Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. 2021/0035409 by Higgins.
Regarding claim 1, Higgins discloses a distributed verification system comprising: a. a server, the server including a controller, operating memory, and a communications interface, wherein the server is accessible via a network (para. 23-26 – see network and server); b. a database in communication with the server (para. 30-32 – see database); c. one or more devices, the one or more devices each including a communications interface and an internal voucher table, wherein the one or more devices are in communication with the server and with one another via the network (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see the gaming machine and the distributed nature of the ticket/voucher system); d. one or more processors (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see processor); and e. a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing thereon instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the system to: i. issue a voucher from one of the one or more devices on the network, the voucher comprising a unique validation ID (para. 43 – see validation number); ii. communicate and store state information of the issued voucher to the internal table of one or more of the one or more devices on the network (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see the gaming machine and the distributed nature of the ticket/voucher system); iii. receive an issued voucher for redemption at any one of the one or more devices on the network (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see the gaming machine and the distributed nature of the ticket/voucher system); iv. communicate and store state information of the redeemed voucher to the internal table of one or more of the one or more devices on the network (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see the gaming machines and communication between the gaming machine to operate the ticket/voucher system); and v. communicate state information of all issued and/or redeemed vouchers to the server from one or more of the one or more devices on the network (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see the gaming machines and the distributed accounting of the ticket/voucher system).
Regarding claim 2, Higgins discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more devices comprise one or more electronic gaming machines (EGMs) and/or one or more point of sale terminals (POSs) (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see the gaming machines).
Regarding claim 3, Higgins discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more devices each comprise an electronic game machine interface board (EGMIB), the EGMIB comprising logic, one or more interface boards, a processor, and on board memory, and wherein the EGMIB is configured to link the one or more devices to the server and to one another (para. 47-53 – see the gaming machine hardware).
Regarding claim 4, Higgins discloses the system of claim 3, wherein the EGMIB comprises a slot machine interface board (SMIB) (para. 27 – see slot machine and the board).
Regarding claim 5, Higgins discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising a server internal voucher table stored on the server and/or the database (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see server storage).
Regarding claim 6, Higgins discloses the system of claim 5, wherein the internal voucher table of each of the one or more devices and/or server comprises information of issued and/or redeemed vouchers, wherein the information is of vouchers issued and/or redeemed on any of the one or more of the devices on the network (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see redemption via gaming machines on the network).
Regarding claim 7, Higgins discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more devices each comprise a set of pre-fetched validation IDs stored thereon, wherein an issued voucher generated while the server is offline is assigned a validation ID from the set of stored pre-fetched validation IDs (para. 43 – see the generated and provided validation IDs).
Regarding claim 8, Higgins discloses the system of claim 7, wherein the set of pre-fetched validation IDs is generated by the server and communicated to and stored on the one or more devices upon connection to the server (para. 24-26, 35-40, 43 – see server generation).
Regarding claim 9, Higgins discloses the system of claim 1, wherein upon the server receiving a redeemed voucher state communication from any one or more of the one or more devices, the server communicates a delete instruction to all the devices on the network, and wherein the redeemed voucher is removed from the internal voucher tables of all the devices on the network (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see deletion and management of the active vouchers between devices).
Regarding claim 10, Higgins discloses the system of claim 9, wherein only the server communicates the delete instruction (para. 24-26, 35-40 – see deletion and management of the active vouchers between devices).
Regarding claim 11, Higgins discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the issued voucher comprises a physical voucher dispensed from the one of the one or more devices on the network (para. 43 – see issued voucher).
Regarding claim 12, Higgins discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the unique validation ID is printed on the physical issued voucher (para. 43 – see validation number printed on ticket).
Regarding claims 13-24, these claims are rejected as noted above regarding claims 1-12.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER J IANNUZZI whose telephone number is (571)272-5793. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30AM-5:30PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kang Hu can be reached at 571-270-1344. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PETER J IANNUZZI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights