Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-31 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Muir (US 2007/0021198 A1) in view of Hedrick (US 2003/0054881 A1).
1. Muir discloses a system comprising: a network interface (Fig. 1-3);
responsive to a detection of a portable electronic device being within a range of a housing of the electronic gaming machine (a gaming machine equipped with a wireless interface (e.g., Bluetooth) can detect and establish communication with a player’s portable electronic device (cell phone, PDA, etc.) when the device is within wireless range of the gaming machine), [0132], [0134]:
generate data, and cause at least the generated data to be wirelessly transmitted to the portable electronic device while the portable electronic device is executing an application associated with a storage of authentication information of a user (using a direct wireless interface (such as Bluetooth), the gaming machine establishes a wireless communication session (e.g., piconet) with the portable electronic device. Once the wireless session is established, the system transmits messages, prompts, confirmations, and secure signals wirelessly to the mobile device. The portable electronic device is associated with the player’s authentication information (e.g., player ID, registered mobile number, or stored credentials) and is used by the player for authentication process), [0132], [0134], [0148] and
following an authentication of the generated data: cause a transmission, to a remote server and via the network interface, of the stored authentication information of the user to automatically log in the user (upon successful verification, the server sends a secure signal to the gaming machine to associate/secure the machine for that player, effectively logging the player into the session), [0015], [0017], [0018], and
cause the game controller of the electronic gaming machine to increase a credit meter of the electronic gaming machine based on an amount of credits from the remote server (after the player is authenticated and the machine is secured for the player, the system supports transfer of funds/credits from the player’s remote account (bank, casino account, etc.) to the gaming machine via the mobile device and central server), [0034], [0158]-[0160], [0162].
Muir does not expressly disclose a processor that is independent of the main game controller of the electronic gaming machine (such as a dedicated player tracking controller or secondary controller) for performing the detection, data generation, and wireless communication functions.
Hedrick discloses a dedicated player tracking controller (or secondary processor) that is independent of the main game controller of the EGM and is supported by the EGM housing (Fig. 3), [0030], [0072]. This independent processor handles detection of portable wireless devices within range, generates authentication/pairing data, performs secure wireless communication with the portable device, and manages the exchange of player authentication information, (Fig. 3), [0030], [0035], [0064]-[0066].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the portable-device-based wireless authentication and remote server login system taught by Muir by incorporating the independent player tracking controller/secondary processor of Hedrick and would have been motivated to do so to provide a more secure, modular, and regulatory-compliant architecture in which wireless patron identification, authentication, and account access functions are handled by a dedicated secondary processor separate from the main game controller.
2. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the amount of credits from the remote server are from an account maintained by the remote server in association with the user, (220: Fig. 5), [0053], [0190].
3. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the authentication of the generated data is based on the generated data matching other data generated distinct from the processor [0160]-[0161].
4. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein additional data is wirelessly received from the portable electronic device after the generated data is wirelessly transmitted to the portable electronic device, Muir [0148], [0160]-[0161], (Fig. 9).
5. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 4, wherein the additional data comprises the stored authentication information of the user, Muir [0148], [0160]-[0161], (Fig. 9).
6. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 4, wherein the memory device stores a plurality of further instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to automatically log in the user, Muir [0148], [0160]-[0161], (Fig. 9).
7. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 6, wherein the user is logged in responsive to the additional data received from the portable electronic device being associated with the generated data, Muir [0148], [0160]-[0161], (Fig. 9).
8. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the user is automatically logged into the remote server as discussed above.
9. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the user is automatically logged into the electronic gaming machine as discussed above.
10. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein wirelessly transmitting the generated data to the portable electronic device includes emitting near-field radio waves (i.e. Bluetooth as discussed above).
11. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the generated data expires after a period of time, Muir [0149].
12. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the game controller of the electronic gaming machine is caused to increase the credit meter of the electronic gaming machine via the network interface (i.e. the player can transfer funds to the gaming machine from the server which would increase the credit meter on the gaming machine), Muir [0034], [0162].
13. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is supported by the housing of the electronic gaming machine, Hedrick (Fig. 3), [0030], [0072].
14. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the processor comprises a player tracking controller, Hedrick (Fig. 3), [0030], [0072].
15. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the processor comprises a card reader controller [0056].
16. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the processor comprises a bill validator controller, Muir [0052].
17. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the processor comprises a printer controller, Muir [0056].
18. Muir and Hedrick disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the wireless transmission of the generated data occurs independent of any content being displayed by any display device, Muir [0132], [0134], [0148].
19-31. Muir and Hedrick disclose a method of operating a system, the method comprising: responsive to detection of a portable electronic device being within a range of a housing of an electronic gaming machine: generating, by a processor that is independent of a game controller of the electronic gaming machine, data, and causing, by the processor, at least the generated data to be wirelessly transmitted to the portable electronic device while the portable electronic device is executing an application associated with a storage of authentication information of a user, and following an authentication of the generated data: causing a transmission, to a remote server and via a network interface, of the stored authentication information of the user to automatically log in the user, and causing the game controller of the electronic gaming machine to increase a credit meter of the electronic gaming machine based on an amount of credits from the remote server as similarly discussed above.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-31 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 10,706,677 and claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,087,131. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
U.S. Patent No. 10,706,677 claims a gaming system and method for providing secure logon to an electronic gaming machine using a portable electronic device. The claims recite, inter alia:
Detection of a portable electronic device within range of the gaming machine housing;
An independent processor (e.g., player tracking controller) generating and wirelessly transmitting data to the portable device;
The portable device executing an application associated with stored user authentication information;
Transmission of authentication information to a remote server for automatic user login; and
Increasing a credit meter on the gaming machine based on credits from the remote server.
U.S. Patent No. 12,087,131 similarly claims related subject matter directed to secure mobile device interaction with gaming machines, including wireless pairing, authentication, and account/credit functions.
The claims of the instant application recite the same or obvious variations of these features, including proximity-based detection of the portable electronic device, generation and wireless transmission of authentication data, use of stored authentication information on the portable device, remote server login, and credit meter increases. Any differences between the claims (e.g., specific processor types, near-field communication, data expiration, or independent controller configurations) constitute obvious variations that would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Therefore, the claims of the instant application are not patentably distinct from the claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 10,706,677 and 12,087,131, and a terminal disclaimer is required to overcome this rejection.
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, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Seng H Lim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights