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 .
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franchi (CA 2197448) in view of Demarest et al. (US patent 5,413,353), A. D. Rogers et al. (US patent 1,503,852), and Fong et al. (US patent 11,869,308).
Franchi shows all of the limitations of the claims except for specifying
a collection box verification system, both mounted on a frame,
a chip validation housing made from sheet metal, plastic or composite materials;
reporting the time and denomination of the deposit to a casino server via an ethernet, intranet, mesh network or hard wired communication system
Franchi shows,
a chip validation assembly having a coin chute to project up through an opening in a gaming table (Page 24, lines 21-24, to page 25, lines 1-4, figure 11,
“To count the betting chips after the pile has been won, a chute is provided to each individual player with a sensor for reading the value of the chips passing through the chute to the individual player's recessed tray 1102. Smart betting chips 1800 are used in the preferred embodiment, wherein the IC chip 1801 within the smart betting chips 1800 transmits identity and value information to the sensor as the smart betting chips 1800 slide past the scanner in the chute. Thus, when a player wins the pot, the chips in the pot are distributed to the player through a chute. The chute contains a sensor that counts the value of the chips distributed to the player.” The sensor and smart betting chips are considered to be a means for identifying the denomination of chips, coins or tokens deposited through the coin chute.)
Demarest et al. teaches “Chips, tokens or coins that make up the rake are pulled by the dealer from the pot and placed in an obvious manner in the rake area 18. At the completion of a game the rake is placed by the dealer into a drop slot 20. The drop slot 20 communicates with a drop box (not shown) mounted to the underside of the gaming table which collects the rake for the house.”
Note that the gaming tables in both Franchi and Demarest et al. are considered to be frames.
Based on the teaching of Demarest et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Franchi system to incorporate a “rake” chute with a drop box or a collection box in order to improve security and information on the “rake” income.
A. D. Rogers et al. teaches, page 3, left column, lines 45-47, “the casing or housing 1, preferably of sheet metal and in which is enclosed the operating mechanism”
Based on the teaching of A. D. Rogers et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Franchi system to incorporate the old and well-known use of sheet metal to make the chip validation housing in order to construct a sturdy mechanism.
Fong et al. teaches,
Column 7, lines 3-8, “the number of each denomination of chip and the total value of the chips, including information regarding the output of the chip reader 38 and any modifications thereto by the cashier in reconciling the chip read with the provided chips; date/time of transaction; location of the transaction, and cashier ID”
Column 5, lines 14-15, “Internet 50 and/or other communication networks (wireless and/or wired, LANs, WANs, etc.)”
Based on the teaching of Fong et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Franchi system to incorporate the reporting the time and denomination of the deposit to a casino server via an ethernet, intranet, mesh network or hard wired communication system in order to improve security by capturing information to prevent fraud.
Claims 3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franchi (CA 2197448), Demarest et al. (US patent 5,413,353), A. D. Rogers et al. (US patent 1,503,852), and Fong et al. (US patent 11,869,308) in further view of other parts of Fong et al. (US patent 11,869,308)
The combination invention of Franchi, Demarest et al., A. D. Rogers et al. and Fong et al., as applied above, shows all of the limitations of the claims except for specifying
The means for identifying the denomination of chips comprises an RFID reader positioned proximate said coin chute to read an RFID identifier within a chip or token
The system further comprising: a table controller including a computer board, an expansion board and a cover, said expansion board including one or more of USB ports, an ethernet port and an audio jack, said computer board including circuitry connecting the respective components of said chip validation assembly and collection box verification system to a processor on said computer board.
Fong et al. teaches, figure 1, teaches a chip reader 38 with an RFID reader 54A and a camera 54B. Other types of chip detectors may also be utilized (optical scanners, magnetic stripe readers, etc.). The chip reader 38 preferably also comprises a controller 56. The controller connects the chip reader to network 50.
The examiner takes Official Notice that the elements of a computer board, an expansion board, a cover, USB ports, an ethernet port and an audio jack are old and well-known hardware elements in a computer network environment in order to connect the computer components of a computer network.
Based on the teaching of Fong et al. and Official Notice, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination invention of Franchi, Demarest et al., A. D. Rogers et al. and Fong et al. to add the use of an RFID reader positioned proximate said coin chute to read an RFID identifier within a chip or token in order to add an independent secondary chip reading check.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination invention of Franchi, Demarest et al., A. D. Rogers et al. and Fong et al. to make use of a computer board, an expansion board, a cover, USB ports, an ethernet port and an audio jack are old and well-known hardware elements in a computer network environment in order to connect the computer components of a computer network.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 4-8 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 2, 4 and 5 recite details about an optical code reader and trigger. Fong et al. shows a camera reader, but it does not show or teach having a trigger or being able to read the chips passing through. Claims 6-8 are dependent upon claims 2 and 5.
Claims 10-19 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claims 10 and 14 recite means for imaging chip and identifying the denomination of chips through said chip validation assembly to said collection box without stopping. Fong et al. shows a camera reader, but it does not show or teach being able to read the chips without stopping. Claims 11-13 and 15-19 are dependent upon claims 10 and 14.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
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 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 at 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 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.
/MICHAEL A CUFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights