Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/732,240

GAMING SYSTEMS AND METHODS HAVING PERSISTENT EXPANDABLE GAME TIERS ACROSS MULTIPLE GAME INSTANCES

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Jun 03, 2024
Priority
Jul 21, 2023 — provisional 63/528,276
Examiner
IANNUZZI, PETER J
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Aristocrat Technologies, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
351 granted / 518 resolved
-2.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
552
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
§103
57.2%
+17.2% vs TC avg
§102
19.6%
-20.4% vs TC avg
§112
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 518 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception. The claims will be analyzed with respect to the Subject Matter Eligibility Test at MPEP§2106. Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 1 (see MPEP§2106.03) The claims recite one of the four statutory categories of subject matter. Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 2A Prong 1 (see MPEP§2106.04(a-c)) The claims recite abstract ideas in the following categories; Methods of organizing human activity such as fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk) see specifically ii. rules for conducting a wagering game, In re Smith, 815 F.3d 816, 818-19, 118 USPQ2d 1245, 1247 (Fed. Cir. 2016); (MPEP§2106.04(a)(2)II). The abstract ideas have been noted in the claims below. Regarding claim 1, determine a first game tier from a plurality of game tiers for playing a base game, each game tier of the plurality of game tiers being assigned a tier level and including a set of value symbols for display during game play (game rules regarding the game elements and progression of the game), wherein each set of the value symbols included within each game tier have a value associated therewith within a predefined range of values (game rules regarding game elements), wherein a minimum value within the predefined range of values increases as the tier level increases (game rules regarding the composition of game elements); determine for the base game a first set of game symbols from a plurality of game symbols to be randomly selected from for display on each reel of a plurality of reels (game rules regarding game elements and game progression), the first set of game symbols including at least value symbols from a set of value symbols corresponding to the first game tier and value symbols included in the game tiers at higher levels than the first game tier (game rules regarding the interaction of game elements and game progression); cause a randomly selected subset of the first set of game symbols to be displayed on the plurality of reels (game rules regarding game progression); in response to one or more trigger symbols being displayed during the base game, trigger a feature game with a particular number of free spins (game rules regarding the interaction of game elements and game progression); evaluate the value symbols of the first subset of game symbols displayed on the plurality of reels (game rules regarding game progression); determine the lowest tier level associated with the value symbols displayed on the plurality of reels (game rules regarding game progression); assign a new game tier to the feature game based on the determined lowest tier level displayed (game rules regarding the interaction of game elements and game progression); and determine for the feature game a second set of game symbols from the plurality of game symbols to be randomly selected from for the display on the plurality of reels, the second set of game symbols including value symbols corresponding to the new game tier and all other higher tier levels (game rules regarding the interaction of game elements and game progression). Regarding claims 2-20, these claims present more abstract game rules regarding the interaction of game elements, the nature of game elements and game progression. Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 2A Prong 2 (see MPEP§2106.04(d)) The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements are generic computer hardware; insignificant extra solution activity such as collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis to data; and the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer. These additional elements individually and in combination provide for limitations that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. These additional elements (1) add “insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(g)” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) and (2) generally link “the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(h).” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I). These additional elements individually and in combination are not limitations that provide for “improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, as discussed in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) apply or use the “judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) implement the “judicial exception with, or using a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(b);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) effect “a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(c);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) or apply or use “the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(e).” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I). As such the claims as a whole do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 2B (see MPEP§2106.05) The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements are well-understood, routine and conventional generic computer hardware and insignificant extra solution activity (see MPEP§2106.05). 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 03, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12633192
SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF ELECTRONIC GAMING
2y 7m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12629589
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DISPLAYING CUSTOM-BUILT LAYOUTS ON A SECOND SCREEN DEVICE THAT HAS BEEN CONVERTED TO A VIDEO GAME CONTROLLER
2y 7m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12623140
ELECTRONIC DIE DEVICE
2y 8m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12611603
STORAGE MEDIUM, GAME SYSTEM, GAME APPARATUS, AND GAME PROCESSING METHOD
2y 6m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12592126
SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF ELECTRONIC GAMING INCLUDING GESTURE-BASED PLAYER CONSTRUCTED SYMBOL COMBINATIONS
3y 4m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+14.4%)
2y 7m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 518 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month