DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the filing filed on June 26, 2024 Claims 1-4 and 10-25 have been examined in this application.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 .
Response to Arguments
The amendment filed August 3rd, 2026, has been entered. Claims 1-4 and 10-25 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s arguments filed 8/3/2026 have been fully considered but are rendered moot due to new grounds of rejection.
In response to applicant’s arguments that the claimed invention is not drawn to abstract ideas, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s amended claims, although they are an improvement towards going beyond the abstract idea and integrating the invention into a practical application, still recite an abstract idea. The addition of an “electronic gaming machine (EGM)” is a generic computer component for performing the abstract idea. A “collision-free signature of entry” can technically be calculated by hand using a pen and paper. Any linear function is a collision-free function (e.g. y = 2x, y = mx + b, etc.), and adding a signature to it can be done by hand. A “token identifier” and “loyalty information” are both identifiers that can be represented by identification (ID) numbers, which can be written by a person using pen and paper.
In addition, the additional limitations do not go beyond the abstract idea. The limitation of “validate the token identifier… against the common blockchain” is the same as validating an ID against a list. Similarly, “access the loyalty information… to determine a membership status” is a similar function of checking the information against a list or database. The limitation of “provide a wagering game via the EGM… based on membership status” is certain methods of organizing human activity (CMOHA). This is providing some sort of wagering game (e.g. Blackjack, Texas Hold’em, etc.) to a person based on membership status, which has been checked and confirmed in the previous steps/claim limitations. Lastly, “store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game…” is a mental process that can be done as long as the ratio between wagering game points and loyalty points is known. For example, 10 points within the wagering game may be equivalent to 1 loyalty point. If a user has 270 wagering game points for their gaming session, that would translate to 27 loyalty points. Since each of these limitations are either mental processes or CMOHA, the claims do not recite patent eligible subject matter.
Furthermore, paragraphs [0014]-[0016] of the applicant’s own specification indicates that the claimed invention “may be an alternative”, meaning that it may be an improvement to existing systems but it also may not. In addition, the specification states that “such accounts may be costly”, again emphasizing that it depends on the system a user is using. This is not an overall improvement to all systems, but rather it may be an improvement to some systems. Overall, it appears that the claimed invention’s main improvement or solution to a technical problem is dependent on a business decision by the user implementing this system where they must first assess their own systems and determine if the system of the claimed invention is an improvement over theirs. Therefore, while the claimed invention may be an improvement in some scenarios, it is not an overall improvement to the technology or technical field.
Lastly, the applicant has cited the precedential decision in Ex parte Desjardins Appeal No. 2024-000567 (PTAB September 26, 2025, Appeals Review Panel Decision). The decision stems from an improvement to the model, as it allowed the model to preserve performance on earlier tasks, even as it learned new ones. This is an improvement to the technical problem of “catastrophic forgetting” in continual learning systems, and was an improvement to all continual learning systems, not just some depending on the scenario. While the Applicant’s claimed invention may provide some technical benefits over some existing systems, it is not an improvement to the technology as a whole. As a result, Ex parte Desjardins is not applicable to the claimed invention as it’s currently claimed.
Accordingly, the Examiner respectfully states that the rejection under 35 USC § 101 to Claims 1-4 and 10-25 stands, based at least on the reasons mentioned above.
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 1-4 and 10-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-4, 10-19, and 21-25 are drawn to a device (i.e., a manufacture) and claim 20 is drawn to a method. As such, claims 1-4, 10-25 are drawn to one of the statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
Under Step 2A Prong 1, the claims are analyzed to determine whether the claims recite any judicial exceptions including certain groupings of abstract ideas (i.e., mathematical concepts, certain methods of organizing human activity such as a fundamental economic practice, or mental processes).
Claims 1, 16, and 20, recite a system comprising: a processor circuit; and a memory comprising machine readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit, cause the processor circuit to: receive, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, a request to anonymously validate a cryptographic token associated with a token owner, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token. If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, include a mental process and/or certain methods of organizing human activity, the limitations fall under the abstract ideas judicial exception and therefore recite ineligible subject matter. Accordingly, claims 1, 16, and 20 recite abstract ideas.
Representative Claim 1: A system comprising: a processor circuit; and a memory comprising machine readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit, cause the processor circuit to: receive, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, a request to anonymously validate a cryptographic token associated with a token owner, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Representative Claim 16: An anonymous player account management device comprising: a processor circuit; and a memory comprising machine readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit, cause the processor circuit to: receive via an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, a request to anonymously validate a cryptographic token associated with a token owner, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Representative Claim 20: A method comprising: receiving, by a processor circuit at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, a request to anonymously validate a cryptographic token associated with a token owner, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validating, by the processor circuit, a token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; accessing the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; providing a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status; and storing an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
(Examiner notes: The underlined claim terms above are interpreted as additional elements beyond the abstract idea and are further analyzed under Step 2A - Prong Two)
The additional elements are instructions for applying the judicial exceptions with a generic computing device as, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the additional elements of processors and/or processor circuits, and an electronic gaming machine (EGM) are generic computer components for performing the above method, per MPEP 2106.05(f). Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the additional elements are generic components of a computing device used to apply the abstract idea.
Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the recited steps of a system, comprising: able to receive a request to validate a token, validate a token; identify an account associated with the token; access loyalty information associated with the token; provide a wagering game to the token owner; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with the token (i.e., one or more concepts performed in the human mind, such as one or more observations, evaluations, judgments, opinions), then it also falls within the “Mental Processes” subject matter grouping of abstract ideas. The recited steps are a simulation that applies an abstract idea, specifically mental processes (observation (able to receive a request to validate a token, access loyalty information associated with the token, and store an indication of loyalty points associated with the token) and/or evaluation (validating a token, identify an account associated with the token), and/or CMOHA (provide a wagering game to the token owner)). If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, include a mental process and/or certain methods of organizing human activity (CMOHA), the limitations fall under the abstract ideas judicial exception and therefore recite ineligible subject matter. Accordingly, claims 1, 16, and 20 recite abstract ideas.
Dependent Claims 2-4, 10-15, 17-19, and 21-25 further narrow the abstract ideas of stopping a game, displaying content, analyzing responses, enabling multiple users to participate in a game, customizing text, and narrating gameplay (i.e., one or more concepts performed in the human mind, such as one or more observations, evaluations, judgments, opinions), then it also falls within the “Mental Processes” and is an abstract idea and then it also falls within the “Organizing Human Processes” subject matter grouping of abstract ideas and then also falls within the “Organizing Human Processes” subject matter grouping of abstract ideas.
Independent claim(s) 1, 16, and 20 recite/describe nearly identical steps (and therefore also recite limitations that fall within this subject matter grouping of abstract ideas), and this/these claim(s) is/are therefore determined to recite an abstract idea under the same analysis.
As such, the Examiner concludes that claims 1, 16, and 20 recite an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong One: YES).
Under Step 2A Prong 2 the claims are analyzed to determine whether the claims recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2A - Prong Two: In prong two of step 2A, an evaluation is made whether a claim recites any additional element, or combination of additional elements, that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. An “addition element” is an element that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception (i.e., an element/limitation that sets forth an abstract idea is not an additional element). The phrase “integration into a practical application” is defined as requiring an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
The requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions using “able to receive a request to validate a token”, “validate a token”, “identify an account associated with the token”, “access loyalty information associated with the token”, “provide a wagering game to the token owner”, and “store an indication of loyalty points associated with the token,” etc. (Claims 1, 16, and 20) are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer.
Similarly, the limitations of applying “able to receive a request to validate a token”, “validate a token”, “identify an account associated with the token”, “access loyalty information associated with the token”, “provide a wagering game to the token owner”, and “store an indication of loyalty points associated with the token,” etc. Independent Claim(s) 1, 16, and 20, and dependent claims 2-4, 10-15, 17-19, and 21-25 are recited at a high level of generality and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components in a vehicle. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Further, the additional limitations beyond the abstract idea identified above serves merely to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Specifically, it/they serve(s) to limit the application of the abstract idea to computerized environments (e.g., able to receive a request to validate a token, validate a token; identify an account associated with the token; access loyalty information associated with the token; provide a wagering game to the token owner; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with the token, etc.). This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
The recited additional element(s) of receiving a request to validate a token, validating a token, identifying an account associated with the token, and associating the account with player activity (Claim(s) 1, 16, and 20), additionally and/or alternatively simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea). This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. (See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Dependent claims 2-4, 10-15, and 17-19 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective dependent claims is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim).
The Examiner has therefore determined that the additional elements, or combination of additional elements, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claim(s) is/are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong two: NO).
Step 2B: In step 2B, the claims are analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is/are sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. This analysis is also termed a search for an "inventive concept." An "inventive concept" is furnished by an element or combination of elements that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception and is sufficient to ensure that the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the identified additional elements in independent claim(s) 1, 16, and 20, and dependent claims 2-4, 10-15, and 17-19 are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer, and/or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Therefore, the claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
The recited additional element(s) of receiving a request to validate a token, validating a token, identifying an account associated with the token, and associating the account with player activity (Claim(s) 1, 16, and 20), additionally and/or alternatively simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea) i.e. selecting users (i.e. using a user interface) is similar to “Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data”, is a well-understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here) (See MPEP 2106.05(d) (II)).
This conclusion is based on a factual determination. Applicant’s own disclosure at paragraph [0078] acknowledges that “Embodiments described herein may be implemented in various configurations for gaming devices 100, including but not limited to: (1) a dedicated gaming device, wherein the computerized instructions for controlling any games (which are provided by the gaming device) are provided with the gaming device prior to delivery to a gaming establishment; and (2) a changeable gaming device, where the computerized instructions for controlling any games (which are provided by the gaming device) are downloadable to the gaming device through a data network when the gaming device is in a gaming establishment” (i.e. conventional nature of using a computer and/or computer program). This additional element therefore does not ensure the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Viewing the additional limitations in combination also shows that they fail to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. When considered as an ordered combination, the additional components of the claims add nothing that is not already present when considered separately, and thus simply append the abstract idea with words equivalent to “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer or/and append the abstract idea with insignificant extra solution activity associated with the implementation of the judicial exception, and/or simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception.
The dependent claims 2-4, 10-15, 17-19, and 21-25 are dependent from claims 1, 16, and 20 and include all the limitations of the independent claims, but fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective independent claims is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim). Therefore, the dependent claims recite the same abstract idea. The limitations of the dependent claims fail to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For example:
The limitations of claims 2, 3, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, and 23 recite clarifications of redeeming account points, providing a game benefit to the player, requesting token transfer, transferring tokens to other players, storing account data in a blockchain, having account data and an account identifier, and encrypting data on the blockchain. Such clarifications, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, are merely defining/selecting a type of data to be manipulated which, per MPEP 2106.05(g), is insignificant extra-solution activity. Therefore, the limitations fail to provide any teaching that integrates the judicial exceptions into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For this reason, the analysis performed on the independent claims is also applicable on these claims.
The limitations of claim 4, 10, 11, 12, 24, and 25 recite clarifications of storing tokens in a digital wallet, validating tokens at an electronic game machine (EGM), validating tokens at a mobile computing device, and validating tokens using a code scanning device. The limitations are further instructions for applying the judicial exceptions with a generic computing device/interface acting as an intermediary for performing the abstract ideas able to receive a request to validate a token, validate a token; identify an account associated with the token; access loyalty information associated with the token; provide a wagering game to the token owner; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with the token, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Therefore, the limitations fail to provide any teaching that integrates the judicial exceptions into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For this reason, the analysis performed on the independent claims is also applicable on these claims.
The Examiner has therefore determined that no additional element, or combination of additional claims elements is/are sufficient to ensure the claim(s) amount to significantly more than the abstract idea identified above (Step 2B: NO).
Therefore, claims 1-4, and 10-25 are not eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
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 1-4, 10-20, 24, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Merati (US 2019/0180558 A1) in view of Luciano Jr. et al. (US 2002/0111210 A1), in view of Zhu et al. (US 2021/0335093 A1), in view of Mikulich et al. (US 2023/0177921 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Merati discloses a system comprising ([0002] The present application relates to gaming systems and more specifically to the casino industry and gaming systems):
a processor circuit ([0035] and a processor coupled to the network interface and the memory for executing the processor executable instructions); and
a memory comprising machine readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit ([0035] and a processor coupled to the network interface and the memory for executing the processor executable instructions), cause the processor circuit to:
receive a request to anonymously validate a cryptographic token associated with a token owner ([0106] For example, if a player scans a QR barcode at a gaming table using a QR reader app installed on his or her phone and is prompted (receive a request) to register or login to his or her C3 (Casino Crypto Currency) account, the player then can either use his or her C3 wallet to place a wager at a C3-enabled table or use regular casino chip); and
validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token ([0097] The creation and recording of C3 transactions into a centralized ledger include creation of a fingerprint (token identifier) i.e. a digital signature that at any subsequent point in the future can prove the data’s integrity (validation), [0108] In this embodiment, for every gaming transaction, the IGO updates a user's account balance and verifies (validates) the account balance using the public, distributed ledger).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing identifying an anonymous player or an anonymous player account; receive, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Luciano teaches identifying an anonymous player or an anonymous player account ([0128] The functions performed by the APID (Anonymous Player Identification) data coordinator are to collect and coordinate APIDs and data associated (player account) with one or more APIDs).
However, Luciano is not relied upon disclosing receive, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Zhu teaches receive, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment ([0029] the gaming device 10 may include a slot machine (EGM of a casino environment), an electronic table game, or a sports betting terminal, among others),
a request to anonymously validate a cryptographic token associated with a token owner, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry ([0038] a cryptographic hash function may create a one-way, (essentially) collision free signature of the entry. The hash algorithm generates a hash. Using hashing function 404, hash values 406 of these transactions are created and added to blockchain blocks 408 that are in the blockchain data structure);
validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry ([0038] a cryptographic hash function may create a one-way, (essentially) collision free signature of the entry. The hash algorithm generates a hash. Using hashing function 404, hash values 406 of these transactions are created and added to blockchain blocks 408 that are in the blockchain data structure);
access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token ([0016] before the player starts to play a game at a member casino, the system will fetch the player's aggregated game play data from the blockchain data structure and compare the data with the player's limit settings);
provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status ([0027] the gaming content server 80 may manage delivery of the gaming content to the user of a gaming device 10, [0029] For example, in some embodiments, the gaming device 10 may include a slot machine, an electronic table game, or a sports betting terminal, among others); and
store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token ([0028] The player tracking server 90 may manage a player tracking account that tracks the gameplay and spending and/or other player preferences and customizations of a player, i.e., the player of the gaming device 10, responsible gaming limit data for the player, manages loyalty awards for the player, manages funds deposited or advanced on behalf of the player, and other functions).
However, Zhu is not relied upon teaching access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Mikulich teaches access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token ([0038] Using blockchain technology to implement STN Charms program brings trust and verifiability to the STN Charms program allowing the customer loyalty program computer system 12 to verify ownership of charms when members receive benefits and providing an audit trail for review, [0089] For example, in some embodiments, the processor 12 may query the STN Charms smart contract 46 to identify transitions stored in the blockchain system 34 to identify casino charm NFTs 64 associated with the patron ID indicating ownership of the identified casino charm NFTs 64 by the patron); and
store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token ([0041] The customer loyalty program computer system 12 implements the STN Charms program using a dApp using the blockchain system 34, data stored in the blockchain, and data stored outside of the blockchain, [0089] For example, in some embodiments, the processor 12 may query the STN Charms smart contract 46 to identify transitions stored in the blockchain system 34 to identify casino charm NFTs 64 associated with the patron ID indicating ownership of the identified casino charm NFTs 64 by the patron).
Merati and Luciano are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, because they are in the same field of casino gaming. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a system for validating a cryptographic token, as disclosed by Merati, further including identifying an anonymous player account as taught by Luciano for the purpose of allowing people to play and keep track of certain game states over time, without being personally identified by a casino (Luciano, [0118]).
Merati and Zhu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, because they are in the same field of blockchain technology in gaming environments. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a system for validating a cryptographic token, as disclosed by Merati, further including receive, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; and provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status, as taught by Zhu for the purpose of ensuring that the hash data is available to authorized users of the blockchain system so that the integrity of the blockchain data structure can be maintained (Zhu, [0017]).
Merati and Mikulich are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, because they are in the same field of casino gaming. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a system for validating a cryptographic token, as disclosed by Merati, further including access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token, as taught by Mikulich for the purpose of identifying transitions stored in the blockchain system to identify casino tokens associated with the patron ID indicating ownership of the identified casino tokens (Mikulich, [0089]).
Regarding Claim 2, Merati discloses wherein the instructions further cause the processor circuit to:
identify a player account associated with the cryptographic token ([0034] the first transaction comprising a wager comprising a first amount of the first digital currency, determining that the first transaction is associated with the first user from the first transaction information (identifying a player account associated with a cryptographic token)); and
associate player activity comprises redemption of player account points associated with the player account by the first player ([0029] About twenty-five years ago, casinos started rewarding players with loyalty points (player account points) based on wagering activities. Casino loyalty points are typically redeemable at various amenities of a casino’s resort such as its hotel and restaurants, [0035] a first account associated with a first user…, first transaction information from a first gaming operator system, the first transaction comprising a wager comprising a first amount of the first digital currency, determine, by the processor, that the first transaction is associated with the first user from the first transaction information (player activity of the first player)).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing an anonymous player account.
Luciano teaches an anonymous player account ([0128] The functions performed by the APID (Anonymous Player Identification) data coordinator are to collect and coordinate APIDs and data associated (player account) with one or more APIDs).
Regarding Claim 3, Merati discloses wherein the player account comprises a player status, and wherein association of the identified player account with player activity of the token owner comprises providing a game benefit to the token owner during play of the wagering game by the token owner ([0105] a program combined with bet recognition, card recognition, win recognition and chip inventory recognition can provide real-time win and loss accounting for a table game when using traditional casino chips, as well as better rating players (player status) and rewarding them (game benefit), [0106] is prompted to register or login to his or her C3 account (associated with account)… The player may then connect to a gaming server or loyalty server coupled to a bet determination system at the table through the Internet or a local WIFI network to receive loyalty points (game benefit) on a real time basis).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing an anonymous player account.
Luciano teaches an anonymous player account ([0128] The functions performed by the APID (Anonymous Player Identification) data coordinator are to collect and coordinate APIDs and data associated (player account) with one or more APIDs).
Regarding Claim 4, Merati discloses wherein the cryptographic token is stored with a digital wallet associated with the token owner ([0100] Embodiments of the invention allow for a user's C3 to be managed by a digital wallet).
Regarding Claim 10, Merati discloses wherein the request to validate the cryptographic token is received at the (EGM) ([0034] An inter-gaming operator (IGO) server and method is described. In one embodiment, a method is performed by an inter-gaming operator computer server, for managing gaming and non-gaming transactions for a plurality of gaming operator systems (analogous to an EGM), [0106] a gaming server (analogous to an EGM), [0115] For example, if a C3 wager is made on a slot machine, the slot machine (gaming machine) may determine an outcome (validating a cryptographic token; if cryptographic casino currency (C3) wager is made, determine an outcome [Wingdings font/0xE0] if C3 is validated, determine an outcome), and a slot accounting system may record the slot machine's net results and report each gaming transaction to a IGO server (electronic element of gaming machine, thereby making it an EGM), i.e., either detailed information (such as a wager amount and/or a payoff amount)).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing anonymously validating a token; and a token scanner of the Electronic Game Machine.
Luciano teaches anonymously validating a token (Fig. 26 Element 2604 [Wingdings font/0xE0] If yes, perform step at 2606, if no perform step at 2608; “yes” is the validation step).
Luciano is not relied upon teaching a token scanner of the Electronic Game Machine.
Mikulich teaches a token scanner of the Electronic Game Machine ([0035] The player identification card reader is configured to accept a player tracking ID card (functionally analogous to a token) inserted by the player, and read information contained on the player tracking card to identify the player account information. The player identification card reader may include, but is not limited to, a barcode reader, a magnetic card reader, and/or a radio frequency identification (RFID) card reader).
Regarding Claim 11, Merati discloses wherein the request to validate the cryptographic token is received via a mobile computing device associated with the token owner ([0106] using a QR reader app installed on his or her phone).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing anonymously validating a token.
Luciano teaches anonymously validating a token (Fig. 26 Element 2604 [Wingdings font/0xE0] If yes, perform step at 2606, if no perform step at 2608; “yes” is the validation step).
Regarding Claim 12, Merati discloses wherein receipt of the request to validate the cryptographic token comprises scanning, by a code scanner device, a graphical code associated with the cryptographic token ([0106] using a QR reader app installed on his or her phone).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing anonymously validating a token.
Luciano teaches anonymously validating a token (Fig. 26 Element 2604 [Wingdings font/0xE0] If yes, perform step at 2606, if no perform step at 2608; “yes” is the validation step).
Regarding Claim 13, Merati discloses wherein the instructions further cause the processor circuit to:
receive a request to execute a blockchain transaction to transfer possession of the cryptographic token from the token owner to a second owner ([0098]-[0101] blockchain transaction framework, [0098] create an orderly market for both sides of a transaction (functionally analogous to transactions to transfer possession of cryptographic tokens), [0099] C3 is a cryptographic currency that has chains of records tied together in blocks that may include player and game data on a distributed ledger (implies transaction of cryptographic tokens) with each transaction having immutable records to make fraudulent misuse of its data almost impossible); and
execute the blockchain transaction ([0100] Use of C3 for both gaming and non-gaming means C3 is maintained on a hybrid blockchain, i.e. C3 offers both the benefit of private and public blockchain through a middleware or a platform that converges the functionalities of public and private block chain networks).
Regarding Claim 14, Merati discloses wherein execution of the blockchain transaction comprises transferring the cryptographic token from a first digital wallet associated with the token owner to a second digital wallet associated with the second owner ([0098] stored in a combination of central and distributed ledgers (implies transfer of tokens from wallet to wallet) under the control of a licensed inter-gaming operator (“IGO”), [0100] C3 to be managed by a digital wallet).
Regarding Claim 15, Merati discloses wherein the cryptographic token has a first value before the blockchain transaction, and wherein execution of the blockchain transaction comprises modifying the first value of the cryptographic token to a second value different from the first value ([0034] creating a first account associated with a first user in response to a request from the first user, the first account for use with a first digital currency issued by a first gaming operator system, receiving first transaction information from a first gaming operator system , the first transaction comprising a wager comprising a first amount of the first digital currency , (account balance before wager)… reducing a balance of the first account by the first amount when the first transaction originated from a first gaming platform associated with the first gaming operator system, [0108] In this embodiment, for every gaming transaction, the IGO updates a user's account balance and verifies the account balance using the public, distributed ledger (ledger implies modifying first value to a second value different from the first value)).
Regarding Claim 16, Merati discloses a device comprising ([0087] a user input device):
a processor circuit ([0035] a processor coupled to the network interface); and
a memory comprising machine readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit, cause the processor circuit to ([0035] a processor coupled to the network interface and the memory for executing the processor executable instructions):
receive, a request to validate a cryptographic token associated with a token owner ([0106] a player scans a QR barcode at a gaming table using a QR reader app installed on his or her phone and is prompted to register (receive a request) or login to his or her C3 account); and
validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token ([0097] The creation and recording of C3 transactions into a centralized ledger include creation of a fingerprint (token identifier) i.e. a digital signature that at any subsequent point in the future can prove the data’s integrity (validation), [0108] In this embodiment, for every gaming transaction, the IGO updates a user's account balance and verifies (validates) the account balance using the public, distributed ledger).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing identifying an anonymous player or an anonymous player account; receive, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Luciano teaches identifying an anonymous player or an anonymous player account ([0128] The functions performed by the APID (Anonymous Player Identification) data coordinator are to collect and coordinate APIDs and data associated (player account) with one or more APIDs).
However, Luciano is not relied upon disclosing receive, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Zhu teaches receive, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment ([0029] the gaming device 10 may include a slot machine (EGM of a casino environment), an electronic table game, or a sports betting terminal, among others),
a request to anonymously validate a cryptographic token associated with a token owner, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry ([0038] a cryptographic hash function may create a one-way, (essentially) collision free signature of the entry. The hash algorithm generates a hash. Using hashing function 404, hash values 406 of these transactions are created and added to blockchain blocks 408 that are in the blockchain data structure);
validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry ([0038] a cryptographic hash function may create a one-way, (essentially) collision free signature of the entry. The hash algorithm generates a hash. Using hashing function 404, hash values 406 of these transactions are created and added to blockchain blocks 408 that are in the blockchain data structure);
access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token ([0016] before the player starts to play a game at a member casino, the system will fetch the player's aggregated game play data from the blockchain data structure and compare the data with the player's limit settings);
provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status ([0027] the gaming content server 80 may manage delivery of the gaming content to the user of a gaming device 10, [0029] For example, in some embodiments, the gaming device 10 may include a slot machine, an electronic table game, or a sports betting terminal, among others); and
store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token ([0028] The player tracking server 90 may manage a player tracking account that tracks the gameplay and spending and/or other player preferences and customizations of a player, i.e., the player of the gaming device 10, responsible gaming limit data for the player, manages loyalty awards for the player, manages funds deposited or advanced on behalf of the player, and other functions).
However, Zhu is not relied upon teaching access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Mikulich teaches access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token ([0038] Using blockchain technology to implement STN Charms program brings trust and verifiability to the STN Charms program allowing the customer loyalty program computer system 12 to verify ownership of charms when members receive benefits and providing an audit trail for review, [0089] For example, in some embodiments, the processor 12 may query the STN Charms smart contract 46 to identify transitions stored in the blockchain system 34 to identify casino charm NFTs 64 associated with the patron ID indicating ownership of the identified casino charm NFTs 64 by the patron); and
store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token ([0041] The customer loyalty program computer system 12 implements the STN Charms program using a dApp using the blockchain system 34, data stored in the blockchain, and data stored outside of the blockchain, [0089] For example, in some embodiments, the processor 12 may query the STN Charms smart contract 46 to identify transitions stored in the blockchain system 34 to identify casino charm NFTs 64 associated with the patron ID indicating ownership of the identified casino charm NFTs 64 by the patron).
Regarding Claim 17, Merati discloses wherein the instructions further cause the processor circuit to:
identify a player account associated with the cryptographic token ([0034] the first transaction comprising a wager comprising a first amount of the first digital currency, determining that the first transaction is associated with the first user from the first transaction information (identifying a player account associated with a cryptographic token)); and
associate the identified player account with player activity of the token owner, wherein account data for the player account is stored in a blockchain data structure associated with the cryptographic token (Fig. 5 Element 516 Blockchain Network, Fig. 13C Element 1340 Crypto-Blocks of Data are Stored, [0029] About twenty-five years ago, casinos started rewarding players with loyalty points (player account points) based on wagering activities. Casino loyalty points are typically redeemable at various amenities of a casino’s resort such as its hotel and restaurants, [0035] a first account associated with a first user…, first transaction information from a first gaming operator system, the first transaction comprising a wager comprising a first amount of the first digital currency, determine, by the processor, that the first transaction is associated with the first user from the first transaction information (player activity of the first player), [0099] C3 is a cryptographic currency that has chains of records tied together in blocks that may include player and game data on a distributed ledger with each transaction having immutable records to make fraudulent misuse of its data almost impossible).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing an anonymous player account.
Luciano teaches an anonymous player account ([0128] The functions performed by the APID (Anonymous Player Identification) data coordinator are to collect and coordinate APIDs and data associated (player account) with one or more APIDs).
Regarding Claim 18, Merati discloses wherein the account data comprises account identifier data and gameplay data ([0096] Such data/metrics may comprise including players' names/IDs, game IDs, wager amounts, times when wagers are placed, and results of wagers (account identifier and gameplay data), [0099] records maybe tied together using a unique ID (account identifier), [0102] C3 may be used to maintain a historical database of wagers (gameplay data)).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing the anonymous player account.
Luciano teaches wherein the anonymous player account ([0128] The functions performed by the APID (Anonymous Player Identification) data coordinator are to collect and coordinate APIDs and data associated (player account) with one or more APIDs).
Regarding Claim 19, Merati discloses wherein the gameplay data is encrypted on the blockchain data structure by a first encryption layer, and data that is not encrypted by the first encryption layer ([0100] Gaming data related to a user's wagers is recorded in a private database over a private network associated with each gaming operator, accessible only by authorized personnel, such as gaming operators and regulators, and non-gaming data may be maintained on a public network. The private network generates hash values (account identifier data) of all transactions and stores resulting crypto-blocks on a block chain network or in a local memory or database, [0101] It should also be mentioned that some parts of C3 data maybe be encrypted using conventional methods (first encryption layer) before hashed (hashing is a second encryption layer in this scenario)).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing wherein the account data comprises account identifier data for the anonymous player account.
Luciano teaches wherein the account data comprises account identifier data for the anonymous player account ([0128] The functions performed by the APID (Anonymous Player Identification) data coordinator are to collect and coordinate APIDs and data associated (player account) with one or more APIDs).
