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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of copending Application No. 18/747,028 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-9 are anticipated by claims 1 and 6-13 of copending Application No. 18/747,028, while claims 10-16 are rendered obvious by claims 2-5 and 14-16 of copending Application No. 18/747,028, as shown in the Table below.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
App. No. 18/745,524
App. No. 18/747,028
Claim 1: A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein a game program executed by a processor of a game apparatus for executing a process of generating a game stage including a player object controllable to move on the basis of an operation by a player and another player object controlled to move on the basis of information received from another game apparatus connected via a network, the game program causing the processor to:
Claim 1: A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein a game program executed by a processor of a game apparatus for executing a process of generating a game stage including a player object controllable to move on the basis of an operation by a player and another player object controlled to move on the basis of information received from another game apparatus connected via a network, the game program causing the processor to:
determine whether or not any revival assistance object including the other player object exists within a predetermined range from the player object, when a mistake occurs in a predetermined game stage;
(Claim 6: The storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the game program further causes the processor to: determine whether or not the revival assistance object exists within a predetermined range from the player object, when a mistake occurs in the predetermined game stage […].)
shift the player object to a special state where the player object does not become damaged in the game stage, if it is determined that the revival assistance object exists within the predetermined range from the player object;
(Claim 6: […] shift the player object to the special state where the player object does not become damaged in the game stage, if it is determined that the revival assistance object exists within the predetermined range from the player object.)
return the player object from the special state to a normal state where the player object can become damaged in the game stage, without terminating play of the game stage, if the player object comes into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state; and
return the player object from the special state to a normal state where the player object can become damaged in the game stage, without terminating play of the game stage, if the player object comes into contact with any revival assistance object including the other player object and a placement object placed in the game stage by the other player object, while the player object is in the special state; and
terminate the play of the game stage if it is determined that the revival assistance object does not exist within the predetermined range from the player object or if a predetermined condition is satisfied without the player object coming into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state.
terminate the play of the game stage if the player object has not come into contact with any revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state.
Claim 2: The storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the player object is operable while being in the special state, a state where the player object is in the special state continues for a predetermined time, and the play of the game stage is terminated if the player object has not come into contact with the revival assistance object within the predetermined time after the player object is shifted to the special state.
Claim 7: The storage medium according to claim 6, wherein the player object is operable while being in the special state, a state where the player object is in the special state continues for a predetermined time, and the play of the game stage is terminated if the player object has not come into contact with the revival assistance object within the predetermined time after the player object is shifted to the special state.
Claim 3: The storage medium according to claim 2, wherein, when the shift to the special state occurs in the same game stage a plurality of times, the predetermined time is gradually shortened as the number of times of the shift to the special state increases.
Claim 8: The storage medium according to claim 7, wherein, when the shift to the special state occurs in the same game stage a plurality of times, the predetermined time is gradually shortened as the number of times of the shift to the special state increases.
Claim 4: The storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the game program further causes the processor to cause a ghost character to appear in the game stage, the ghost character acting on the basis of replay data for replaying a play content of another player, and the revival assistance object includes the ghost character related to the other player in addition to the other player object.
Claim 9: The storage medium according to claim 6, wherein the game program further causes the processor to cause a ghost character to appear in the game stage, the ghost character acting on the basis of replay data for replaying a play content of another player, and the revival assistance object includes the ghost character related to the other player in addition to the other player object.
Claim 5: The storage medium according to claim 4, wherein the game program further causes the processor to: record an action content of the player object in a predetermined period as the replay data and transmit the replay data to a predetermined server at a predetermined timing; acquire the replay data transmitted by another player, from the predetermined server at a predetermined timing after the play of the game stage by the player is started; and cause the ghost character to act on the basis of the replay data acquired from the predetermined server.
Claim 10: The storage medium according to claim 9, wherein the game program further causes the processor to: record an action content of the player object in a predetermined period as the replay data and transmit the replay data to a predetermined server at a predetermined timing; acquire the replay data transmitted by another player, from the predetermined server at a predetermined timing after the play of the game stage by the player is started; and cause the ghost character to act on the basis of the replay data acquired from the predetermined server.
Claim 6: The storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the other player object does not affect the player object in the normal state.
Claim 11: The storage medium according to claim 6, wherein the other player object does not affect the player object in the normal state.
Claim 7: The storage medium according to claim 6, wherein the other player object is displayed in a semi-transparent manner when the player object is in the normal state, and is displayed in an opaque manner when the player object is in the special state.
Claim 12: The storage medium according to claim 11, wherein the other player object is displayed in a semi-transparent manner when the player object is in the normal state, and is displayed in an opaque manner when the player object is in the special state.
Claim 8: The storage medium according to claim 7, wherein, when the player object is in the special state, a game screen is displayed such that a saturation of the game stage is decreased except for the revival assistance object.
Claim 13: The storage medium according to claim 12, wherein, when the player object is in the special state, a game screen is displayed such that a saturation of the game stage is decreased except for the revival assistance object.
Claim 9: The storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the game program further causes the processor to: cause the player object to place a placement object at a predetermined position in the game stage, on the basis of a predetermined operation; and return the player object from the special state to the normal state if the player object in the special state comes into contact with the placement object placed by the other player object.
Claim 1: […] return the player object from the special state to a normal state where the player object can become damaged in the game stage, without terminating play of the game stage, if the player object comes into contact with any revival assistance object including the other player object and a placement object placed in the game stage by the other player object, while the player object is in the special state […].
Claim 10: The storage medium according to claim 9, wherein the player object is not returned to the normal state if the player object in the special state comes into contact with the placement object placed by the player object.
Claim 2: The storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the player object is not returned to the normal state if the player object in the special state comes into contact with the placement object placed by the player object.
Claim 11: The storage medium according to claim 9, wherein the game program further causes the processor to: transmit placement information including at least position information of the placement object, to the predetermined server when the player object places the placement object; and place the placement object based on the placement information stored in the predetermined server, in the game stage, and the revival assistance object includes the placement object placed on the basis of the placement information stored in the predetermined server.
Claim 3: The storage medium according to claim 1, wherein the game program further causes the processor to: transmit placement information including at least position information of the placement object, to the predetermined server when the player object places the placement object; and place the placement object based on the placement information stored in the predetermined server, in the game stage, and the revival assistance object includes the placement object placed on the basis of the placement information stored in the predetermined server.
Claim 12: The storage medium according to claim 11, wherein the placement object placed on the basis of the placement information stored in the predetermined server does not function as the revival assistance object when placed, and a function of the placement object as the revival assistance object is activated when the player object comes into contact with the placement object.
Claim 4: The storage medium according to claim 3, wherein the placement object placed on the basis of the placement information stored in the predetermined server does not function as the revival assistance object when placed, and a function of the placement object as the revival assistance object is activated when the player object comes into contact with the placement object.
Claim 13: The storage medium according to claim 11, wherein, at a predetermined timing, when no placement object exists in the game stage, the placement object based on the placement information stored in the predetermined server is placed in the game stage.
Claim 5: The storage medium according to claim 3, wherein, at a predetermined timing, when no placement object exists in the game stage, the placement object based on the placement information stored in the predetermined server is placed in the game stage.
Claim 14: The storage medium according to claim 1, wherein, when the player object is returned to the normal state, the player object in the normal state is placed at a position where the mistake does not occur immediately after the player object is returned to the normal state.
Claim 14: The storage medium according to claim 1, wherein, when the player object is returned to the normal state, the player object in the normal state is placed at a position where the mistake does not occur immediately after the player object is returned to the normal state.
Claim 15: A game system for executing a process of generating a game stage including a player object controllable to move on the basis of an operation by a player and another player object controlled to move on the basis of information received from another game apparatus connected via a network, the game system comprising a processor and a memory coupled thereto, the processor being configured to control a processing system to at least:
Claim 15: A game system for executing a process of generating a game stage including a player object controllable to move on the basis of an operation by a player and another player object controlled to move on the basis of information received from another game apparatus connected via a network, the game system comprising a processor and a memory coupled thereto, the processor being configured to control a processing system to at least:
determine whether or not any revival assistance object including the other player object exists within a predetermined range from the player object, when a mistake occurs in a predetermined game stage;
shift the player object to a special state where the player object does not become damaged in the game stage, if it is determined that the revival assistance object exists within the predetermined range from the player object;
when a mistake occurs in a predetermined game stage, shift the player object to a special state where the player object does not become damaged in the game stage;
return the player object from the special state to a normal state where the player object can become damaged in the game stage, without terminating play of the game stage, if the player object comes into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state; and
return the player object from the special state to a normal state where the player object can become damaged in the game stage, without terminating play of the game stage, if the player object comes into contact with any revival assistance object including the other player object and a placement object placed in the game stage by the other player object, while the player object is in the special state; and
terminate the play of the game stage if it is determined that the revival assistance object does not exist within the predetermined range from the player object or if a predetermined condition is satisfied without the player object coming into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state.
terminate the play of the game stage if a predetermined condition is satisfied without the player object coming into contact with any revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state.
Claim 16: A game processing method causing a processor of a game system, for executing a process of generating a game stage including a player object controllable to move on the basis of an operation by a player and another player object controlled to move on the basis of information received from another game apparatus connected via a network, to:
Claim 16: A game processing method executed by a processor of a game system for executing a process of generating a game stage including a player object controllable to move on the basis of an operation by a player and another player object controlled to move on the basis of information received from another game apparatus connected via a network, the game program causing the processor to:
determine whether or not any revival assistance object including the other player object exists within a predetermined range from the player object, when a mistake occurs in a predetermined game stage;
shift the player object to a special state where the player object does not become damaged in the game stage, if it is determined that the revival assistance object exists within the predetermined range from the player object;
when a mistake occurs in a predetermined game stage, shift the player object to a special state where the player object does not become damaged in the game stage;
return the player object from the special state to a normal state where the player object can become damaged in the game stage, without terminating play of the game stage, if the player object comes into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state; and
return the player object from the special state to a normal state where the player object can become damaged in the game stage, without terminating play of the game stage, if the player object comes into contact with any revival assistance object including the other player object and a placement object placed in the game stage by the other player object, while the player object is in the special state; and
terminate the play of the game stage if it is determined that the revival assistance object does not exist within the predetermined range from the player object or if a predetermined condition is satisfied without the player object coming into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state.
terminate the play of the game stage if a predetermined condition is satisfied without the player object coming into contact with any revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state.
The italicized limitations in the Table above highlight the distinctions between claims 1-16 of the present application and claims 1-16 of copending Application No. 18/747,028. As indicated above, claim 1 of the present application is anticipated by claim 6 of copending Application No. 18/747,028. It is noted that while claim 1 of the present application recites where the play of the game stage may be terminated if it is determined that the revival assistance object does not exist within the predetermined range from the player object, the play of the game stage may alternatively be terminated if a predetermined condition is satisfied without the player object coming into contact with the revival assistance object while the player is in the special state, which is likewise claimed in claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/747,028. Moreover, while claim 1 of the present application is broader than claim 6 of copending Application No. 18/747,028, as claim 1 recites wherein the revival assistance object includes the other player object, while claim 6 of the copending application recites any revival assistance object including the other player object and a placement object placed in the game stage by the other player object, the broader claim of the instant application is anticipated by claim 6 of the copending application.
Independent claims 15-16 of the instant application are obvious in view of claims 15-16 of copending Application No. 18/747,028. While claims 15-16 of the copending application fail to recite the limitation “determine whether or not any revival assistance object including the other player object exists within a predetermined range from the player object, when a mistake occurs in a predetermined game stage”, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to first determine if any revival assistance object exists within a predetermined range from the player object, as the claims thereafter recite shifting the state of the player object when the player object comes into contact with any revival assistance object, whereby in order to come into contact with a revival assistance object, the revival assistance object must be within a predetermined range from the player object (see further Specification, [0015-0016]). Further, as noted above, while claims 15-16 of the instant application recite wherein the play of the game stage may be terminated if it is determined that the revival assistance object does not exist within the predetermined range from the player object, the play of the game stage may alternatively be terminated if a predetermined condition is satisfied without the player object coming into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state, as similarly claimed in claims 15-16 of the copending application.
Claims 10-14 of the instant application are likewise rendered obvious in view of claims 2-5 and 14 of copending Application No. 18/747,028. While claims 2-5 and 14 of the copending application are dependent on claim 1 of the copending application, claim 1 of the instant application is obvious in light of claim 1 of the copending application for the reasons presented above with respect to claims 15-16.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: “Non-Transitory Computer-Readable Storage Medium Having Game Program Stored Therein, Game System, and Game Processing Method for Reviving a Player Object or Terminating Play”.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 11, and 15-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“player object, when a” recited in claim 1, ln. 7, claim 15, ln. 7, and claim 16, ln. 6 should likely read “player object[[,]] when a”;
“in the game stage, if it is determined” recited in claim 1, ln. 10, claim 15, ln. 10, and claim 16, ln. 9 should likely read “in the game stage[[,]] if it is determined”;
“a state where the player object is in the special state continues for a predetermined time” recited in claim 2, ln. 3-4 should likely read “in the player object is in the special state
“placement object, to the” recited in claim 11, ln. 4 should likely read “placement object[[,]] to the”; and
“predetermined server, in the” recited in claim 11, ln. 7 should likely read “predetermined server[[,]] in the”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites in part “when a mistake occurs in a predetermined game stage”. It is indefinite as to what a “predetermined game stage” comprises, and the Specification does not offer further guidance. For example, is the recited limitation intended to mean that a mistake can only occur at a specific/predetermined game stage, as opposed to any time during the play of the game stage?
Claims 15-16 are rejected for the same reasoning.
All dependent claims are rejected by virtue of their dependencies on claim 1.
Claim 9 recites in part “the placement object placed by the other player object” in ln. 6-7. This limitation lacks sufficient antecedent basis in the claim (see claim 9, ln. 3, “cause the player object to place a placement object” (emphasis added)).
Claims 10-13 are rejected by virtue of their dependencies on claim 9.
Claim 11 recites in part “the predetermined server” in ln. 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 12-13 are rejected by virtue of their dependencies on claim 11.
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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract ideas without significantly more.
Regarding claim 1, analyzed as representative claim:
[Step 1] Claim 1 recites in part “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium”, which falls within the “manufacture” statutory category of invention.
[Step 2A – Prong 1] The claim recites a series of steps which can be practically performed by one or more humans through mental process (i.e., observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion) (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) and certain methods of organizing human activity (i.e., 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)).
Claim 1 recites: A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein a game program executed by a processor of a game apparatus for executing a process of generating a game stage including a player object controllable to move on the basis of an operation by a player and another player object controlled to move on the basis of information received from another game apparatus connected via a network, the game program causing the processor to (generic computing components: non-transitory computer-readable medium, processor, game apparatus, network):
determine whether or not any revival assistance object including the other player object exists within a predetermined range from the player object, when a mistake occurs in a predetermined game stage (mental process: observation/evaluation);
shift the player object to a special state where the player object does not become damaged in the game stage, if it is determined that the revival assistance object exists within the predetermined range from the player object (human activity: following rules or instructions);
return the player object from the special state to a normal state where the player object can become damaged in the game stage, without terminating play of the game stage, if the player object comes into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state (human activity: following rules or instructions);; and
terminate the play of the game stage if it is determined that the revival assistance object does not exist within the predetermined range from the player object or if a predetermined condition is satisfied without the player object coming into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state (human activity: following rules or instructions).
The limitations, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, encompass a mental process and methods of organizing human activity, specifically managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people – including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions, as noted above, but for the recitation of generic computing components. That is, a human can mentally (i.e., visually) observe whether a revival assistance object exists within a predetermined range from a player object when a mistake occurs in a game. Further, the limitations of shifting the player object to a special state if it is determined that the revival assistance object exists within the predetermined range, returning the player object from the special state to a normal state if the player object comes into contact with the revival assistance object while in the special state, and terminating the play of the if a specific condition occurs (e.g., the revival assistance object is determined to not exist within the predetermined range or the player does not come into contact with the revival assistance object (i.e., within a specific period of time)) encompass rules for playing a game/modifying game play, and interactions between people (players), which fall within the abstract idea of certain methods of organizing human activity (managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people – including following rules or instructions) (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C)). Accordingly, the claims encompasses abstract ideas.
[Step 2A – Prong 2] The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the additional elements, indicated above, do not integrate the abstract ideas into a practical application because the additional elements amount to no more than the use of generic computer components to perform the abstract ideas and/or generally link the abstract ideas to a particular technological environment (i.e., computing environment) (See MPEP 2106.05(f) & (h)). The additional elements are recited at a high level of generality such that they do not amount to a particular machine or technical improvement thereof.
There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or other technology (see MPEP 2106.05(a)), recites a “particular machine” to apply or use the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(b)), recites a particular transformation of an article to a different thing or state (see MPEP 2106.05(c)), or recites any other meaningful limitation (see MPEP 2106.05(e)).
Accordingly, the claim is directed to the judicial exception.
[Step 2B] As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract ideas into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than the use of generic computer components on which to implement the abstract ideas, and/or to generally link the abstract ideas to a particular technological environment. The generic computer structures serve to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities, as evidenced by the Specification (Figs. 1-3; [0034-0037], wherein the network is the Internet, the game apparatus is a smartphone, stationary or hand-held game apparatus, tablet terminal, mobile phone, personal computer, wearable terminal, or the like, the processor may be composed only of a CPU, or may be composed of a SoC, and the storage medium may be flash memory and a dynamic random access memory (DRAM)). Viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract ideas into a patent eligible application of the abstract ideas such that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Independent claims 15-16 recite a game system and game processing method for performing the limitations of claim 1 discussed above. Accordingly, claims 15-16 are likewise not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-14 recite additional subject matter which further narrow or define the abstract ideas embodied in the representative claim. While the dependent claims may have a narrower scope than claim 1, no claim contains “significantly more” to transform the corresponding claim into a patent-eligible application of the otherwise ineligible abstract ideas. Therefore, claims 2-14 are also not patent eligible.
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)(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.
Claims 1-2, 6, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koike (JP2018202084A).
Regarding claim 1, Koike discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein a game program executed by a processor of a game apparatus for executing a process of generating a game stage including a player object controllable to move on the basis of an operation by a player and another player controllable to move on the basis of information received from another game apparatus connected via a network (Fig. 4; [0011-0013]; [0035-0038]), the game program causing the processor to:
determine whether or not any revival assistance object including the other player object exists within a predetermined range from the player object, when a mistake occurs in the predetermined game stage ([0169]; [0176]; [0182-0183]; [0189], wherein when a player character gets damaged and their HP becomes zero, it is determined whether or not another player is in the vicinity of the damaged player and a corresponding revival icon is determined and displayed);
shift the player object to a special state where the player object does not become damaged in the game stage if it is determined that the revival assistance object exists within the predetermined range from the player object ([0169]; [0176]; [0181]; [0183-0185], wherein if the restoration icon exists and has been operated, damage (a decrease of the HP of the player in the suspended death state) stops accruing while in a suspended death state, wherein the restoration icon may only exist and be operated by another player based on a distance of the another player from the player in the suspended death state);
return the player object from the special state to a normal state where the player object can become damaged in the game stage, without terminating play of the game stage, if the player object comes into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state ([0169]; [0176]; [0182-0183]; [0185], wherein the player character in the suspended death state returns to the normal state (e.g., the initial value for HP is restored)); and
terminate the play of the game stage if it is determined that the revival assistance object does not exist within the predetermined range from the player object or if a predetermined condition is satisfied without the player object coming into contact with the revival assistance object while the player object is in the special state ([0181]; [0183-0184], wherein the player character transitions from the suspended death state to a dead state after a predetermined period of time/when HP becomes zero).
Regarding claim 2, Koike further discloses wherein the player object is operable while being in the special state ([0170], wherein the player character in the suspended death state can move), a state where the player object is in the special state continues for a predetermined time, and the play of the game stage is terminated if the player object has not come into contact with the revival assistance object within the predetermined time after the player object is shifted to the special state ([0169]; [0176]; [0181-0184], wherein the player character is in the suspended death state for a predetermined time (until HP has become “0”), and wherein the player character transitions to the dead state, terminating the play, if the player character has not come into contact with another player who operates the restoration icon).
Regarding claim 6, Koike further discloses wherein the other player object does not affect the player object in the normal state ([0013]; [0033]; [0052]; [0169], e.g., wherein the play is a battle between a boss NPC and the player character).
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is a game system of claim 1 and is thereby rejected for the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is a game processing method of claim 1 and is thereby rejected for the same reasoning.
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.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koike in view of Apex Legends as evidenced by “Health”, Apex Legends Wiki, 3 pages (Nov. 18, 2022) (hereinafter “Apex”).
Regarding claim 3, Koike further discloses wherein the number of times the player character can be revived from the suspended death state may be limited in one battle play (e.g., three times) ([0200]). However, Koike may not further disclose wherein, when the shift to the special state occurs in the same game stage a plurality of times, the predetermined time is gradually shortened as the number of times of the shift to the special state increases. Nevertheless, Apex teaches wherein the revival time decreases as the number of times the player is downed (special state) increases (p. 2, wherein the first time a Legend (player) gets downed in a match, they will have 90 seconds to be revived, the second time they will have 60 seconds, the third 30 seconds, and every subsequent time 15 seconds). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to decrease the possible time for revival (predetermined time of the special state) as the number of player downs increases, as taught by Legends, in Koike as an alternative technique to increase difficulty of the game.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koike in view of Ogasawara et al. (JP2017209381A) (hereinafter “Ogasawara”).
Regarding claim 7, Koike may not further explicitly disclose wherein the other player object is displayed in a semi-transparent manner when the player object is in the normal state, and is displayed in an opaque manner when the player is in the special state. However, Ogasawara, directed to a battle game (Fig. 7; [0002]), teaches wherein other player objects are displayed in a semi-transparent manner, and where a change in an operation state of a player character causes a change in the display of the other player objects (Fig. 7; [0068-0072]; [0077], wherein the other player characters are displayed in a semi-transparent manner to be easily recognized from the player character (player A), and where, in accordance with the change in an operation state of the player character, the display manner of the other player characters (ghost objects) is changed). While Ogasawara may not explicitly disclose wherein the change to the other player objects (ghost objects) comprises displaying the objects in an opaque manner, it would have been an obvious change as a matter of design choice (Ogasawara, [0072], noting, for example, where the player objects could also be presented in a gray manner). The Specification does not disclose an advantage, particular purpose, or solution to a problem for displaying the other player object in an opaque manner when the player object is in the special state. Moreover, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display other player objects in a semi-transparent manner when the player is in the normal state and in an opaque manner when the player object is in the special state, as taught by Ogasawara, in Koike in order to provide for easy recognition between players.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koike in view of Ogasawara, as applied to claim 7, and in further view of “Always Use Touchstones in Don’t Starve Together – How To use Touchstones in Don’t Starve Together”, 2 pages, uploaded on May 17, 2023 by user “AllFunNGamez” (hereinafter “Don’t Starve”).
Regarding claim 8, Koike discloses wherein the revival/restoration icon is displayed in the vicinity of the player character in the suspended death state ([0183]). However, Koike may not further explicitly disclose wherein, when the player object is in the special state, a game screen is displayed such that a saturation of the game stage is decreased except for the revival assistance object. Nevertheless, Don’t Starve teaches this limitation (0:55-1:03, wherein once dead (i.e., special state), the game screen darkens and the touchstones, used for revival, glow). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the saturation of the game screen while emphasizing the revival assistance object when the player is in the special state, as taught by Don’t Starve, in Koike in order to adjust the gaming experience based on the in-game events (e.g., dull/dark screen when dead, with an emphasis on a needed icon for revival).
Claims 9 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koike in view of Apex Legends as evidenced by “Apex Legends Lifeline Gameplay – Tactical Ability D.O.C. Heal Drone”, 4 pages, uploaded on Feb. 11, 2019 by user “TheGamerStep” (hereinafter “Legends”).
Regarding claim 9, Koike may not further explicitly disclose wherein the game program further causes the processor to: cause the player object to place a placement object at a predetermined position in the game stage, on the basis of a predetermined operation; and return the player object from the special state to the normal state if the player object in the special state comes into contact with the placement object placed by the other player object. However, Legends teaches these limitations (pp. 1-4, wherein another player may place an object (D.O.C. Heal Drone) at a position, and where the object is configured to heal allies within a predetermined range). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize an object placed by another player as a healing/revival assistance object, as taught by Legends, in the invention of Koike to provide an alternative method for healing/revival of the player object to the normal (i.e., healthy) state.
Regarding claim 11, Koike may not further disclose, however, Legends further teaches wherein the game program further causes the processor to: transmit placement information including at least position information of the placement object to the predetermined server when the player object places the placement object; and place the placement object based on the placement information stored in the predetermined server in the game stage, and the revival assistance object includes the placement object placed on the basis of the placement information stored in the predetermined server (pp. 1-4, wherein the object (D.O.C. Heal Drone) is placed at a position and the object and its corresponding position is received by other players in the game). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transmit placement information of the object to another player through display in the game, as taught by Legends, in the invention of Koike to notify the player object of the object for healing/assistance in the game.
Regarding claim 12, Koike may not further disclose, however, Legends further teaches wherein the placement object placed on the basis of the placement information stored in the predetermined server does not function as the revival assistance object when placed, and a function of the placement object as the revival assistance object is activated when the player object comes into contact with the placement object (pp. 1-4, wherein the object is only configured to heal allies within a predetermined range). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the object placed by another player as a healing/revival assistance object when the player object is nearby/comes into contact with the object, as taught by Legends, in the invention of Koike to provide an alternative method for healing/revival of the player object to the normal (i.e., healthy) state.
Regarding claim 13, Koike may not further disclose, however, Legends further teaches wherein, at a predetermined timing, when no placement object exists in the game stage, the placement object based on the placement information stored in the predetermined server is placed in the game stage (pp. 1-4, wherein the object (D.O.C. Heal Drone) is placed at a position and the object and its corresponding position is received by other players in the game). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transmit placement information of the object to another player through display in the game, as taught by Legends, in the invention of Koike to notify the player object of the object for healing/assistance in the game.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koike in view of Apex Legends as evidenced by Legends, as applied to claim 9, and further evidenced by “Meet Lifeline – Apex Legends Character Trailer”, 2 pages, uploaded on Feb. 4, 2019 by user “Apex Legends” (hereinafter “Lifeline”).
Regarding claim 10, Koike may not further explicitly disclose, however, Lifeline teaches wherein the player object is not returned to the normal state if the player object in the special state comes into contact with the placement object placed by the player object (pp. 1-2, where the D.O.C. heal drone can be assigned to another player who is not the player object themselves). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide for the player object to be assigned to and heal another player, and not the player themselves, as taught by Lifeline, in order to promote teamwork and/or increase difficulty of the game.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koike.
Regarding claim 14, Koike may not further disclose wherein, when the player object is returned to the normal state, the player object in the normal state is placed at a position where the mistake does not occur immediately after the player object is returned to the normal state. However, Koike discloses when the player character transitions from the death state, as opposed to the suspended death state/special state, to the normal state, the player character restarts from the start room ([0177]; [0181]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the player character in the start room following a revival (shift from suspended death state to normal state), as is done following a respawn (shift from death state to normal state), wherein in both instances, the player character’s initial HP is restored ([0020]; [0169]; [0181]; [0185]), in order to achieve the claimed invention and/or provide safety to the newly-revived player.
Acknowledgments
No prior art is provided for claims 4-5. As presented, the combination of all the elements of claims 4-5 do not appear in a single reference of prior art. Additionally, based on the art of record, it does not appear that it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to combine various pieces of the cited prior art to obtain each and every limitation as currently required by the claims. While U.S. Pub. 2009/0093313 A1 (“Yabuki”) teaches a ghost character acting on the basis of replay data for replaying a play content of another player, the cited prior art, including Yabuki, fails to disclose or teach wherein the revival assistance object includes the ghost character related to the other player in addition to the other player object, as required by claim 4.
However, claims 4-5 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 35 U.S.C. 101, as well as provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting, as presented above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA N BRANDLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Dmitry Suhol, can be reached at (571)272-4430. 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.
/ALYSSA N BRANDLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights