DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 9,875,617; 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,297,112; 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,984,631; and 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,657,678. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims are very similar to the parent application claims, but they are slightly broader and have minor rewording.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Carlson (US patent 6,428,413)
Carlson shows,
In regards to claims 1 and 11,
A method for playing a plurality of different games at a player interface unit (Claim 20, “A method for playing a plurality of different games at a plurality of player interface units”) comprising the steps of:
Receiving, via a communication network at an electronic gaming engine, a player record of information from the player interface unit when a player playing a selected one of the plurality of different games initiates a game event; (Claim 20, “receiving, over the network and in the gaming engine, a player record of information from one of the plurality of player interface units when a player playing a selected one of the plurality of different games initiates a game event”)
storing the received player record of information in a queue in a memory controlled by the gaming engine (728), the memory storing a plurality of player records received from a plurality of player interface units (102) over the communication network:
determining game rules, retrieved from the memory, for the selected one game corresponding to the delivered player record of information; (Claim 20, “retrieving the game rules for the selected one game corresponding to the delivered player record of information of the initiated game event”)
generating a first set of random numbers for use in a first subset of the plurality of different games using a first random number generating algorithm; generating a second set of random numbers for use in a second subset of the plurality of different games using a second random number generating algorithm; (Claim 20, “providing a series of uniformly distributed pseudo-random numbers, transforming a set from the series of the uniformly distributed pseudo-random number into at least one non-uniform distribution when required in the determined game rules by the gaming engine, transforming a set from the series of the uniformly distributed pseudo-random number into at least one combinational subset when required in the determined game rules by the gaming engine, obtaining random numbers from the provided uniformly distributed pseudo-random numbers” Transforming is considered to be generating. (column 8, lines 12-15, “By integrating verification algorithms 202 in a random number circuit 104, gaming engine 100 in accordance with the present invention ensures that all of the pseudo-random numbers in buffer 203 are in fact statistically random.” The plurality of different games in the first subset could be the drawing of 1000 numbers, column 7, line 63, or Keno selecting a random 20 from a group of 80, column 8, lines 59-60. The plurality of different games in the second subset could be card games with random numbers scaled to range from 1-52, column 8, lines 63-64.)
determining that the selected one game is one of the first subset of the plurality of different games; (from the rules library 108)
obtaining random numbers from the first set of generated random numbers when required by the determined game rules; (Figure 6, steps 612 to 618)
verifying that the random numbers are statistically random; (718)
delivering to the player interface unit game play results from the gaming engine in response to the determined game rules and obtained random numbers; (Claim 20, “delivering, over the network and to the one player interface unit, game play results from the gaming engine in response to the retrieved game rules, obtained random numbers, at least one combinational subset and at least one non-uniform distribution”) and
implementing the game play results in the player interface unit so as to respond to the player initiated game event for the selected one game. (Claim 20, “implementing the game play results in the one player interface unit so as to respond to the player initiated game event for the selected one game.”)
In regards to claims 2 and 12,
further comprising authenticating the player record of information using a security
verification module of the gaming engine prior to processing the player record. (RN circuit along with 718)
In regards to claims 3 and 13,
wherein the verification is performed prior to delivering the game play results. (720 then 722)
In regards to claims 4-7, 10, 14-17 and 20,
in which the first subset of the plurality of different games includes card games (including a range of 1 to 52), poker games, and slot machine games of the plurality of different games. (column 1, lines 39-63, many games disclosed. Column 8, lines 61-65, is specific to the 1 to 52 range.)
In regards to claims 8 and 18,
in which each number in the first set of random numbers are generated to fall within a first range and in which each number in the second set of random numbers is generated to fall within a second range, in which the first range is different from the second range. (column 1, lines 39-49, “Typical games consist of deterministic and non-deterministic rules. A game progresses by the interaction of these rules. There are two sources for non-determinism: player decisions and chance events. In the game of Poker, for example, deciding to replace three instead of two cards in a hand is a player decision that is limited, but not predetermined, by rules. The rules limit the range of options the player has, but within that set of options the player is free to choose. An example of a chance event is the random set of cards received by the poker player.”)
In regards to claims 9 and 19,
generating the set of random comprises: generating a plurality of random bits; determining a quantity, in which the quantity represents a quantity of bits required
by the game rules; and obtaining from the plurality of random bits the quantity of bits, wherein the quantity of bits map to a random number. (column 6, line 66 to column 7, line 12, “Random number generator circuit 201 accepts as input one or more key values which are typically binary values having a fixed relatively large number of bits. For example, the ANSI X9.17 pseudo-random number generator uses 56-bit keys. Random generator circuit 201 also usually accepts a seed value, which is also another large bit binary value. Further, random number generator circuit 201 has a data input or clock input that accepts a continuously variable signal which is conveniently a clock representing date and time. In this manner, each time the signal on the clock or data input changes a new random number is output on line 206. Random number control circuit stores and provides the key values, seed value, and clock values to random number generator circuit 201.”)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/1/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive in regards to art.
In regards to double patenting, the examiner has reviewed the rejection in view of the new claims and the rejection is maintained.
In regards to 35 USC 101, the claim language has incorporated features showing an improvement to the functioning of the computer environment and, per the current guidelines, Step 2A, Prong Two would be YES. Per Pathway B, the claim would qualify as eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
In regards to art, applicant asserts, “Carlson does not disclose or mention a queue structure for storing player records from a plurality of player interface units for prioritized processing. Further, Carlson fails to teach any verification process to provide security across network.” The examiner does not concur. See the flow chart in figure 7 and the current rejection addresses the new limitations.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MICHAEL A CUFF whose telephone number is (571)272-6778. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9-5.
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, Xuan Thai can be reached on 571 272-7147. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL A CUFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights