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 .
This office action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 08/13/2026. The previous claim objections have been withdrawn. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-5, 8, 10, 11 and 12 are amended. Claims 13-20 are new.
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(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
[STEP 1] The claim recites at least one step or structure. Thus, the claim is to an apparatus and method which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
[STEP2A PRONG 1] The claims recite limitations which have been constructed as certain methods of organizing human activity and/or mental process. Claim 1 recites an apparatus, claim 11 recites a method and claim 12 recites a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claims recite generic computer components for performing steps including, receiving information about a first player’s progress and supplementary game content; generating and providing a gameplay information resource tailored to that progress; receiving a request to share the resource with a less progressed second player; and transmitting the resource to that player; and upon receiving the updated progress information, regenerating and retransmitting the resource. Stripped from the recited “processor,” and “memory,” language, these functions describe a longstanding human activity of a more advanced individual curating and selectively sharing advice, tips, hints or notes with a less advanced individual and updating that guidance as the less advanced individual’s progress changes. Such activity constitutes (i) a method of organizing human activity involving “managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)” (see MPEP 2106.04 (a)(2)(II)(C)), and (ii) a mental process that can be performed in the mind or with pen and paper (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)). Accordingly, claim(s) 1-20 recite abstract ideas.
[STEP2A PRONG II] The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims do not recite additional elements that are significantly more than the judicial exception or meaningfully limit the practice of the judicial exception. The additional elements including the “at least one processor,” “at least one memory,” “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium,” under their broadest reasonable interpretation, are generic computer components performing conventional functions of receiving, processing, storing, and transmitting data (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) and MPEP 2106.05(F)). The additional limitations merely implement the abstract idea on a computer and do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Furthermore, the claimed limitations generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, namely a gaming environment, which is insufficient to integrate the exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
[STEP2B] The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as discussed above, the additional elements are generic computer components that are known to one of ordinary skill in the art. The recitation of these additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, but rather adds mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Therefore, claims 1-20 are found to be directed to a grouping of abstract ideas without significantly more.
Claim(s) 2-10, 13, and 14, claims 15-17, and claims 18-20 is/are dependent on supra claim(s) 1, 11, and 12, and include all the limitations of the claim(s). Therefore, the dependent claim(s) recite(s) the same abstract idea. The additional limitations recited in the dependent claims, such as, identifying gameplay elements encountered by the first player and including corresponding information as the subset; receiving an additional gameplay information resource associated with an additional player; sending a request for gameplay information in response to a trigger condition; labeling and specifying the content source of the gameplay information (e.g., text, video, audio) describing in game elements. These limitations merely further recite how the selection rules are evaluated and applied. An evaluation a person could perform mentally or with pen and paper, and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The recited “gameplay information storage circuitry,” is a generic computer component that stores and provides data (see MPEP 2106.05(d)) and merely applies the abstract idea on a computer.
Accordingly, the additional element(s) do(es) not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and the claim is therefore directed to the judicial exception. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sherwani et al. (US 20210146250 A1), hereinafter Sherwani, in view of Benedetto et al. (US 20210283514 A1), hereinafter Benedetto, and further in view of Hiatt et al. (US 20210362063 A1), hereinafter Hiatt.
In regard to claim(s) 1, 11, and 12, Sherwani teaches an apparatus comprising: at least one processor: at least one memory having instructions stored thereon that, when executed, case the at least one processor (Par. [0004]; “The computer system includes one or more processors and one or more non-transitory computer readable storage media (e.g. one or more memories) storing instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, cause the computer system to perform operations.”);
receive a player progress indicator indicative of a first player's progress in a game (Par. [0005]; “the operations include receiving an activity identifier of an activity completed by a first video game player…The operations also include generating information about the mechanic to complete the activity, and presenting the information in a user interface to a second video game player of the video game that has not completed the activity. ”) and (Par. [0078]; “Events 414 may be fired in response to several various trigger conditions. For example, such trigger conditions may include: an activity that was previously unavailable becomes available, a user starts an activity, a user ends an activity, an opening or ending cut-scene for an activity begins or ends, the user's in-game location or zone changes, an in-game statistic changes”).
receive gameplay information comprising supplementary information related to content of the game (Par. [0036]; “a video game platform collects event data including mechanic identifiers and activity identifiers associated with a successful completion outcome for an activity. The data, collected from many users of the video game platform, is aggregated and processed to identify the most impactful mechanics associated with successful outcomes for activities.”) and (Par. [0007]; “the information includes at least one of: a text description, a link to a graphical animation, a link to a video file, or a link to an audio file.”);
generate, based on the player progress indicator and the received gameplay information, a gameplay information resource associated with the first player (Par. [0037]; “The video game platform can generate suggestions for a mechanic, a target, an avoidance strategy, and a mitigation strategy to help players successfully complete the activity.”) and (Par. [0038]; “a mechanic tip can be customized depending on data associated with a specific video game player and/or the input device. In particular, the video game platform can determine player-specific information, including mechanic availability, historical data about prior use of the mechanic, the current in-game characteristics of the user including inventory and load out, as well as the hardware configuration used by the player during the activity”).
receive, from a first device, a first player identifier identifying the first player, and, responsive to receiving the first player identifier, make the generated gameplay information resource accessible to the first device (Par. [0041]; “The video game platform 150 collects, stores, and processes events from the video game player devices 130 and the video game console 110 to provide various video game-related functionalities including, for instance, suggesting video game activities”) and (Par. [0076]; “The values of the metadata 412 and events 414 can be associated with a user profile.”).
Sherwani teaches an information exchange between a first player who has completed an activity and a second player who has not (Par. [0005]; “the operations include receiving an activity identifier of an activity completed by a first video game player…The operations also include generating information about the mechanic to complete the activity, and presenting the information in a user interface to a second video game player of the video game that has not completed the activity.”), but does not explicitly teach receive a share request associated with the first player identifier, the share request comprising a second player identifier identifying a second player, the first player having progressed further in the game than the second player.
However, Benedetto discloses a user created message that is delivered to one or more targeted users (Par. [0034]; “Further, the companion interface can be used to create messages from the user. For instance, a message can be a request for help, wherein the message is delivered to a targeted user or broadcast to a defined group (e.g., friends of the user)…In other examples, a message can be created and delivered to one or more targeted users to enhance game play.”) and (Par. [0096]; “For example, the message may be intended for broadcast to other users (e.g., help flag), and includes a request for assistance from other players of the gaming application. Further, the message including the request for assistance may be targeted to friends of the user, or delivered to known experts, or third parties that provide gaming assistance”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sherwani’s server-based gameplay information system to incorporate Benedetto’s sharing method. Sherwani discloses a communication structure for exchanging data between player devices (Par. [0049]; “communications data (e.g. messages, commands, etc.) can be exchanged between the video game console 110 and the video game player devices 130 through the video game platform 150.”), and Benedetto teaches sending gameplay related information or messages to identified users (Par. [0034]; “ a message can be created and delivered to one or more targeted users to enhance game play.”). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine these teachings in order to allow gameplay information generated for one player to be communicated to other, specifically identified players.
Benedetto further teaches transmit, based on receiving the share request, the generated gameplay information resource to a second device associated with the second player identifier (Par. [0034]; “a message can be created and delivered to one or more targeted users to enhance game play.”) and (Par. [0011]-[0013], [0103]; “The method includes sending the companion interface to a second computing device associated with the user for display concurrent with the game play of the user.”).
The motivation to combine Sherwani with view of Benedetto is set forth above and applies equally here. Sherwani teaches transmitting helpful content to player devices (Par. [0041]; “Video content, such as help videos demonstrating how video game activities can be played, is also available to the video game console 110 from the third party system 190 through the video game platform 150.”) and (Par. [0082]; “In some embodiments, the video game platform (e.g. the video game platform 150 of FIG. 1) sends information for a help tip to a video game console (e.g. the video game console 110 of FIG. 1)”). Benedetto teaches delivering the created message specifically to the device(s) associated with the targeted user (Par. [0034; “a message can be created and delivered to one or more targeted users to enhance game play.”). Combining Sherwani’s teaching that the generated help resource is what is transmitted to the player’s device(s) with Benedetto’s teachings of a second device associated with a second player teaches transmitting, based on receiving the share request, the generated gameplay information resource to a second device associated with the second player identifier. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to route the tailored gameplay information to the intended recipient.
Sherwani teaches receipt of updated progress events tied to the player identifier (Par. [0057]-[0058]; “An example of an event about the zone can indicate an update to the current in-game location of the video game player. This event can be reported regularly, or whenever the player's in-game location changes significantly.”) but does not explicitly determine that an updated player progress indicator has been received, the updated player progress indicator indicative of the first player's progress in the game.
However, Hiatt teaches determines that the update events indicative of the first player’s changed progress have been received (Par. [0049]; “An example of an event about the activity can indicate changes in activity availability for a video game player (e.g., the user 112).”) (Fig. 12; “Receive activity identifier, player identifier, and mechanic identifier” and Fig. 13; “Receive activity identifier, player identifier, and completion data”).
Hiatt further teaches regenerate the gameplay information resource based on the updated player progress indicator and (Par. [0107]; “Over time, the selection of activity suggestions by the user can be monitored and the weights can be adjusted based on a history of such selections.”) and (Par. [0108]; “A weighted sum 1020 of the individual scores of the sort factors can be computed, resulting in a total score. The total score can be set as a readiness score 1030.”) and Fig. 11 discloses that the candidate activities, readiness scores, and resulting activity suggestions ae recomputed for the user based on the current event data; (Par. [0110]; “FIG. 11 illustrates an example of a flow for suggesting an activity, according to embodiments of the present disclosure. In an example, the flow includes operation 1102, where the computer system determines candidate activities, some or all of which may be suggested upon further analysis. For instance, the computer system determines activities that are available to the user and that the user has not performed (based on properties of activity objects and/or properties of events about the activities and collected in association with a user identifier of the user). These activities form the set of candidate activities.”). Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, Hiatt discloses that weights and scores are adjusted over time and that a new readiness score is generated each cycle. The readiness score and activity suggestions are recomputed for the user based on the current event data, which itself is continuously updated (Par. [0049]; “An example of an event about the activity can indicate changes in activity availability for a video game player (e.g., the user 112).”) and (Par. [0053]; “An example of an event about the zone can indicate an update to the current in-game location of the video game player. This event can be reported regularly, or whenever the player's in-game location changes significantly.”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined teachings of Sherwani in view of Benedetto and incorporate the Hiatt’s teaching of determining that updates player progress events have been received and regenerating the player specific suggestions based on the current event data. Sherwani discloses updated in game progress events corresponding to a player identifier (Sherwani, Par. [0057]-[0058]), and Hiatt determines that such update events have been received and recomputes readiness scores and activity suggestions based on the continuously updated event data (Hiatt, Par. [0107]-[0110], Fig. 11). Sherwani and Hiatt are both directed to a server-based video game platform that generates player specific guidance. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to keep the generated gameplay information resource current with the first player’s updating progress in the game, yielding the predictable result of an up-to-date progress resource (see MPEP 2143(a), (d)).
As set forth in the combination above, Sherwani in view of Benedetto and further in view of Hiatt teach “transmit the regenerated gameplay information resource to the second device associated with the second player identifier.” It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sherwani’s teaching of transmitting personalized help to the player device (Par. [0082]; “In some embodiments, the video game platform (e.g. the video game platform 150 of FIG. 1) sends information for a help tip to a video game console (e.g. the video game console 110 of FIG. 1)”) with Benedetto’s delivery of created messages to a targeted user’s device (Par. [0034], [0103]; “The method includes sending the companion interface to a second computing device associated with the user for display concurrent with the game play of the user.”) and Hiatt’s regeneration suggestions upon updated progress events (Par. [0114]; “the computer system presents activity suggestions…The computer system sends information about the selected candidate activities to one or more computing devices of the user.”). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine to ensure that the shared recipient’s information remains consistent with the first player’s latest progress.
Claim(s) 11 and 12 recite a method and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, respectively. The claims recite the same limitations as claim 1 recited as a method and non-transitory computer readable storage medium. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium recite the same functional operations disclosed by Sherwani (Par. [0004]; “The computer system includes one or more processors and one or more non-transitory computer readable storage media (e.g. one or more memories) storing instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, cause the computer system to perform operations.”) and is well known to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected for the same reasons set forth above in claim 11.
In regard to claim(s) 2, 15 and 18, Sherwani teaches wherein: the gameplay information is received from gameplay information storage circuitry; and the gameplay information resource comprises a subset of the gameplay information stored by the gameplay information storage circuitry, wherein the subset is selected in dependence on the player progress indicator (Par. [0005]; “The operations also include storing the activity identifier and the mechanic identifier in a data store.”) and (Par. [0038]; “The video game platform can filter the mechanic tip for the player's current state, for example, by eliminating mechanics that are unavailable”).
In regard to claim(s) 3, 16, and 19, Sherwani teaches wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the at least one processor to: identify, based on the player progress indicator, one or more gameplay elements that have been encountered by the first player; and generate the gameplay information resource to include, as the subset, information relating to the one or more gameplay elements that have been encountered by the first player (Sherwani, Par. [0038]; “a mechanic tip can be customized depending on data associated with a specific video game player and/or the input device. In particular, the video game platform can determine player-specific information, including mechanic availability, historical data about prior use of the mechanic, the current in-game characteristics of the user including inventory and load out”).
In regard to claim 4, Sherwani does not explicitly teach the communication circuitry configured to receive an additional gameplay information resource associated with an additional player identifier identifying an additional player, and the processing circuitry configured to generate the gameplay information resource in dependence on the additional gameplay information resource. However, Benedetto teaches game processors associated with other remote game sessions execute instances of the gaming application for other users and that this additional information may be used to create the contextually relevant information for the current player (Par. [0044]; “other game processors of game server 205 associated with other virtual machines are configured to execute instances of the gaming application associated with game plays of other users and to capture snapshots during those game play, wherein this additional information may be used to create the contextually relevant information.”).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sherwani’s sever based gameplay information resource generation system to incorporate Benedetto’s multiplayer information sharing method. Both Sherwani and Benedetto are directed to systems and methods that generate gameplay information for users within a gaming platform. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify Sherwani’s system by incorporating Benedetto’s teaching of using information associated with additional players in order to generate contextually relevant gameplay information for the current player. Upon such modification, Sherwani’s system would generate gameplay information resources based not only on the player’s own gameplay progress but also on gameplay information associated with other players, as taught by Benedetto.
In regard to claim 5, Sherwani teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the at least one processor to send, to gameplay information storage circuitry, a request for the gameplay information, the request being sent in response to receiving at least one of: a gameplay information resource request; the player progress indication; and an indication that the game has been added to the first player's game library (Par. [0092]; “A user selection of any of the suggested activities presented in the menu 812 can be received.”) and (Par. [0094]; “In some embodiments, the video game platform receives a user selection of one of the selectable options 940, in response to which an appropriate help tip window is displayed”) and (Par. [0078]; “Events 414 may be fired in response to several various trigger conditions. For example, such trigger conditions may include: an activity that was previously unavailable becomes available, a user starts an activity, a user ends an activity, an opening or ending…an in-game statistic changes”).
Claim 5 recites, “the request being sent in response to receiving at least one of,” only one limitation must be satisfied. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, Sherwani’s user selection of a suggested activity or selectable help option which triggers retrieval of the corresponding activity and/or help data from the data store reads on a gameplay information resource request.
To address the third limitation, “an indication that the game has been added to the first player's game library,” Benedetto teaches that game titles owned by a member user are managed and made available through an account manager (Par. [0075]; “game titles owned by a member user may be managed by account manager”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify Sherwani’s system to further incorporate Benedetto’s account manager system because doing so would allow the system to condition gameplay information request based on whether a game is present in the user’s library. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to enhance Sherwani’s system with an additional trigger that ensures gameplay information automatically surfaces when a user adds a new game to their library.
In regard to claim 6, Sherwani teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the gameplay information comprises at least one of: text describing one or more in-game elements; video data describing one or more in-game elements; and audio data describing one or more in-game elements (Sherwani, Par. [0007]; “the information includes at least one of: a text description, a link to a graphical animation, a link to a video file, or a link to an audio file”) and (Par. [0068]; “the game media is an image, audio, video, text, etc.”)
In regard to claim 7, Sherwani teaches the apparatus of claim 6, wherein the one or more in-game elements comprise at least one of: one or more in-game characters; one or more in-game locations; one or more in-game storylines; in-game lore; and one or more in-game user controls (Par. [0060]; “The video game platform 150 can also collect data about an actor in a video game.”) and (Par. [0053], [0056]; “The zone represents an area of a game world of the video game.”) (Par. [0077]; “A list of in - game statistics, items, lore, in-game zones.”) (Par. [0062]; “The mechanic represents an item (e.g. tool), capability, skill, or effect that can be used by the video game player.”).
In regard to claim 8, Sherwani teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: the instructions, when executed, further cause the at least one processor to receive the gameplay information from gameplay information storage circuitry; and the gameplay information storage circuitry comprises a shared gameplay information resource (Par. [0036]; “The data, collected from many users of the video game platform, is aggregated and processed to identify the most impactful mechanics associated with successful outcomes for activities.”).
In regard to claim 9, Sherwani teaches the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the gameplay information comprises information downloaded from an online resource (Par. [0044]; “download or stream video content from the third party system ” and Par. [0048]-[0049] further teaches that gameplay information (e.g., “video files demonstrating how a video game can be played”) is provided by a third-party system.).
In regard to claim 10, Sherwani teaches the apparatus of claim 1, comprising: gameplay information storage circuitry to store the gameplay information, wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the at least one processor to receive the gameplay information from the gameplay information storage circuitry (Par. [0005]; “ The operations also include storing the activity identifier and the mechanic identifier in a data store.”).
In regard to claim 13, 14, 17 and 20, Sherwani teaches selection of information based positive impact criteria and exclusion based on negative impact and/or unavailability criteria (Par. [0036]; “The platform then determines which mechanic or mechanics are most strongly correlated with a player successfully completing a given activity, as well as which mechanics should be avoided”) and (Par. [0038]; “The video game platform can filter the mechanic tip for the player's current state, for example, by eliminating mechanics that are unavailable”). Sherwani does not explicitly teach wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the at least one processor to, when generating the gameplay information resource, select information that has been whitelisted for use; and exclude information that has been blacklisted.
However, Hiatt teaches using a spoiler block mechanism that excludes areas and activities the user has not yet reached and excludes already completed activities from the candidate suggestion set (Par. [0016]; “the operations further include: determining that the second activity includes a spoiler for the user, and ranking the second activity lower than the activity based on the spoiler.”) and (Par. [0049]; “This is primarily used to decide what activities to display and to remove spoiler block for those activities (where an activity having a spoiler may not be surfaced to the video game player). A property of this event includes, for instance a list (e.g., array) of activities that are currently available.”) and (Par. [0052]; “The video game platform 150 can also collect data about a zone in a video game…Other properties are possible including, for instance, an indication of whether the object should be treated as hidden for spoiler block uses cases (the default may be set to false)” and (Hiatt, Fig. 11; step 1104 “Remove spoiler activities from candidate activities.”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Sherwani and Benedetto to use Hiatt’s spoiler block and candidate exclusion logic to categorize information for inclusion in or exclusion from the gameplay resource based on whether the underlying areas have or have not been reached. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that incorporating Hiatt’s categorization mechanism into the combined teachings of Sherwani and Benedetto provides the benefit of preventing spoiler disclosures to the recipient, who is less advanced than the first player, while filtering out content already known to the recipient.
Response to Amendment
Applicants’ arguments filed on 08/13/2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
With regard to Applicant’s argument to the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, the argument is not persuasive as set forth above and in previous actions, as the steps can be performed under their broadest reasonable interpretation as a mental process; generating a resource based on a player’s progress and received gameplay information is an observation and evaluation that a person could perform mentally or with pen and paper, and receiving or transmitting the resource is data gathering and outputting (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)). Alternatively, the same steps also fall within certain methods of organizing human activity, specifically managing interactions between people, including teaching (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)).
As set forth in the 101 rejections above, the claims recite generating, receiving, and transmitting data, which fall under an abstract idea and not a technical improvement. Adapting the content of an informational resource to a person’s advancement level and delivering it to a targeted recipient is organizing human activity. Additionally, the specification does not disclose any specific improvement to how the “gameplay information network” operates. The claims recite generic components performing generic collection, filtering, and transmission functions. Therefore, the claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for the reasons set forth above.
Conclusion
Accordingly, claims 1-20 are rejected.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure:
Aghdaie et al. (US 11065539 B2) discloses a system for sharing gameplay content between identified players, including features for tailoring shared content to the player’s progress state and directing the content to specific recipients.
Zalewski et al. (US 20100041475 A1) discloses network gaming environments including exchange of game related information between users.
Johnson et al. (US 20120021840 A1) discloses multiplayer information exchange and cross user communication in a gaming environment.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BUSHIRA MUSA whose telephone number is (571)272-9156. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kang Hu can be reached at 5712701344. 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.
/B.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/KANG HU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights