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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The claims are directed to the abstract idea of mental processes and/ or certain methods of organizing human activity. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
Step 1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter
More specifically, regarding Step 1, of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, the claims are directed to a machine, process, and/or an article of manufacturer, which are statutory categories of invention.
Step 2a – Prong 1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims are analyzed to determine whether it is directed to a judicial exception.
Claims 1-19 are considered mental processes which comprises the steps of observing icons, evaluating letter pools, and selecting/judging correct letters. Additionally, rules for a puzzle game, similar to managing gameplay in board/card games are considered organizing human activity.
This mirrors cases like In re Smith (815 F.3d 816, Fed. Cir. 2016), where claims to rules for a wagering card game were held abstract, analogous to fundamental economic practices in Alice and Bilski v. Kappos (561 U.S. 593, 2010) and In re Marco Guldenaar Holding B.V. (911 F.3d 1157, Fed. Cir. 2018), claims to a dice game were abstract as rules for gameplay, with conventional markings on dice failing to transform the idea.
Step 2a – Prong 2 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
The second prong of step 2a is the consideration if the claim limitations are directed to a practical application.
Limitations that are indicative of integration into a practical application:
-Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
-Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition - see Vanda Memo
-Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b)
-Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing – see MPEP 2106.05(c)
-Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo
Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application:
-Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea- see MPEP 2106.05(f)
-Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)
-Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(h)
Claims 1-19 do not improve the functioning of a computer. The additional elements (display tableau, fields, icons) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. They do not improve computer functionality, solve a technological problem, or apply the idea in a meaningful way beyond the puzzle itself (e.g., no enhanced processing, data structures, or user interfaces claimed). The puzzle is just a new game variant, not a technological advancement. The display is conventional, per dependent claims (paper in newspapers/magazines or computer screens). The claim preempts basic puzzle formats.
Step 2b of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
Next, the claims as a whole are analyzed to determine whether any element, or combination of elements, is sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the exception.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because no element or combination of elements is sufficient to ensure any claim of the present application as a whole amounts to significantly more than one or more judicial exceptions, as described above. For example, the elements, individually and as an ordered combination, are well-understood, routine, and conventional: Displaying fields/icons on paper or screens is generic (e.g., printing puzzles in publications or rendering on displays). Shuffling/dealing equivalents (letter pools and selection) are conventional in puzzles/games).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-14, 16, 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dropquote. April 1, 2023. <https://www.puzzles.wiki/wiki/Dropquote?oldid=7763> accessed 2/23/2026 (Dropquote hereinafter), (a video of the puzzle can be seen in the following YouTube link < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4hztbRq6D4&t>).
1. Dropquote discloses a word puzzle comprising:
a display tableau (the puzzle grid and letter columns displayed on paper or screen);
a puzzle-key field displayed on the display tableau, the puzzle-key field comprising a plurality of letter pools, each letter pool being identified by an indicator icon, each letter pool comprising a letter set of at least one alphabetic letter (letters provided above each column form letter pools, identified by column position as an implicit indicator);
a puzzle-solution field comprising a plurality of answer slots, the plurality of answer slots aligned horizontally to form a string (grid rows consist of horizontally aligned answer slots forming words/strings in the quote); and
a plurality of indicator icons, each indicator icon associated with a one answer slot, each indicator icon indicating for the one answer slot the letter pool from which to select a correct letter for the one answer slot (each slot's column position indicates the corresponding letter pool above it).
Screenshot of the Dropquote game from <https://dropquotes.puzzlebaron.com/play.php> is provided below for referencing:
PNG
media_image1.png
690
1007
media_image1.png
Greyscale
2-3. Dropquote discloses the word puzzle of claim 1, wherein the display tableau is made of a paper, and each of the puzzle-key field and the puzzle-solution field is displayed on the display tableau by printing each of the puzzle-key field and the puzzle-solution field on the paper, wherein the paper is a portion of a printed publication selected from the group consisting of: a newspaper, a magazine, a restaurant menu (Dropquote puzzles are printable and commonly presented on paper) (as evidenced by < https://dropquotes.puzzlebaron.com/faq.php>).
4. Dropquote discloses the word puzzle of claim 1, wherein the display tableau is a computer display screen, and each of the puzzle-key field and the puzzle-solution field is displayed on the display tableau by illuminating the computer display screen to render an image of each of the puzzle-key field and the puzzle-solution field onto the computer display screen (Drop Quote is playable online via computer screens at < https://dropquotes.puzzlebaron.com>).
5. Dropquote discloses the word puzzle of claim 1, further comprising a title field displayed on the display tableau, the title field disposed on the display tableau vertically superior to each of the puzzle-key field and the puzzle-solution field (puzzles often include a title above the grid and letter pools as can be seen from screenshot above).
6. Dropquote discloses the word puzzle of claim 1, further comprising a given-letter character displayed on a given-letter answer slot of the plurality of answer slots (using hint button, refer to screenshot above).
7. Dropquote discloses the word puzzle of claim 1, further comprising a clue field displayed on the display tableau, the clue field comprising one or more words configured to indicate a solution to the word puzzle (using hint button, refer to screenshot above).
9. Dropquote discloses the word puzzle of claim 1, wherein at least one answer slot is not associated with an indicator icon (black squares or spaces lack letter pools).
10. Dropquote discloses the word puzzle of claim 1, wherein at least one indicator icon refers to more than one letter pool (columns may share thematic letters in variations).
11-13, 16. Dropquote discloses a method of displaying a word puzzle, the method comprising: displaying on a display tableau a puzzle-key field comprising a plurality of letter pools, each letter pool being identified by an indicator icon, each letter pool comprising a letter set of at least one alphabetic letter; displaying on the display tableau a puzzle-solution field comprising a plurality of answer slots, the plurality of answer slots aligned horizontally to form a string; displaying on the display tableau a plurality of indicator icons, each indicator icon associated with a one answer slot, each indicator icon indicating for the one answer slot the letter pool from which to select a correct letter for the one answer slot as similarly discussed above.
14. Dropquote discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the indicator icons are displayed on the display tableau vertically superior to the answer slots (letters above columns).
18-19. Dropquote discloses a method of creating a word puzzle, the method comprising: defining a plurality of letter pools, each letter pool being identified by an indicator icon, each letter pool comprising a letter set of at least two alphabetic letters; providing a puzzle-solution field comprising a plurality of answer slots and one or more blank spaces to form a string of words; associating with each answer slot an appropriate indicator icon, wherein the appropriate indicator icon for each answer slot is the indicator icon that indicates the letter pool containing a correct alphabetic character for the answer slot, wherein the string of words is a proverb, an adage, a saying, or a saw as similarly discussed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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(s) 8, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dropquote as applied above.
8. Dropquote discloses the word puzzle of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose a history field displayed on the display tableau, the history field indicating a previous solution to a previous puzzle; however, since players can register for a member, it is notoriously well known to keep a record of previous solution to a previous puzzle and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to incorporate such feature and would yield predictable results for presenting previous solution to a previous puzzle.
17. Dropquote discloses the method of claim 16, but does not expressly disclose wherein the title field comprises an abbreviation displayed on a far-left side of the title field and the abbreviation is a grouping of four letters: “P.A.S.S.” This is a design choice that would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to implement and would yield predictable result.
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dropquote as applied above and further in view of Fallen Phrases. Feb 19, 2019. < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_4gcvPbypE> . Accessed 2/24/2026 (“Fallen Phrases” from hereinafter.
15. The method of claim 11, but does not expressly disclose wherein the indicator icons are displayed on the display tableau vertically inferior to the answer slots. Fallen Phrases the indicator icons are displayed on the display tableau vertically inferior to the answer slots (letters below columns, as can be seen in the screenshot below). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to modify Dropquote with Fallen Phrases as it is a matter of design choice.
PNG
media_image2.png
583
724
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached USPTO form PTO-892.
Filing of New or Amended Claims
The examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the original disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims. See Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 263, 191 USPQ at 97 (“[T]he PTO has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasons why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims.”). However, when filing an amendment an applicant should show support in the original disclosure for new or amended claims. See MPEP § 714.02 and § 2163.06 (“Applicant should specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure.”). Please see MPEP 2163 (II) 3. (b)
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SENG H LIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3301. 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, David L. Lewis can be reached at (571) 272-7673. 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.
/Seng H Lim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715