Regarding Claim 20, Merati discloses a method comprising ([0121] Embodiments of the invention comprise a method for players to deposit cash into a holding account maintained by a regulated IGO, together with a process and protocol for administering a digital wallet for wagering on a casino's table game, slot machine or on an online game):
receiving, by a processor circuit, a request to validate a cryptographic token associated with a token owner, ([0035] and a processor coupled to the network interface and the memory for executing the processor executable instructions, [0097] The creation and recording of C3 transactions into a centralized ledger include creation of a fingerprint (token identifier) i.e. a digital signature that at any subsequent point in the future can prove the data’s integrity (validation), [0106] For example, if a player scans a QR barcode at a gaming table using a QR reader app installed on his or her phone and is prompted (receive a request) to register or login to his or her C3 (Casino Crypto Currency) account, the player then can either use his or her C3 wallet to place a wager at a C3-enabled table or use regular casino chip, [0108] In this embodiment, for every gaming transaction, the IGO updates a user's account balance and verifies (validates) the account balance using the public, distributed ledger);
validating, by the processor circuit, a token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the signature collision-free signature of entry ([0097] The creation and recording of C3 transactions into a centralized ledger include creation of a fingerprint (token identifier) i.e. a digital signature that at any subsequent point in the future can prove the data’s integrity (validation), [0108] In this embodiment, for every gaming transaction, the IGO updates a user's account balance and verifies (validates) the account balance using the public, distributed ledger);
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing identifying an anonymous player or an anonymous player account; receiving, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Luciano teaches identifying an anonymous player or an anonymous player account ([0128] The functions performed by the APID (Anonymous Player Identification) data coordinator are to collect and coordinate APIDs and data associated (player account) with one or more APIDs).
However, Luciano is not relied upon disclosing receiving, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry; validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry; access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Zhu teaches receiving, at an electronic gaming machine (EGM) of a casino environment ([0029] the gaming device 10 may include a slot machine (EGM of a casino environment), an electronic table game, or a sports betting terminal, among others),
a request to anonymously validate a cryptographic token associated with a token owner, wherein the cryptographic token comprises a collision-free signature of entry created using a hashing function associated with a common blockchain, a token identifier and loyalty information stored in a blockchain entry ([0038] a cryptographic hash function may create a one-way, (essentially) collision free signature of the entry. The hash algorithm generates a hash. Using hashing function 404, hash values 406 of these transactions are created and added to blockchain blocks 408 that are in the blockchain data structure);
validate the token identifier associated with the cryptographic token against the common blockchain based on the collision-free signature of entry ([0038] a cryptographic hash function may create a one-way, (essentially) collision free signature of the entry. The hash algorithm generates a hash. Using hashing function 404, hash values 406 of these transactions are created and added to blockchain blocks 408 that are in the blockchain data structure);
access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token ([0016] before the player starts to play a game at a member casino, the system will fetch the player's aggregated game play data from the blockchain data structure and compare the data with the player's limit settings);
provide a wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status ([0027] the gaming content server 80 may manage delivery of the gaming content to the user of a gaming device 10, [0029] For example, in some embodiments, the gaming device 10 may include a slot machine, an electronic table game, or a sports betting terminal, among others); and
store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token ([0028] The player tracking server 90 may manage a player tracking account that tracks the gameplay and spending and/or other player preferences and customizations of a player, i.e., the player of the gaming device 10, responsible gaming limit data for the player, manages loyalty awards for the player, manages funds deposited or advanced on behalf of the player, and other functions).
However, Zhu is not relied upon teaching access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token; and store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token.
Mikulich teaches access the loyalty information stored in the blockchain entry to determine a membership status of the cryptographic token ([0038] Using blockchain technology to implement STN Charms program brings trust and verifiability to the STN Charms program allowing the customer loyalty program computer system 12 to verify ownership of charms when members receive benefits and providing an audit trail for review, [0089] For example, in some embodiments, the processor 12 may query the STN Charms smart contract 46 to identify transitions stored in the blockchain system 34 to identify casino charm NFTs 64 associated with the patron ID indicating ownership of the identified casino charm NFTs 64 by the patron); and
store an indication of loyalty points associated with play of the wagering game in the cryptographic token ([0041] The customer loyalty program computer system 12 implements the STN Charms program using a dApp using the blockchain system 34, data stored in the blockchain, and data stored outside of the blockchain, [0089] For example, in some embodiments, the processor 12 may query the STN Charms smart contract 46 to identify transitions stored in the blockchain system 34 to identify casino charm NFTs 64 associated with the patron ID indicating ownership of the identified casino charm NFTs 64 by the patron).
identifying, by the processor circuit, an anonymous player account associated with the cryptographic token ([0034] the first transaction comprising a wager comprising a first amount of the first digital currency, determining that the first transaction is associated with the first user from the first transaction information (identifying a player account associated with a cryptographic token)); and
associating, by the processor circuit, the identified player account with player activity of the first player ([0035] a first account associated with a first user…, first transaction information from a first gaming operator system, the first transaction comprising a wager comprising a first amount of the first digital currency, determine, by the processor, that the first transaction is associated with the first user from the first transaction information (player activity of the first player)).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing identifying an anonymous player or an anonymous player account.
Luciano teaches identifying an anonymous player or an anonymous player account ([0128] The functions performed by the APID (Anonymous Player Identification) data coordinator are to collect and coordinate APIDs and data associated (player account) with one or more APIDs).
Regarding Claim 24, Merati discloses wherein the cryptographic token is stored with a digital wallet associated with the token owner ([0100] Embodiments of the invention allow for a user's C3 to be managed by a digital wallet).
Regarding Claim 25, Merati discloses wherein the request to validate the cryptographic token is received at the EGM ([0034] An inter-gaming operator (IGO) server and method is described. In one embodiment, a method is performed by an inter-gaming operator computer server, for managing gaming and non-gaming transactions for a plurality of gaming operator systems (analogous to an EGM), [0106] a gaming server (analogous to an EGM), [0115] For example, if a C3 wager is made on a slot machine, the slot machine (gaming machine) may determine an outcome (validating a cryptographic token; if cryptographic casino currency (C3) wager is made, determine an outcome [Wingdings font/0xE0] if C3 is validated, determine an outcome), and a slot accounting system may record the slot machine's net results and report each gaming transaction to a IGO server (electronic element of gaming machine, thereby making it an EGM), i.e., either detailed information (such as a wager amount and/or a payoff amount)).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing anonymously validating a token; and a token scanner of the Electronic Game Machine.
Luciano teaches anonymously validating a token (Fig. 26 Element 2604 [Wingdings font/0xE0] If yes, perform step at 2606, if no perform step at 2608; “yes” is the validation step).
Mikulich teaches a token scanner of the Electronic Game Machine ([0035] The player identification card reader is configured to accept a player tracking ID card (functionally analogous to a token) inserted by the player, and read information contained on the player tracking card to identify the player account information. The player identification card reader may include, but is not limited to, a barcode reader, a magnetic card reader, and/or a radio frequency identification (RFID) card reader).
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Merati (US 2019/0180558 A1) in view of Luciano Jr. et al. (US 2002/0111210 A1), in view of Zhu et al. (US 2021/0335093 A1), in view of Mikulich et al. (US 2023/0177921 A1), and in further view of Soukup et al. (US 2019/0164384 A1).
Regarding Claim 21, Merati discloses wherein the instructions further cause the processor circuit to:
receive, a second request to validate the cryptographic token associated with the second owner ([0034] the first transaction comprising a wager comprising a first amount of the first digital currency, determining that the first transaction is associated with the first user from the first transaction information (identifying a player account associated with a cryptographic token)).
However, Merati is not relied upon disclosing an anonymous player account; and provide the wagering game via the EGM to the second owner based on the membership status.
Luciano teaches an anonymous player account ([0128] The functions performed by the APID (Anonymous Player Identification) data coordinator are to collect and coordinate APIDs and data associated (player account) with one or more APIDs).
However, Luciano is not relied upon teaching provide the wagering game via the EGM to the second owner based on the membership status.
Soukup teaches provide the wagering game via the EGM to the second owner based on the membership status ([0034] The player gaming tracking device is configured to allow a player to log into the player's account by using the player tracking card and track the player's gaming activity, [0109] During operation, the patron may enter player information at a player gaming tracking device 20 associated with a gaming machine 12 to initiate a gaming session to begin placing wagers on the games being provided by the gaming machine 12).
Merati and Soukup are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, because they are in the same field of casino gaming. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a system for validating a cryptographic token, as disclosed by Merati, further including provide the wagering game via the EGM to the second owner based on the membership status, as taught by Soukup for the purpose of tracking player actions, wagering activity, and other player metrics associated with either an unknown anonymous casino patron or a known casino patron (Soukup, [0109]-[0112] and [0147]).
Regarding Claim 22, Merati is not relied upon disclosing wherein the instructions further cause the processor circuit to provide a bonus game of the wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status.
Soukup teaches wherein the instructions further cause the processor circuit to provide a bonus game of the wagering game via the EGM to the token owner based on the membership status ([0008] The casino management server includes a processor for implementing a bonus award feature. The processor programmed to execute an algorithm including initiating the bonus award feature, identifying gaming machines associated with the bonus award feature, and determining a bonus award associated with the bonus award feature. The bonus award includes a first award value associated with a carded player account and a second award value associated with an un-carded anonymous player wagering session and/or account).
Regarding Claim 23, Merati is not relied upon disclosing wherein the anonymous player account comprises a player status, and wherein association of the identified anonymous player account with player activity of the token owner comprises providing a game benefit to the token owner during play of the wagering game by the token owner.
Soukup teaches wherein the anonymous player account comprises a player status, and wherein association of the identified anonymous player account with player activity of the token owner comprises providing a game benefit to the token owner during play of the wagering game by the token owner ([0025] The casino management server is also programed to track un-carded anonymous player wagering sessions when gaming sessions are initiated by players that do not have carded player tracking accounts or unique player tracking IDs, monitors the gaming activity associated with the gaming sessions, and initiates floor-wide system-based bonus award features that include active gaming sessions associated with both carded player tracking accounts and un-carded anonymous players).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Upadrasta et al. (US 2024/0021046 A1) is in the field of systems and methods for use of cryptocurrencies in a casino gaming system (Abstract).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMID TARIQ HAFIZ whose telephone number is (571) 272-4629. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM, Monday through Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kang Hu can be reached on 571-270-1344. 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.
/HAMID TARIQ HAFIZ/
Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/ROBERT J UTAMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights