DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 10, 11, 15 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 10 recites “and a dial interface comprising” where “comprising” appears to be extraneous
Claim 11 is dependent on claim 4, but should depend on claim 10 based on the recitation of “sports betting kiosk” in the preamble.
Claim 15 recites “causing display of at this a second wagering combination” which is incorrect grammar
Claim 16 recites “operable to” cycle” where there is an extraneous quote after the word “to”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-3, 8-10 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. According to the specification, the invention relates to a method of providing a virtual environment responsive to player inputs. Exemplary claims 1 and 10 includes the following underlined claim elements:
1. A kiosk comprising: a dial interface, wherein the dial interface is operable to: receive a wager amount via a turn of the dial interface, wherein receiving the wager amount comprises: increasing the wager amount when the dial interface is turned a first direction; and decreasing the wager amount when the dial interface is turned a second direction; receive confirmation of a wager amount, wherein receiving confirmation of the wager amount comprises receiving a first push at the dial interface; in response to receiving the wager amount, receive a winning amount, wherein receiving the winning amount comprises: increase the displayed winning amount when the dial interface is turned the first direction; and decrease the displayed winning amount when the dial interface is turned the second direction; receive a confirmation of the winning amount, wherein receiving confirmation of the wager amount comprises receiving a second push at the dial interface; and in response to receiving the confirmation of the winning amount, displaying a first wagering combination
10. A sports betting kiosk operable to receive wagers on sporting events, the sports wagering kiosk comprising: a first display; and a dial interface comprising, wherein the dial interface is operable to: receive a wager amount via a turn of the dial interface, wherein receiving the wager amount comprises: increasing the wager amount when the dial interface is turned a first direction; and decreasing the wager amount when the dial interface is turned a second direction; receive confirmation of a wager amount, wherein receiving confirmation of the wager amount comprises receiving a first push at the dial interface; in response to receiving the wager amount, receive a winning amount, wherein receiving the winning amount comprises: increase the displayed winning amount when the dial interface is turned the first direction; and decrease the displayed winning amount when the dial interface is turned the second direction; receive a confirmation of the winning amount, wherein receiving confirmation of the wager amount comprises receiving a second push at the dial interface; and in response to receiving the confirmation of the winning amount, displaying a first wagering combination, wherein the first wager combination is displayed on the first display.
The underlined claim elements above are directed in user interaction in a virtual environment and applying logic to user interactions which is the court enumerated abstract idea of certain methods of organizing human activities, following rules or instructions. The various dependent claims only further detail the abstract ideas or constitute insignificant extra solution activity and consequently are also considered abstract ideas.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims do not recite additional elements that would integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The recited “processor”, “memory” and “display” amount to implementing the abstract idea on a general purpose computer, and/or do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. There is no improvement made to computer technology since the claims are directed to providing a wagering game that responds to player input. This is not related to a long standing problem in computer technology. Additionally, there is no practical application as there is no particular machine that is used to implement the claim language and only generic computer components are used to perform the invention. Also, there is no transformation of the machine used in the application into a different state or thing. Lastly, the claims do not attempt to apply the abstract idea in a meaningful way beyond simply using a generic computer. The various dependent claims only further detail the abstract idea or are insignificant extra solution activity and also fail to rise significantly more than the abstract ideas.
The claims do not recite additional elements, individually or in combination, that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As discussed above with respect to the lack of a practical application, the additional element in the claim amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The same analysis applies here, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer component(s) cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional element(s) or combination of elements in the claim(s) other than the abstract idea(s) computer network system: (i) mere instructions to implement the idea on a computer, and/or (ii) recitation of generic computer structures that serves to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry. Viewed as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself
Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea that lacks significantly more and thus is not patent eligible.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-20 are allowed.
Claims 4-7 and 11-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: after a reasonable search Examiner could not find a reference or series of references that taught: a wagering kiosk operable to receive wagers, the wagering kiosk comprising: at least one processor; a memory; a first display; and a physical dial interface comprising a second display and a round exterior portion coupled to the display, the round exterior portion operable to rotate around the display, wherein the physical dial interface is operable to: receive a wager amount via a turn of the dial interface, wherein receiving the wager amount comprises: increasing the wager amount when the dial interface is turned a first direction; and decreasing the wager amount when the dial interface is turned a second direction; receive confirmation of a wager amount, wherein receiving confirmation of the wager amount comprises receiving a first push at the dial interface; in response to receiving the wager amount, receive a winning amount, wherein receiving the winning amount comprises: increase the displayed winning amount when the dial interface is turned the first direction; and decrease the displayed winning amount when the dial interface is turned the second direction; receive a confirmation of the winning amount, wherein receiving confirmation of the wager amount comprises receiving a second push at the dial interface; in response to receiving the confirmation of the winning amount, causing display of a first wagering combination, wherein the first wager combination is displayed on the first display; and wherein the memory comprises computer executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor; cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising: receive the wager amount and the wining amount via the dial interface; retrieve available betting opportunities; generate a plurality of wager combinations that achieve the winning amount; and cause display of a subset of the wagering combinations, wherein the subset of winning combinations includes the first wagering combination. The closest prior art, Levy (pat. no. 3,909,002), discloses a kiosk with a dial interface allowing the user to place a bet. Levy however, fails to disclose entering a winning amount or presenting a wagering opportunity based on the proposed wager and desired winning amount. Shechtman (pub. no. 20120322540) discloses a user interface for filtering betting opportunities. Shechtman, however, fails to disclose entering betting criteria using a dial interface. There is no permissible motivation for combining the dial interface of Levy with the Shechtman invention.
Regarding 101, although the claims recite an abstract idea, it is integrated into a practical application by recitation of a physical dial.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAWRENCE STEFAN GALKA whose telephone number is (571)270-1386. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-9 & 12-5.
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, 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.
/LAWRENCE S GALKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights