistics. For instance, in some implementations, detecting the responsible gameplay pattern can include tracking one or more gameplay statistics of the player and determining that values of the one or more gameplay statistics fall within a responsible gameplay pattern threshold….a responsible gaming NFT can be awarded to the player. For instance, the gaming channel can generate or award the responsible gaming NFT in response to the responsible gameplay pattern. In some implementations, the responsible gaming NFT can be awarded”
Dalmia suggests it is advantageous to correlating the responsible gaming action to a reward for the player, because providing a reward in response to determination that a player has taken an action that corresponds to a responsible gaming action is an effective mechanism to encourage players to take responsible gaming actions ([0063]-[0064] & [0271]-[0276]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, system, and device of Anbazhagan to include correlating the responsible gaming action to a reward for the player, as taught by Dalmia, because providing a reward in response to determination that a player has taken an action that corresponds to a responsible gaming action is an effective mechanism to encourage players to take responsible gaming actions.
With respect to claims 2 and 15, Anbazhagan teaches the method of claim 1 and the system of claim 14:
wherein determining that the player of the electronic game has taken the action that corresponds to the responsible gaming action comprises: determining, with the processor, a player identifier associated with the player; ([0107] “single account in a system…user may wish to access his or her account… a user uses consistent login information…using identification information…full name, mobile phone number, social security number, date of birth, street address, email address, biometric information like fingerprints or facial recognition, etc.), or some combination of multiple different forms of identification information”
retrieving an action history associated with the player identifier; and ([0018] “encouraging responsible gameplay in a distributed gaming system is provided, which includes comparing user activity with historical activity of the user”, [0085] “machine learning service 412 may be used to detect and understand a player's various interests and patterns in a gaming system (e.g., such as what types of games a user likes to play, how long a user plays certain games, etc.)…react to the player patterns in a particular way based on the player's activity…games that player uses the most, encouraging break time, diverting a player to activities appropriate for the player based on the player's history”, [0146] “A user's level of risk may be based on historical data, real-time data, and, preferably, a combination thereof”, [0151]-[0152]
determining that the responsible gaming action represents an improved gaming behavior with respect to the action history associated with the player identifier ([0146] “detect patterns, and may consider several factors …if a player tends to spend more when losing; if a player spends/loses more at certain times; if a player deposits more when losing; if a player deposits more when winning, the specific games a player plays, the amounts of a player's bets, the outcomes of games, a player's entry into special events such as tournaments. The system may also check a user's credit to determine what the user is reasonably able to afford….may be based on historical data, real-time data, and, preferably, a combination thereof. A user may be tracked…monitor gameplay…promote responsible gameplay, and prevent detrimental gaming activity” – analyzing various gaming/playing patterns and determining that the user not taken irresponsible actions (e.g., after a period when they did) is equivalently determining an improved gaming behavior with respect to the action history – and similarly when the system is not detecting irresponsible activity that is a determination the user has taken responsible gaming actions, [0190] “encouraging a user to take a break…intervening to prevent excessively long sessions…real-time analysis of the user’s current session length and the user’s previous session length…indicating that the user’s session length is unusual”, [0153]-[0155] “ The central data store 140a may monitor a number of different use cases involving each player, such as winnings and losses, active and passive usage or other use cases that are helpful in encouraging responsible gameplay…player break queue 150h may be informed by certain pre-determined information, such as player break configurations, pre-determined thresholds, or the like. The player break queue 150h can help encourage or require a player to take breaks, depending on the level of risk the player demonstrates…based on session activity time…prompting the user for a session break, providing more forceful intervention if the user's grace period has been exceeded or breached, and/or providing an appropriate message to the player…”, [0073] “ may provide offers to users of the gaming system 100 based on a number of different criteria, including play style, play frequency, geographic location, location within a certain facility, amounts spent, amounts won, or other criteria tracked by the system 100 that a company or entity operating the system wishes to reward”)
With respect to claims 3 and 16, Anbazhagan teaches the method of claim 2 and the system of claim 15:
wherein the improved gaming behavior indicates an ability of the player to better control an amount wagered during execution of the electronic game as compared to an ability of the player to control wagers made in the action history ([0146] “detect patterns, and may consider several factors …if a player tends to spend more when losing; if a player spends/loses more at certain times; if a player deposits more when losing; if a player deposits more when winning, the specific games a player plays, the amounts of a player's bets, the outcomes of games, a player's entry into special events such as tournaments. The system may also check a user's credit to determine what the user is reasonably able to afford….may be based on historical data, real-time data, and, preferably, a combination thereof. A user may be tracked…monitor gameplay…promote responsible gameplay, and prevent detrimental gaming activity” & [0194] “subject to various responsible gaming limits which may be user-selected or may be otherwise imposed by the system. Such responsible gaming limits may include deposit limits, spending/loss limits, session time limits, wagering limits, and stake limits….wagering limits may be cumulative” – patterns of wager/spend improvements=)
Examiner notes that Dalmia also discloses this limitation ([0064] “pattern…responsible wagers…”)
With respect to claims 4 and 17, Anbazhagan teaches the method of claim 1 and the system of claim 14:
wherein the reward comprises an additional game feature presented to the player during execution of the electronic game and wherein the additional game feature is unavailable to the player during execution of the electronic game in an absence of determining that the player of the electronic game has taken the action that corresponds to the responsible gaming action ([0082]-[0092] “machine learning service 412 may in certain circumstances cause the system to initiate action to encourage the player to engage in more responsible gameplay…machine learning service 412 may be used to detect and understand a player's various interests and patterns in a gaming system…how long a user plays certain games, etc…. the EDS 400 may react to the player patterns in a particular way based on the player's activity…may provide information, promotions, or bonuses based on the player's activity (e.g., providing bonuses for games that player uses the most, encouraging break time…The bonuses and rewards offered by the bonus/reward system 500 can be offered for each of the games offered by the gaming system 100, and may vary by game…The fulfillment subsystem 502 may also interact with the EDS 400 to determine when various events occur that require or justify promotions or rewards to players using the gaming system 100…the bonus/reward system 500 may offer (e.g., from the bonus service 520) a variety of bonuses for different games via the gaming system 100. For example, the bonus/reward system 500 can offer bonuses, such as cash amounts, digital currency (e.g., crypto currency), non-fungible tokens (NFTs), or other real-world or digital assets, which may be offered in the form of prizes based on gameplay or performance. In addition to the rewards offered, the bonus/reward system 500 can offer various rewards, such as in-game rewards that enhance or alter the game play or participation in the various games provided via the gaming system 100….may offer free bets, cash bonuses, or other prizes. As another example, for bingo offered via the gaming system 100, the bonus/reward system 500 may offer bonus bingo tickets, cash bonuses, or other prizes. As a further example, for poker offered via the gaming system 100, the bonus/reward system 500 may offer free turns, free rolls, free round or tournament dollars (e.g., cash or cash equivalent that can be used for a particular round or tournament), cash bonuses, or other prizes. As an additional example, for electric casino games (e.g., casino slot races) offered via the gaming system 100, the bonus/reward system 500 may offer bonus free spins, free special tokens or coins (e.g., tokens or coins with special properties to be used with the casino games), free-to-play turns or tournaments, cash bonuses, or other prizes.” – free extra turns/rolls/rounds are additional features that would not have otherwise been available to the player if they hadn’t been rewarded with it – furthermore a special token/coin with special properties usable for a game is also a features that would not have otherwise been available to the player if they hadn’t been rewarded with it)
Examiner notes that Dalmia also discloses this limitation ([0275] “reward…NFT…At 1402, a player plays on an NFT-enabled gaming channel. The NFTs may be limited in supply in some examples such that only a limited number of NFTs for particular digital content such as a character, game play level, or the like. Other NFTs may include custom reel strips, audio clips, themes of games, and the like”)
With respect to claims 5 and 18, Anbazhagan and Dalmia teach the method of claim 1 and the system of claim 14. Anbazhagan does not appear to disclose,
wherein the reward comprises an out-of-game reward that is made available to the player outside of the electronic game and wherein the instructions for redeeming the reward include the player discontinuing play of the electronic game for at least a period of time
However, Dalmia discloses
wherein the reward comprises an out-of-game reward that is made available to the player outside of the electronic game and wherein the instructions for redeeming the reward include the player discontinuing play of the electronic game for at least a period of time ([0104] “NFT…redeemable by different entities…different real-world casino, by a non-gaming organization (e.g., a product and/or service vendor), and/or by another entity)” & [0141] “the player can redeem the voucher at a real, physical product and/or service vendor such as, for instance, a car dealership located in the real, physical world, where the player can redeem the voucher to receive the monetary value of the winning outcome and/or apply such monetary value toward the purchase of a vehicle from the car dealership” – the reward NFT is redeemable in the real-world for a product/service (i.e., it is an out-of-game reward that is made available to the player outside of the electronic game) and the instructions for redemption therefore require discontinuing play of the electronic game for at least a period of time (e.g., as would be required to redeem at a physical location) – Examiner notes the content of the instructions is printed matter and merits no patentable weight)
Dalmia suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the reward comprises an out-of-game reward that is made available to the player outside of the electronic game and wherein the instructions for redeeming the reward include the player discontinuing play of the electronic game for at least a period of time, because doing so is an effective mechanism to encourage players to take responsible gaming actions ([0063]-[0064] & [0271]-[0276]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, system, and device of Anbazhagan to include correlating the responsible gaming action to a reward for the player, as taught by Dalmia, because doing so is an effective mechanism to encourage players to take responsible gaming actions.
With respect to claims 6 and 19, Anbazhagan teaches the method of claim 1 and the system of claim 14:
further comprising: maintaining a responsible gaming model; ([0151] “. The CIP 1802 runs analytical models…based on the real-time data received in the player event feed from the player activity queue 150f and the historical data from the historical data database 142f In this way, the CIP 1802 is capable of detecting player events that are either pre-programmed or determined in real time to protect players and users of the system 100 based on its analysis and data processing. According to embodiments”, [0082] “a real-time connection to a machine learning service 412 for the EDS 400. The machine learning service 412 may provide real-time rule analysis and application for the various games 402 monitored by the EDS 400. The machine learning service 412 may detect unusual and/or potentially detrimental player activity. For example, according to embodiments, the machine learning service 412 may detect unusual player activity in the form of the churn rate for one or more players. According to alternative embodiments, upon detecting unusual and/or potential detrimental player activity, the machine learning service 412 may initiate activity to curb those activities. For example, according to embodiments, the machine learning service 412 may in certain circumstances cause the system to initiate action to encourage the player to engage in more responsible gameplay”, [0085] “machine learning service may monitor the data streams and may track and calculate various player metrics…also make use of real-time or dynamic data from the data streams 150, 150a, 150b, 150c…may be used to detect and understand a player's various interests and patterns in a gaming system…determinations made by the machine learning service 412, the EDS 400 may react to the player patterns in a particular way based on the player's activity. For example, the EDS may provide information, promotions, or bonuses based on the player's activity (e.g., providing bonuses for games that player uses the most, encouraging break time”, [0145]-[0146] “the machine learning service 412 may detect unusual and/or potentially detrimental player activity and, upon detecting such activity, initiate action to encourage the player to engage in more responsible gameplay, or prevent the player from engaging in further potentially detrimental activity…the machine learning service 412 may utilize information, including information from data streams 150, 150a, 150b, 150c and events associated with non-gaming systems 406 to detect patterns, and may consider several factors in determining a user's level of risk. Examples of such factors include: if a player tends to spend more when losing; if a player spends/loses more at certain times; if a player deposits more when losing; if a player deposits more when winning, the specific games a player plays, the amounts of a player's bets, the outcomes of games, a player's entry into special events such as tournaments. The system may also check a user's credit to determine what the user is reasonably able to afford. A user's level of risk may be based on historical data, real-time data, and, preferably, a combination thereof. A user may be tracked across multiple jurisdictions as the user connects and establishes copies of or pointers to the user's account in different jurisdictions. Alternatively, additional system components, such as those described below may be used to monitor gameplay, provide warnings, promote responsible gameplay, and prevent detrimental gaming activity”)
providing in-game actions taken by the player during execution of the electronic game to the responsible gaming model; ([0151] “The CIP 1802 runs analytical models…based on the real-time data received in the player event feed from the player activity queue 150f and the historical data from the historical data database 142f In this way, the CIP 1802 is capable of detecting player events that are either pre-programmed or determined in real time to protect players and users of the system 100 based on its analysis and data processing. According to embodiments”, [0082] “a real-time connection to a machine learning service 412 for the EDS 400. The machine learning service 412 may provide real-time rule analysis and application for the various games 402 monitored by the EDS 400. The machine learning service 412 may detect unusual and/or potentially detrimental player activity. For example, according to embodiments, the machine learning service 412 may detect unusual player activity in the form of the churn rate for one or more players. According to alternative embodiments, upon detecting unusual and/or potential detrimental player activity, the machine learning service 412 may initiate activity to curb those activities. For example, according to embodiments, the machine learning service 412 may in certain circumstances cause the system to initiate action to encourage the player to engage in more responsible gameplay”, [0085] “machine learning service may monitor the data streams and may track and calculate various player metrics…also make use of real-time or dynamic data from the data streams 150, 150a, 150b, 150c…may be used to detect and understand a player's various interests and patterns in a gaming system…determinations made by the machine learning service 412, the EDS 400 may react to the player patterns in a particular way based on the player's activity. For example, the EDS may provide information, promotions, or bonuses based on the player's activity (e.g., providing bonuses for games that player uses the most, encouraging break time”, [0145]-[0146] “the machine learning service 412 may detect unusual and/or potentially detrimental player activity and, upon detecting such activity, initiate action to encourage the player to engage in more responsible gameplay, or prevent the player from engaging in further potentially detrimental activity…the machine learning service 412 may utilize information, including information from data streams 150, 150a, 150b, 150c and events associated with non-gaming systems 406 to detect patterns, and may consider several factors in determining a user's level of risk. Examples of such factors include: if a player tends to spend more when losing; if a player spends/loses more at certain times; if a player deposits more when losing; if a player deposits more when winning, the specific games a player plays, the amounts of a player's bets, the outcomes of games, a player's entry into special events such as tournaments. The system may also check a user's credit to determine what the user is reasonably able to afford. A user's level of risk may be based on historical data, real-time data, and, preferably, a combination thereof. A user may be tracked across multiple jurisdictions as the user connects and establishes copies of or pointers to the user's account in different jurisdictions. Alternatively, additional system components, such as those described below may be used to monitor gameplay, provide warnings, promote responsible gameplay, and prevent detrimental gaming activity”)
receiving an output from the responsible gaming model based on the responsible gaming model processing the in-game actions; and ([0151] “. The CIP 1802 runs analytical models…based on the real-time data received in the player event feed from the player activity queue 150f and the historical data from the historical data database 142f In this way, the CIP 1802 is capable of detecting player events that are either pre-programmed or determined in real time to protect players and users of the system 100 based on its analysis and data processing. According to embodiments”, [0082] “a real-time connection to a machine learning service 412 for the EDS 400. The machine learning service 412 may provide real-time rule analysis and application for the various games 402 monitored by the EDS 400. The machine learning service 412 may detect unusual and/or potentially detrimental player activity. For example, according to embodiments, the machine learning service 412 may detect unusual player activity in the form of the churn rate for one or more players. According to alternative embodiments, upon detecting unusual and/or potential detrimental player activity, the machine learning service 412 may initiate activity to curb those activities. For example, according to embodiments, the machine learning service 412 may in certain circumstances cause the system to initiate action to encourage the player to engage in more responsible gameplay”, [0085] “machine learning service may monitor the data streams and may track and calculate various player metrics…also make use of real-time or dynamic data from the data streams 150, 150a, 150b, 150c…may be used to detect and understand a player's various interests and patterns in a gaming system…determinations made by the machine learning service 412, the EDS 400 may react to the player patterns in a particular way based on the player's activity. For example, the EDS may provide information, promotions, or bonuses based on the player's activity (e.g., providing bonuses for games that player uses the most, encouraging break time”, [0145]-[0146] “the machine learning service 412 may detect unusual and/or potentially detrimental player activity and, upon detecting such activity, initiate action to encourage the player to engage in more responsible gameplay, or prevent the player from engaging in further potentially detrimental activity…the machine learning service 412 may utilize information, including information from data streams 150, 150a, 150b, 150c and events associated with non-gaming systems 406 to detect patterns, and may consider several factors in determining a user's level of risk. Examples of such factors include: if a player tends to spend more when losing; if a player spends/loses more at certain times; if a player deposits more when losing; if a player deposits more when winning, the specific games a player plays, the amounts of a player's bets, the outcomes of games, a player's entry into special events such as tournaments. The system may also check a user's credit to determine what the user is reasonably able to afford. A user's level of risk may be based on historical data, real-time data, and, preferably, a combination thereof. A user may be tracked across multiple jurisdictions as the user connects and establishes copies of or pointers to the user's account in different jurisdictions. Alternatively, additional system components, such as those described below may be used to monitor gameplay, provide warnings, promote responsible gameplay, and prevent detrimental gaming activity”)
using the output from the responsible gaming model as part of determining that the player of the electronic game has taken the action that corresponds to the responsible gaming action ([0146] “detect patterns, and may consider several factors …if a player tends to spend more when losing; if a player spends/loses more at certain times; if a player deposits more when losing; if a player deposits more when winning, the specific games a player plays, the amounts of a player's bets, the outcomes of games, a player's entry into special events such as tournaments. The system may also check a user's credit to determine what the user is reasonably able to afford….may be based on historical data, real-time data, and, preferably, a combination thereof. A user may be tracked…monitor gameplay…promote responsible gameplay, and prevent detrimental gaming activity” – therefore the system analyzes various gaming/playing patterns to determine whether the user has taken irresponsible actions – and similarly when the system is not detecting irresponsible activity that is a determination the user has taken responsible gaming actions, [0190] “encouraging a user to take a break…intervening to prevent excessively long sessions…real-time analysis of the user’s current session length and the user’s previous session length…indicating that the user’s session length is unusual”, [0153]-[0155] “ The central data store 140a may monitor a number of different use cases involving each player, such as winnings and losses, active and passive usage or other use cases that are helpful in encouraging responsible gameplay…player break queue 150h may be informed by certain pre-determined information, such as player break configurations, pre-determined thresholds, or the like. The player break queue 150h can help encourage or require a player to take breaks, depending on the level of risk the player demonstrates…based on session activity time…prompting the user for a session break, providing more forceful intervention if the user's grace period has been exceeded or breached, and/or providing an appropriate message to the player…”, [0073] “ may provide offers to users of the gaming system 100 based on a number of different criteria, including play style, play frequency, geographic location, location within a certain facility, amounts spent, amounts won, or other criteria tracked by the system 100 that a company or entity operating the system wishes to reward”)
With respect to claim 7, Anbazhagan teaches the method of claim 6;
wherein the responsible gaming model is trained with a combination of gameplay data [0145]-[0146] “the machine learning service 412 may detect unusual and/or potentially detrimental player activity and, upon detecting such activity, initiate action to encourage the player to engage in more responsible gameplay, or prevent the player from engaging in further potentially detrimental activity…the machine learning service 412 may utilize information, including information from data streams 150, 150a, 150b, 150c and events associated with non-gaming systems 406 to detect patterns, and may consider several factors in determining a user's level of risk. Examples of such factors include: if a player tends to spend more when losing; if a player spends/loses more at certain times; if a player deposits more when losing; if a player deposits more when winning, the specific games a player plays, the amounts of a player's bets, the outcomes of games, a player's entry into special events such as tournaments. The system may also check a user's credit to determine what the user is reasonably able to afford. A user's level of risk may be based on historical data, real-time data, and, preferably, a combination thereof. A user may be tracked across multiple jurisdictions as the user connects and establishes copies of or pointers to the user's account in different jurisdictions. Alternatively, additional system components, such as those described below may be used to monitor gameplay, provide warnings, promote responsible gameplay, and prevent detrimental gaming activity”)
and psychologist input data ([0167]-[0173] “Depending on the user's answers to the questionnaire…may be offered personalized recommendations regarding enabling gambling control tools, may have limits automatically imposed on the user's account, or may have the account suspended…personalized and tailored controls on a user's account. In step 2202 the OP 1802 determines that a user is a medium risk user….The user may be instructed, for example, to be as honest as possible in answering the questions, as the user's answers may impact the user's overall experience with the system and may affect the accuracy of recommendations provided by the system. In step 2206, the user is presented with a questionnaire including questions related to the user's gaming activity. The questions may seek yes/no answers, and may be directed to whether the user gambles to forget about personal problems, whether the user gets stressed, anxious or is unable to sleep because of gambling, whether gambling negatively affects the user's personal relationships, job, or studies, or whether the user becomes restless or irritable when unable to gamble. Other exemplary questions may be directed to whether the user bets more than he/she/they can afford to lose, whether the user has borrowed money or gone in debt to gamble, whether the user has gambled money that was supposed to be spent on bills, rent, or other commitments, whether the user has felt guilty about gambling, or whether the user has needed to gamble with larger amounts of money to get the same feeling of excitement… the level of concern regarding the user's activity is determined based on the user's answers to the questionnaire…” –based on psychologist input data as well)
With respect to claim 10, Anbazhagan teaches the method of claim 1;
wherein the electronic game comprises a game of chance ([0077] “one or more games provided by way of the gaming system 100, such as sports betting, poker, bingo, casino slot races, or other games. The promotion/loyalty system 300 can facilitate competition among a series of sequential games, such as casino slot races. The leaderboard provided by the promotion/loyalty system 300” – bingo & slots are games of change, [0124] “ providing game play functionality and interaction for other games as well. (e.g., casino games, casino slots, etc.….Data Center 1 160a, that local data center may provide gameplay for Game 1 to the user”, [0004] “able to join virtual gambling or other gaming online, such as betting on sporting events, playing card games (e.g., poker), accessing casino games (e.g., slots)”. [0091] “electric casino games (e.g., casino slot races)”)
With respect to claim 11, Anbazhagan teaches the method of claim 1;
wherein the electronic game comprises a game of skill ([0077] “one or more games provided by way of the gaming system 100, such as sports betting, poker, bingo, casino slot races, or other games” – sports betting and poker are games of skill, , [0067] “esports or other video games” – games of skill, [0004] “able to join virtual gambling or other gaming online, such as betting on sporting events, playing card games (e.g., poker), accessing casino games (e.g., slots)”)
With respect to claim 12, Anbazhagan and Dalmia teach the method of claim 1. Anbazhagan does not appear to disclose,
wherein the display device is provided as part of an Electronic Gaming Machine (EGM)
However, Dalmia discloses
wherein the display device is provided as part of an Electronic Gaming Machine (EGM)(Fig 29 & [0110] “system can generate, implement, host, manage, and/or otherwise be involved with the creation and/or operation of one or more physical gaming devices (e.g., an electronic gaming machine (EGM)) located in a physical gaming environment (e.g., a casino)
Dalmia suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the display device is provided as part of an Electronic Gaming Machine (EGM), because such environments/machines are locations where it is important/possible to encourage players to take responsible gaming actions ([0063]-[0064] & [0271]-[0276]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, system, and device of Anbazhagan to include wherein the display device is provided as part of an Electronic Gaming Machine (EGM),, as taught by Dalmia, because such environments/machines are locations where it is important/possible to encourage players to take responsible gaming actions.
With respect to claim 13, Anbazhagan teaches the method of claim 1;
wherein the display device is provided as part of a mobile device (Fig 1 tag 122 and 124 shows display devices including a mobile device, [0004] “gaming online, such as betting on sporting events, playing card games (e.g., poker), accessing casino games (e.g., slots) using computers, laptops, phones, and tablets”)
v Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anbazhagan in view of Dalmia, as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Dragicevic et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2019/0005844 , January 3, 2019- hereinafter "Dragicevic”)
With respect to claim 8, Anbazhagan and Dalmia teach the method of claim 6. Anbazhagan does not appear to disclose,
wherein the responsible gaming model comprises a recurrent neural network
However, Dragicevic discloses
wherein the responsible gaming model comprises a recurrent neural network ([0127]-[0129] “may for example be performed using other statistical classification techniques, such as non-parametric analysis, artificial neural network techniques”
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, 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 the type of machine learning model of Dragicevic (recurrent neural network)for that of Anbazhagan. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 9, Anbazhagan and Dalmia teach the method of claim 8. Anbazhagan does not appear to disclose,
wherein the recurrent neural network is fed Nth latest actions and outcomes of gaming sessions with which the player is associated
However, Dragicevic discloses
wherein the recurrent neural network is fed Nth latest actions and outcomes of gaming sessions with which the player is associated ([0127]-[0129] “may for example be performed using other statistical classification techniques, such as non-parametric analysis, artificial neural network techniques” & [0066]-[0070] “the player's daily bet amount and plotting these points over a pre-defined and configurable period of active gambling days and calendar days, a linear regression can provide a p-value and slope co-efficient to indicate whether the individual behavior has demonstrated a consistent trend over that period; by calculating average player wagering volumes for prior and current periods and comparing differences using t-tests, also over a pre-defined and configurable period of active gambling days and calendar days, this can provide a p-value to indicate whether a current period has witnessed a statically significant change in behavior compared to a previous period; variation in amount bet over a period can also be derived as a measure of betting volatility, which can in turn be compared against the variation in previous periods to assess trends and trend consistency via p-values. The test output, including test metrics like p-values, allow the machine learning technique to consider the consistency of trends as an input alongside absolute levels of activity in recent and prior periods, as well as average trend directions.” – therefore the model is trained/fed a certain number of the lastest actions/outcomes of various events (e.g., certain past window of time))
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, 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 the type of machine learning model of Dragicevic (recurrent neural network, wherein the recurrent neural network is fed Nth latest actions and outcomes of gaming sessions with which the player is associated)for that of Anbazhagan. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Englman et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2009/0176558, July 9, 2009) teaches detecting responsible/irresponsible gaming activities and providing rewards and publishments to promote responsible gameplay.
Agarwal et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2011/0245943, October 6, 2011) teaches detecting responsible/irresponsible gaming activities and providing rewards and publishments to promote responsible gameplay.
Flanagam et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2009/0191523, July 30, 2009) teaches detecting responsible/irresponsible gaming activities and providing rewards and publishments to promote responsible gameplay
Conclusion
No claim is allowed
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M DETWEILER whose telephone number is (571)272-4704. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Waseem Ashraf can be reached at telephone number (571)-270-3948. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/JAMES M DETWEILER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621