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
2. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
3. Claims 1-4, 6-7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (a1)(a2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. Pub. No. JP 2017-118980 (‘980).
In Reference to Claims 1 and 15
‘980 discloses a system and method for team formation appointment (matching players who use arcade devices [0001], players who are scheduled to participate [0010] on server system 1100 of Fig. 1 comprising processor unit 200 and matching control unit 40 [0009] with reservation management unit 230 and registration control unit 231 [0011] and Fig. 14 S12 and S34, [0039], see also Fig.1 server system 1100, user terminal 1500 [0040]), comprising:
displaying a first player in a virtual scene that supports team-based battles (fighting game [0016], battle game [0039] supported by reservation system screen W2 which allows game title selection [0068]), a team formation appointment control associated with the first player (reservation screen W2 [0067]), for making an appointment of forming a target team comprising the first player (Fig. 5 allows player to perform the intended use of joining another player to form a multiplayer team [0067]);
receiving one or more team attribute setting operations when the team formation appointment control is triggered (in the reservation screen W2, there are setting operations 1 through 8 [0068] and particulars thereof [0069-0072]);
determining a set of team attributes of the target team comprising at least an appointed formation time of the target team (reservation date and time [0068]); and
displaying, when an appointment confirm instruction is triggered, formation appointment information of the target team including the set of team attributes, the formation appointment information indicating a formation of the target team with the first player and one or more other players being scheduled at the appointed formation time (player operation initiates inputs transmitted to server system [0073] to include target team, attributes, players invited [0074], this is a temporary registration [0074] until confirmed [0075]), the one or more other players joining the target team based on the formation appointment information, the target team being involved in a battle with another team in the virtual scene (whether the team is involved in a battle with another team or anything else is non-functional descriptive matter as it is not claimed that battle only with another team has any different effect on the operation of the claim as opposed to any battle type activities in general. Nonetheless, the players invited and who have accepted [0073-0075] are engaged as a team in a battle game with a monster, fighting game as a group battle [0083]).
As to claim 15, in addition, result prompt information and applying result prompt information indicating a result of the specific player applying to join the target team (Examiner construes apply result prompt information as a player responding to and joining a team. According to ‘980 server 1100 sends a reservation notification to all designated player i.e., sends an invitation to all invitees, and an approval request being an affirmative response to the invitation and an update by the server of all now confirmed participating participants ]0074]).
In Reference to Claim 2
‘980 discloses displaying, when a triggering operation is performed on the team formation appointment control, an attribute setting interface configured for setting the set of team attributes; and receiving the one or more team attribute setting operations in the attribute setting interface occurs when the reservation screen W2 is displayed the reservation date and time is provided as input in section 23 is response to a display of a software keyboard allowing a player to enter the date and time attributes ([0069]).
In Reference to Claim 3
‘980 discloses wherein the displaying the team formation appointment
control comprises: displaying a virtual party interface; and displaying the team formation appointment control in the virtual party interface occurs when the participant setting unit displays a list of player accounts ([0068]) for selection by the player to invite to join the game.
In Reference to Claim 4
‘980 discloses the appointed formation time and at least a second team attribute from a team interaction mode where the reservation date and time input unit 23 receives these attributes ([0068]) to set the scheduled time and a game title attribute selection ([0068]). The reservation interface W2 is displayed and receives a plurality of inputs selecting from a plurality of attributes ([0068]).
In Reference to Claim 6
‘980 discloses displaying a reservation notification for the intended use of inviting at least
another player [0074] based on the displayed list of player accounts so a new participant can be selected from the list ([0071]) and showing an invitation result when the player is approved to join the game by the server ([0075]).
In Reference to Claim 7
‘980 discloses displaying player identifiers (user ID) [0045]) and a unique user ID is assigned to each registrant (Fig. 9 [0108]) when a triggering operation is performed on a first candidate player invitation function item that is in an associated region of a first candidate player identifier of a first candidate team player in the one or more candidate team players, determining to invite the first candidate team player which occurs when player makes a selection of a candidate player to receive the notification ([0074]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claim 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘980 in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2020/0143197 to Zmijewski.
‘980 discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose displaying, when the candidate team player is in an invitation unavailable state, second prompt information indicating that the candidate team player is in the invitation unavailable state. One of skill in the art would be aware of the teachings of Zmijewski.
Zmijewski teaches of organizing information of a player’s game library and locating friends to invite to challenge matches (Fig. 13). Additionally, the images displayed indicate candidate players are available (Fig. 13) or unavailable state (Fig. 15 to accept or decline) where “[t]urning back to FIG. 13, there is also a corresponding button 1314 to spectate a friend's live or real-time game in progress if he or she is currently playing a game.” ({indicating a schedule conflict} [0145]) and ”[f]or each unavailable friend displayed, the corresponding challenge button 1316 displayed would be inactive and cannot be selected to send a challenge request to the friend to play a single player versus single player game. The corresponding button 1318 to spectate a friend's live or real-time game in progress is also inactive and cannot be selected.” ({displaying an unavailable state} [0146]).
The Supreme Court in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; and
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Here, it would require only routine skill in the art to modify the W2 screen indicating player availability with the indications of a schedule conflict and unavailability status of Zmijewski to achieve the predictable result of more fully informing the game organizer of the status of potential invitees of conflicts and availabilities. The Courts have held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results to be indicia of obviousness.
8. Claim 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘980 in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2018/0361248 to Nomura.
‘980 discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose displaying room creation prompt information of the target team and a creation function item associated with the room creation prompt information within a target time period before the appointed formation time; and creating, when a triggering operation is performed on the creation function item, a virtual room configured to allow members in the target team to interact with each other.
Nomura teaches of shared games when a player triggers a shared virtual experience a player is added to a lobby ([0082]) and where “[a]ssuming that the player is eligible (or became eligible), the gaming module 125 assigns 750 the player to a lobby for the shared virtual experience with a specified start time. In one embodiment, if the player is the first player to join the lobby, the gaming module 125 sets the start time by beginning a countdown of a predetermined length (e.g., two minutes). The start time for other players in the lobby is determined by the start time for the first player in the lobby. In other words, the shared virtual experience begins at the same (or substantially the same) time for the group of players. Lobbies may be public (meaning anyone can join) or private (meaning a code is required for a player to enter).” ([0100]). Also, “[i]f a lobby is full and another player tries to join, that player may be directed to wait or a new lobby with a new countdown may be created. In other words, the shared virtual experience module 540 may begin coordinating a second group to participate in the shared virtual experience together.” ([0082]).
Here, it would require only routine skill in the art to modify the team formation of ‘980 with the creation of a lobby and time period of Nomura to achieve the predictable result of coordinating groups to participate in a shared virtual experience. The Courts have held that the use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way to be indicia of obviousness.
9. Claims 13 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘980 in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2021/0354033 to Ono.
In Reference to Claim 13
‘980 discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose stopping the displaying of the formation appointment information when a number of applicant players reaches a target number. One of skill in the art would be aware of the game method of Ono.
Ono teaches that room setting information is set by a host computer ([0207) where upon receiving invitation information the target person terminal displays a notification image 34 and an invitation dialog can be opened ([0209] Fig. 16 at GP13). This is the display of appointment information. “Upon receiving the participation information, the server 100 determines if it is possible to enter the room and updates room information if it is possible to enter the room (S13). Here, at the server 100, the updated room information (room update information) is set so as to be received by the host terminal and the target person terminal. ([0210]). Upon receiving the room update information from the server 100, the host terminal updates and displays the room detail page (HP12). However, when the notification image 34 is tapped again after the suspension operation is performed, the invitation information dialog 52 is displayed again so that a target person can input a participation operation with respect to the multi-play to which the target person has been invited. However, as described above, in the case where the room to which the target person has been invited is in a state of “play in progress”, “full”, or “deactivated”, it is determined that entering the room is not possible, and a dialog indicating that entering the room is not possible is displayed.([0138]). Examiner interprets Ono as replacing the notification and dialogues when a room reaches capacity with a dialogue indicating play in progress, full or deactivated.
Here, it would require only routine skill in the art to modify the reservation management information of ‘980 with the dialogues of Ono to achieve the predictable result of letting the host or target player know that scheduling has ended when the capacity of the room has been reached. The Courts have held that applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results to be indicia of obviousness.
In Reference to Claim 16
‘980 discloses a player list and player IDs for each player which is a displaying a predefined target number of player display positions, each player display position being a display vacancy or including a player identifier of an applicant player applying to join the target team ([0045, 0068]); and according to Ono who teaches when the specific player successfully applies to join the target team and the predefined target number of player display positions comprise at least a first player display position that is a display vacancy, displaying a specific player identifier of the specific player at the first player display position (Fig 7D wherein Player TARO joins (Fig. 7C) and occupies the header TARO Rank 15).
In Reference to Claim 17
Ono displays an applying control of the target team (Fig. 7C 52a), the applying control being configured for applying to join the target team; and determining to apply to join the target team when a triggering operation is performed on the applying control (when selected by the player the control allows an acceptance signal to be sent to the game server to join the team).
In Reference to Claim 18
Ono discloses displaying, when the applying result prompt information indicates that the specific player successfully applies to join the target team, an applying cancel control in a place of the applying control, the applying cancel control being configured for canceling an application to join the target team; and stop the displaying of the applying result prompt information when a triggering operation is performed on the applying cancel control (Examiner construes this limitation as selecting no 52b is cancelling an application to join in Fig. 6C).
In Reference to Claim 19
Ono teaches displaying a virtual party interface that includes at least the target team; (Fig. 7C) and displaying, in the virtual party interface, the formation appointment information including the set of team attributes of the target team (Fig. 7D, each player rank is an attribute).
In Reference to Claim 20
Ono teaches of displaying invitation information of the first team player and a confirm control associated with the invitation information, the invitation information indicating that the first team player invites the specific player to join the target team; and determining, when a triggering operation is performed on the confirm control, to apply to the target team (Examiner construes Figs. 7C and 7D as teaching displaying an invitation to join via offering a displayed control and once activated, the player is displayed as applied to the team of JIRO and HANAKO in the header, the header being a confirmation that the player has successfully joined).
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claims 5, 10-12 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
11. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior references are silent as to displaying when a triggering operation is performed on a tag function item comprising at least two party tags, and as one party tag being the part tag of the target team; wherein the room creation prompt information and the creation function item are displayed in an interaction reminder interface, the method further comprises: displaying, in the interaction reminder interface, player identifiers of applicant players that have applied to join the target team; displaying an invite-all option configured for inviting the applicant players all at once; and when a triggering operation is performed on the creation function item and the invite-all option is in a checked state, transmitting invitation information for entering the virtual room to the applicant players; obtaining, when the appointment confirm instruction is triggered, a count of teams that have been appointed to be formed by the first player within a target time period; and displaying, when the count is less than or equal to a number threshold, the formation appointment information.
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is in the Notice of References Cited.
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Paul A. D’Agostino whose telephone number is (571) 270-1992.
14. 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.
15. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Lewis can be reached on (571) 272-7673. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-2992.
/PAUL A D'AGOSTINO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715