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 .
Status of Claims
In response to the Amendment filed on June 4th, 2026, claims 1 and 11 have been amended. Claims 21-24 are newly added. Claims 1-24 are currently pending.
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 1-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Step 1:
Claims 1-10 and 22-23 are drawn to a gaming system (machine).
Claims 11-21 are drawn to a method (process).
Claim 24 is drawn to a gaming system (machine).
Thus, initially, under Step 1 of the analysis, it is noted that the claims are directed towards eligible categories of subject matter.
Step 2A:
However, under Step 2A, the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea). The claims are directed to the abstract idea of fundamental economic practices (i.e. wagering).
Let us begin by considering the requirements of each independent claim:
Thus, let us take Claim 1 as exemplary:
A gaming system comprising:
one or more gameplay stations, the one or more gameplay stations each including a user interface; and
a gaming server in communication with the one or more gameplay stations through a communications interface, the gaming server comprising a memory and a processor configured for executing instructions stored on the memory to perform the following steps:
receive a gameplay request from at least one of the one or more gameplay stations;
evaluate the gameplay request based on one or more corresponding award levels from a score sheet (certain methods of organizing human activity: fundamental economic practices such as wagering; wagering includes actions such as receiving an input/wager, determining an outcome, and using the outcome to settle the wager); and
determine a reward value for the gameplay request using the one or more corresponding award levels and a wager pot processing system (certain methods of organizing human activity: fundamental economic practices such as wagering; wagering includes actions such as receiving an input/wager, determining an outcome and award, and using the outcome to settle the wager);
wherein the one or more corresponding award levels include at least a dynamic value based on a wager pot pool of the wager pot processing system (certain methods of organizing human activity: fundamental economic practices such as wagering; wagering includes actions such as receiving an input/wager, determining an outcome and award, and using the outcome to settle the wager), and
wherein the wager pot pool includes a plurality of wager pot pool tier levels, wherein two or more of the wager pot pool tier levels have different values, wherein said reward value is determined based on both the wager pot pool value and the wager pot pool tier level of the wager pot pool (certain methods of organizing human activity: fundamental economic practices such as wagering; wagering includes actions such as receiving an input/wager, determining an outcome and award, and using the outcome to settle the wager).
Under broadest reasonable interpretation, independent claims 1, 11, and 24 are directed to the fundamental economic practice of wagering, aside from the reference to a generic computer or generic gaming components (e.g. one or more gameplay stations, a gaming server, a memory, a processor).
The second prong of Step 2A, ask whether the claims recite additional elements that would integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Here, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. Claims 1, 11, and 24 recite the additional elements of one or more gameplay stations, a gaming server, a memory, and a processor, along with the step of receiving a gameplay request. The gameplay stations, gaming server, memory, and processor are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. a generic computer or gaming components performing generic computer functions like processing and transmitting data) and do not add any meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because it amounts to simply invoking a computer or generic gaming components as a tool to perform an existing process in their ordinary capacity and/or generally linking the abstract idea to a technological environment. In other words, the claims invoke the gameplay stations, gaming server, memory, and processor merely as tools to execute the abstract idea. Additionally, the additional element of receiving a gameplay request is considered insignificant extra-solution activity related to transmitting data and does not add any meaningful limitation to the abstract idea.
Step 2B:
Step 2B asks whether a claimed invention which fails Step 2A contains an inventive concept, i.e. significantly more. Independent claims 1 and 11 do not include additional elements, when considered individually and in combination, that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the gameplay stations, gaming server, memory, and processor are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as generic computer components performing generic computer functions like processing and transmitting data) and simply amount to implementing the abstract idea using a generic computer or gaming components. The additional elements that were considered insignificant pre-solution or extra-solution activity have been re-analyzed and do not amount to anything more than what is well-understood, routine and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d), Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) ("Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, the claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result--a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink AND Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93).
The combination of additional elements adds nothing that is not already present when considered separately. Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea without significantly more.
Dependent claims
Claims 2-10 and 12-23 inherit the same abstract idea as claims 1, 11, and 24.
Claims 2-10 and 12-23 recite further additional element limitations related to wagering (i.e. pool/reward amounts, commissions, bingo rules). These additional elements, under their BRI, fall within the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping(s) of abstract ideas and/or are additional elements that are considered insignificant pre-solution or extra-solution activities, and do not add any meaningful limitation to the abstract idea and do not amount to anything more than what is well-understood, routine and conventional, as would flow naturally from the similar recitations discussed above.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 9-17, and 19-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Saffari et al. (US 2006/0052160 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Saffari discloses a gaming system comprising:
one or more gameplay stations, the one or more gameplay stations each including a user interface (see fig. 2 and par. [0069], The gaming unit 20 may include one or more audio speakers 62, a coin return tray 64, an input control panel 66, upper and lower color video display units 68, 70 for displaying images relating to the game or games provided by the gaming unit 20); and
a gaming server in communication with the one or more gameplay stations through a communications interface, the gaming server comprising a memory and a processor configured for executing instructions stored on the memory to perform the following steps (see par. [0082], The network 40, and hence the individual gaming units 20, 30, may be communicatively connected to network computers or servers 22, 32…The network computer 22 may include a memory 138 for storing programs and routines, a microprocessor 140 (MP) for executing the stored programs, a random access memory 142 (RAM) and an input/output bus 144 (I/O)):
receive a gameplay request from at least one of the one or more gameplay stations (see par. [0089], When the first player enrolls in the Bingo game, the Bingo card 802 may be selected at random by the controller 100 of the gaming unit 20);
evaluate the gameplay request based on one or more corresponding award levels from a score sheet (see par. [0094], In some implementations of the multi-player Bingo game, the first player or players matching the game-winning pattern may be awarded a fixed prize amount, or a prize amount proportionate to the amount wagered by the player or players on the occurrence of the Bingo game); and
determine a reward value for the gameplay request using the one or more corresponding award levels and a wager pot processing system (see par. [0094], For example, a player may be awarded an additional prize from the prize pool for matching a five number pattern when ten or fewer balls have been drawn, or by covering the entire Bingo card when fewer than 30 balls have been drawn);
wherein the one or more corresponding award levels include at least a dynamic value based on a wager pot pool of the wager pot processing system (see par. [0098], As previously discussed, the Bingo win award may be a fixed award amount, an amount proportionate to the players wager, a portion or all of an accumulated prize pool, or a combination of various award amounts), and
wherein the wager pot pool includes a plurality of wager pot pool tier levels, wherein two or more of the wager pot pool tier levels have different values, wherein said reward value is determined based on both the wager pot pool value and the wager pot pool tier level of the wager pot pool (see par. [0121], The progressive jackpot may be a multi-tier progressive jackpot. For example, the progressive jackpot may have a smaller progressive awarded as frequently as a Bingo win award. In addition, the progressive jackpot may have a much larger progressive that may be awarded infrequently. The larger progressive may even be a wide area progressive wherein the gaming units 20 of the Bingo gaming system 10 may be distributed in a plurality of gaming locations. The large progressive may cover all of the gaming locations, while the small progressive may be fund by and awarded to players at one of the gaming locations).
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Saffari discloses wherein the gameplay request comprises at least a bingo card and a bingo call (see par. [0072], For the multi-player Bingo game, the control panel of the gaming unit 20 may be provided with a plurality of selection buttons 76, each of which may allow the player to select a different number of Bingo cards to play prior to enrolling in the Bingo game), and wherein the score sheet comprises specified card patterns with the one or more corresponding award levels for determining the reward value (see par. [0094], For example, a player may be awarded an additional prize from the prize pool for matching a five number pattern when ten or fewer balls have been drawn, or by covering the entire Bingo card when fewer than 30 balls have been drawn).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Saffari discloses wherein the award levels comprise a percentage value of the wager pot pool (see par. [0098], As previously discussed, the Bingo win award may be a fixed award amount, an amount proportionate to the players wager, a portion or all of an accumulated prize pool, or a combination of various award amounts).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Saffari discloses wherein the award levels comprise a percentage value of the wager pot pool and a minimum reward (see par. [0098], As previously discussed, the Bingo win award may be a fixed award amount, an amount proportionate to the players wager, a portion or all of an accumulated prize pool, or a combination of various award amounts).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Saffari discloses wherein the gameplay request further comprises a wager value, wherein the wager value determines the specified card patterns and the one or more corresponding award levels that are enabled for determining the reward value for the respective gameplay request (see par. [0193], Moreover, in some implementations, only player's making the maximum wager on an occurrence of the base wagering game may be eligible to win the progressive jackpot).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Saffari discloses wherein the wager pot processing system comprises a plurality of wager pot pools (see par. [0245], In alternative implementations, a progressive jackpot pool may be subdivided into a main pool from which progressive jackpot awards may be paid, and a reserve pool that may be used to replenish the main pool after an award is paid out to a winning player).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Saffari discloses wherein the gameplay request further comprises a selection of one of the plurality of wager pot pools (see par. [0193], Moreover, in some implementations, only player's making the maximum wager on an occurrence of the base wagering game may be eligible to win the progressive jackpot).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, Saffari discloses wherein the specified card patterns include interim patterns corresponding to static reward values of the one or more corresponding award levels and winning patterns corresponding to dynamic reward values of the one or more corresponding award levels for determining the reward value (see par. [0134], In one embodiment, players may be awarded prizes for matching predefined interim patterns on their Bingo cards having associated award amounts during the course of the Bingo game. The patterns may be termed “interim” because the patterns may be matched during the course of the game, and the patterns do not result in the termination of the game when they are matched. The Bingo game terminates only when one or more players match the game-winning pattern; also see par. [0098], As previously discussed, the Bingo win award may be a fixed award amount, an amount proportionate to the players wager, a portion or all of an accumulated prize pool, or a combination of various award amounts).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Saffari discloses wherein the score sheet further comprises a ball count associated with the specified patterns (see par. [0094], For example, a player may be awarded an additional prize from the prize pool for matching a five number pattern when ten or fewer balls have been drawn, or by covering the entire Bingo card when fewer than 30 balls have been drawn).
Regarding claim 21, Saffari discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable mediums having instructions stored thereon, which, when executed by one or more processors cause the one or more processors to perform the method according to claim 11 (see par. [0077], Referring to FIG. 3, the gaming unit 20 may include a controller 100 that may comprise a program memory 102, a microcontroller or microprocessor (MP) 104, a random-access memory (RAM) 106 and an input/output (I/O) circuit 108, all of which may be interconnected via an address/data bus 110).
Regarding claim 22, Saffari discloses wherein the gaming system is configured such that the wager pot pool is configured to accommodate both single and multiple denominations (see par. [0229], In other implementations, the progressive jackpot may be offered with wagering games having different wagering structures. In one example, the Bingo gaming system 10 having gaming units 20 with $0.01 Bingo games as described in the preceding example may further include gaming units 30 with $1.00 Bingo games wherein a player may wager from one to fifteen credits, with each credit being worth $1.00 resulting in a wagering range of from $1.00 to $15.00 on an occurrence of the Bingo game).
Regarding claim 23, Saffari discloses wherein the gaming system is configured such that the wager pot pool is configured to accommodate a single denomination (see par. [0223], In one type of implementation, the progressive jackpot may be offered with a single wagering game played on multiple machines each having the same wagering structure).
Regarding claim 24, Saffari discloses a gaming system comprising:
one or more gameplay stations, the one or more gameplay stations each including a user interface (see fig. 2 and par. [0069], The gaming unit 20 may include one or more audio speakers 62, a coin return tray 64, an input control panel 66, upper and lower color video display units 68, 70 for displaying images relating to the game or games provided by the gaming unit 20); and
a gaming server in communication with the one or more gameplay stations through a communications interface, the gaming server comprising a memory and a processor configured to execute instructions stored on the memory to perform the following steps (see par. [0082], The network 40, and hence the individual gaming units 20, 30, may be communicatively connected to network computers or servers 22, 32…The network computer 22 may include a memory 138 for storing programs and routines, a microprocessor 140 (MP) for executing the stored programs, a random access memory 142 (RAM) and an input/output bus 144 (I/O)):
receive a gameplay request from at least one of the one or more gameplay stations (see par. [0089], When the first player enrolls in the Bingo game, the Bingo card 802 may be selected at random by the controller 100 of the gaming unit 20);
evaluate the gameplay request based on one or more corresponding award levels from a score sheet (see par. [0094], In some implementations of the multi-player Bingo game, the first player or players matching the game-winning pattern may be awarded a fixed prize amount, or a prize amount proportionate to the amount wagered by the player or players on the occurrence of the Bingo game); and
determine a reward value for the gameplay request using the one or more corresponding award levels and a wager pot processing system (see par. [0094], For example, a player may be awarded an additional prize from the prize pool for matching a five number pattern when ten or fewer balls have been drawn, or by covering the entire Bingo card when fewer than 30 balls have been drawn);
wherein the one or more corresponding award levels include at least a dynamic value based on a wager pot pool of the wager pot processing system (see par. [0098], As previously discussed, the Bingo win award may be a fixed award amount, an amount proportionate to the players wager, a portion or all of an accumulated prize pool, or a combination of various award amounts), and
wherein the gaming system is configured such that the wager pot pool is configured to accommodate both single and multiple denominations (see par. [0229], In other implementations, the progressive jackpot may be offered with wagering games having different wagering structures. In one example, the Bingo gaming system 10 having gaming units 20 with $0.01 Bingo games as described in the preceding example may further include gaming units 30 with $1.00 Bingo games wherein a player may wager from one to fifteen credits, with each credit being worth $1.00 resulting in a wagering range of from $1.00 to $15.00 on an occurrence of the Bingo game).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 8 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saffari et al. (US 2006/0052160 A1) in view of Holch (US 7,695,366 B1).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Saffari discloses the gaming system as discussed above. However, Saffari does not explicitly disclose wherein the wager pot processing system is configured to extract a predetermined commission value from at least one of the wager value, the wager pot pool, and the reward value.
Holch teaches a cashless computerized wager pool game system and method wherein the wager pot processing system is configured to extract a predetermined commission value from at least one of the wager value, the wager pot pool, and the reward value (see col. 1, lines 62-67, The house then takes a slice of money off the top of the player pool, called a "takeout." This takeout amount is, in essence, a commission to the gaming operator for sponsoring the event(s) or game. The typical commission percentage for table Poker is usually no more than 5% of the player pool for each hand or for each game). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the gaming system of Saffari with the commission of Holch so that the casino can derive a profit from the games (see Holch, col. 1, lines 47-48).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 4th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the claimed invention provides improved gaming systems and methods and enable an advantage of improved variability and enjoyment in class II gaming. Applicant cites paragraphs [0007]-[0012] of the Specification which generally discusses the background of class II gaming along with the desire for improved gaming systems. However, these paragraphs do not provide any insight as to the specific technical solution that Applicant is seeking to accomplish (see MPEP 2106.05(a) Improvements to the Functioning of a Computer or To Any Other Technology or Technical Field, “Conversely, if the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner (i.e., a bare assertion of an improvement without the detail necessary to be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art), the examiner should not determine the claim improves technology”). Further, the assertion that improved variability and enjoyment provides an advantage is a subjective matter (i.e. different players may have different preferences) and not necessarily an improvement in the technology. Because there are no claim elements or limitations that clearly demonstrate an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to gaming technology, the claimed abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application.
With respect to Applicant’s amendments of claims 1 and 11 to include “wherein the wager pot pool includes a plurality of wager pot pool tier levels, wherein two or more of the wager pot pool tier levels have different values, wherein said reward value is determined based on both the wager pot pool value and the wager pot pool tier level of the wager pot pool”, the Examiner notes that Saffari teaches this limitation. Saffari describes a multi-tier jackpot with two tier levels, each level having a different value and wherein said reward value is determined based on both the wager pot pool value and the wager pot pool tier level of the wager pot pool (see par. [0121], The progressive jackpot may be a multi-tier progressive jackpot. For example, the progressive jackpot may have a smaller progressive awarded as frequently as a Bingo win award. In addition, the progressive jackpot may have a much larger progressive that may be awarded infrequently. The larger progressive may even be a wide area progressive wherein the gaming units 20 of the Bingo gaming system 10 may be distributed in a plurality of gaming locations. The large progressive may cover all of the gaming locations, while the small progressive may be fund by and awarded to players at one of the gaming locations). Thus, Saffari teaches the invention as claimed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLEN CHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5529. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 11:00 AM EST to 7:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALLEN CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715 8/26/2026
Prosecution Insights