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 § 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, 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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mattice (US 2010/0093428) in view of Oguchi (US 2019/0130700).
Claim 1. Mattice discloses a table game management system, comprising:
a plurality of gaming chips each with an individually identifiable RFID attached thereto (chips 65 comprising RFID component with ID tag 66 in Fig 5c);
a game table for playing games using the plurality of gaming chips (25 in Fig. 5a, 1310 in Fig. 13A);
a chip placement area provided on the game table, wherein the chip placement area players to place betting chips as the plurality of gaming chips (“player space region” in Fig. 5a to track wagering tokens, paragraph 236 or chip placement area 1313 in Fig. 13a, paragraph 824-825, 854), and in which a dealer may pay out payout chips each with an individually identifiable RFID attached for a winning (chips comprising RFID component with ID tag 66 with token ID information, paragraphs 239-343) player from a chip tray (1311 in Fig. 13A);
a chip reader that collectively reads the RFID of each of the plurality of gaming chips placed in the chip placement area (RFID tag reader 24, in Fig. 5a; paragraphs 242, 254, 279, 824);
a controller that determines results of the reading by the chip reader (server, 1a-1b, 4, 5a, paragraphs 234, 280, 306);
a player identification system configured to identify a player playing a game at the gaming table using facial recognition technology or an ID card (paragraphs 86, 91-93);
and a storage device that stores ID information of the RFID of the gaming chip in association with ID information of an owner of the gaming chip (database, paragraphs 105, 121, 330, 337, 837, 1218),
wherein the chip reader reads the ID information of the RFID of the payout chip when the payout is made to the winning player of the plurality of players, and the controller is capable of (wagering token tracking system is operable to automatically identify and track token exchanged between the player and another entity/the dealer/house such as winnings; paragraphs 377, 452, 474):
obtaining the ID information of the owner of the gaming chip based on the ID information of the RFID of the gaming chip among the plurality of gaming chips (Each chip has an ID associated with ownership; paragraphs 15, 31, 111, 233-236, 402, 446), and
when a plurality of players place betting chips (Track game state including bet, paragraph 208; wager placement area to track wager/bets, paragraphs 824-825, 854. The system track a plurality of players; paragraphs 379 and exchange of wagering tokens between the player and another entity including dealer, house, other players/patrons; paragraphs 236, 474, 633 ), the plurality of players including the winning player and at least one other winning player (system track winnings of each player and therefore can have multiple winning players; paragraphs 452, 474):
detecting the ID information of the RFID of first betting chips, which are of the winning player specified by the player identification system among the plurality of players and which remain after the betting chips bet by the at least one other winning player and the payout chips paid out for the at least one other winning player have been transferred out of the chip placement area earlier, and the ID information of the RFID of the payout chip based on the reading results of the chip reader (Automatically determine the amount and value of wagering token award to each winning player due to a win; paragraph 377, 452, 474. Therefore, the system detects the remaining betting chip as a winning player and the amount due or payout chips paid to the player. The system tracks the game state and the payout to be made to the player; paragraphs 1212-1213), and
rewriting, in the storage device, the ID information of the owner associated with the ID information of the RFID of the payout chip to the ID information of the owner associated with the ID information of the RFID of the first betting chips bet by the winning player (Mattice discloses that the token is tracked by associating in a database, ID information of the chip and the owner. This includes when user/patron takes possession or control of the wagering chips; paragraphs 15, 31, 111, 233-236, 402, 446).
Mattice discloses the claimed invention but fails to teach that the chip placement area allows a plurality of players to place betting chips and a plurality of players place betting chips in the same chip placement area. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. Mattice discloses that patron's personal space boundaries may be automatically and dynamically updated to correspond to match the predefined gaming table "personal space" boundaries associated with that gaming table's particular configuration (paragraph 375). In an analogous art to gaming systems, Oguchi discloses a gaming system comprising a gaming table to play a game with gaming a plurality of gaming chips. Oguchi discloses a chip placement area or a chip reading unit to read the wagering chips (240 in Fig. 2; paragraphs 51-53). The chip placement area is divided into sectors to accommodate a plurality of users (paragraph 45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify Mattice’s gaming table and incorporate a single chip placement area that can be sectioned for different players since Mattice discloses that the system can accommodate different gaming configurations.
Claim 2. Mattice discloses the table game management system according to claim 1, wherein the storage device is a database that stores, for a plurality of gaming chips, the ID information of the gaming chips in association with the ID information of the owner of the gaming chips (Mattice discloses a database to track user and chips; paragraphs 105, 121, 330. The system tracks a plurality of chips; paragraph 377.).
Claim 3. Mattice discloses the table game management system according to claim 1, wherein the storage device is the RFID of the gaming chip (RFID storage includes information of owner and previous owners; pargaphrs 258-270).
Claim 5. Mattice discloses the table game management system according to claim 1, wherein a reading area of the chip reader covers the entire chip placement area (RFID reader can cover the entire table and therefore the entire chip placement area; paragraph 855, Fig. 13I.).
Claim 6. Mattice discloses the table game management system according to claim 1, further comprising: a camera that captures the game table to generate images (camera for facial and recognizing behavior, paragraphs 86, 310, 1213-1214); and an image analyzer that recognizes the gaming chips and a dealer hand or a player hand on the game table by analyzing the images, wherein the controller recognizes a movement of the gaming chips and/or the dealer hand or the player hand based on recognition results of the image analyzer (chips held in player’s hand, or placed; paragraphs 351, 376, 450, 503).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mattice (US 2010/0093428 in view of Oguchi (US 2019/0130700) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Nguyen (US 2007/0094721).
Claim 4. Mattice discloses the claimed invention as discussed above but fails to teach that the controller further determines that there is fraud in the case that a combination of the information of the player identified by the player identification system and the ID information of the gaming chip placed in the chip placement area by the player does not match a combination of the stored ID information of the gaming chip and the ID information of the owner associated with the stored ID information of the gaming chip. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art. In an analogous art to tracking gaming tokens, Nguyen discloses a system of tracking and authenticating gaming tokens. Nguyen discloses the token comprise authentication data that uniquely identifies person (paragraphs 12, 26-27). The authentication data may be stored in memory included in a token or a server (paragraphs 26). The authentication data is compared with the authentication data obtained from a person at a gaming device or gaming table when the token is in use (paragraphs 9, 13, 42, 59, 69, 96, ). The authentication data can be a player card or biometric data including facial recognition (paragraphs 29, 66, 83, 102). Nguyen also discloses that the system tracks in the database when the ownership of each token is changed (paragraph 58). The system tracks the activity and use of the token, store/log any discrepancies between the information so that token may be investigated, and prevent unauthorized gambling (paragraphs 111, 125, 141). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to before the effective filing date to modify Mattice’s system and determine that there is fraud in the case that a combination of the information of the player identified by the player identification system and the ID information of the gaming chip placed in the chip placement area by the player does not match a combination of the stored ID information of the gaming chip and the ID information of the owner associated with the stored ID information of the gaming chip in order to provide the predictable result of authenticating the user and the token and prevent unauthorized gambling.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
New grounds of rejection has been made with the prior cited reference Mattice and newly cited reference Oguchi to address the amended limitations.
Conclusion
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 Jasson H Yoo whose telephone number is (571)272-5563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Peter Vasat can be reached at 571 270-7625. 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.
/JASSON H YOO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights