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 .
Applicant’s submission of a Response
Applicant’s submission of a response was received on 08/19/2026. Presently, claims 1-16 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Office Action mailed 05/19/2026. Applicant’s representative asserts that the amended claims limitations are not met. However, in light of the amendments to the claims, new rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been presented, as discussed in detail below.
In regards to rejections under 35 U.S.C. §103, applicant asserts the following: “Applicant notes that the cited paragraph is directed only to when a betting period is closed, but does not teach the features of amended claim 1 wherein (i) the dealer console opens "a betting window for the second roulette wheel during a wheel spin associated with a gaming event at the first roulette wheel" and (ii) that "initiation of a gaming event at the second roulette wheel is conditioned on receipt, at the dealer console, of a dealer confirmation of a result of the gaming event at the first roulette wheel." Accordingly, at least this feature of amended claim 1 is not taught by the cited portions of Atkinson.” (Page 8 of Remarks)
Regarding point (1), the examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to the arguments above, (i) a betting window is opened by the dealer and the dealer has full control of the betting periods (¶45 of Atkinson) and different roulette games are associated (for example: they are associated through the same screen as shown in ¶76 and Fig 6 of Atkinson). (2) In regards to "initiation of a gaming event at the second roulette wheel is conditioned on receipt, at the dealer console, of a dealer confirmation of a result of the gaming event at the first roulette wheel." The office relies on newly found prior art Jay CHUN (US 20200143627 A1) in order to teach these limitations (See 103 rejection below).
Regarding claim 11, since it recites similar features to claim 1, the rejection is maintained as present below.
Applicant’s representative argues that since the prior art does not disclose or suggest the suggested features of claim 1 or 11 and so, dependent claims are patentable. However, in light of the remarks and standing rejection below, the examiner asserts the prior art of record teaches all the elements as claimed and these elements satisfy all structural, functional, operational, and spatial limitations currently in the claims. Therefore, the standing rejections are proper and maintained.
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 and 3-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson et al. (US 20190051102 A1; hereinafter Atkinson) in view of Mark C. Nicely (US 20130059647 A1; hereinafter Nicely) in view of Jay CHUN (US 20200143627 A1; hereinafter Chun).
Regarding claim 1, Atkinson discloses a roulette gaming system (system applied to roulette; ¶31), comprising: a roulette table (dealer station 120 has a gaming table; ¶31 and Fig 1); at least one camera (camera; ¶40) capturing a live feed (obtaining game information over the live table; ¶31 and ¶40) of the first roulette wheel and a live feed of the second roulette wheel (live feed of roulette machines 610 and 615; ¶76 and Fig. 6); a dealer console provided at the roulette table (dealer video touch interface 124; ¶31), the dealer console comprising an interactive user interface to enable a dealer to manage gaming aspects of roulette events at the first roulette wheel and the second roulette wheel (dealer terminal used to administer the game and for other purposes; ¶31), wherein the dealer console opens a betting window (dealer station opens betting window by initiating a countdown; ¶43) for the second roulette wheel during a wheel spin associated with a gaming event at the first roulette wheel (Atkinson does not mention doing the alternating betting windows but the dealer gets to have direct control to close the betting period in ¶45, which allows the dealer to close the betting window when he wants and for further clarification roulette games are associated, for example they are associated through the same screen as shown in ¶76 and Fig 6 of Atkinson); and a gaming interface provided at a player display (player terminal 110; ¶31 and Fig 1), wherein the gaming interface provides the live feed of the first roulette wheel and the live feed of the second roulette wheel (provides visual feed to player's terminal; ¶31 and Fig 4), and the gaming interface is configured to receive a bet during a betting window set at the dealer console (touchscreen interface to enter bets; ¶30).
Atkinson does disclose a first roulette wheel and a second roulette wheel in the live feed of the player (¶76 and Fig. 6), but does not disclose the table comprising a first roulette wheel and a second roulette wheel, and wherein initiation of a gaming event at the second roulette wheel is conditioned on receipt, at the dealer console, of a dealer confirmation of a result of the gaming event at the first roulette wheel. However, Nicely teaches the table comprising a first roulette wheel and a second roulette wheel (multiple roulettes shown in Fig 3).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Atkinson to implement the teachings of Nicely for the benefit of increasing game frequency by reducing downtime between spins. By having more roulettes, the players are allowed more play time and they can develop different strategies that take into consideration the amount of roulettes on the table.
Chun teaches wherein initiation of a gaming event at the second roulette wheel is conditioned on receipt, at the dealer console, of a dealer confirmation of a result of the gaming event at the first roulette wheel (the master game server has the ability of scheduling or controlling the start time and/or pace for various table games administered across the system, such as depending upon start times of the previous or other recently started games in ¶69-71, so one of ordinary will conclude that a second roulette game in ¶33 will be controlled to start whenever the system wants, such as after the previous or other recently started games finish).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Atkinson to implement the teachings of Chun for the benefit of increasing game frequency by reducing downtime between spins. By having more roulettes, the players are allowed more play time and they can develop different strategies that take into consideration the amount of roulettes on the table.
Regarding claim 3, Atkinson discloses wherein the dealer console provides at least one selection to provide an indication, at the gaming interface, for at least one of: a time left to accept bets, no more bets, and gaming event results (closing the betting period, which is then relayed to other player terminals; ¶45).
Regarding claim 4, Atkinson discloses wherein the dealer console comprises a first display to manage gaming aspects of the first roulette wheel (dealer terminal 124 has a display and is configured to be manage gaming aspects such as a “squeeze” gesture in ¶47, but this can also be applied to a roulette game as mentioned in ¶31).
Atkinson does not explicitly disclose a second display to manage gaming aspects of the second roulette wheel, however, this is a duplication of parts. Since a second display to manage gaming aspects of the second roulette wheel has the exact same structure and function as the first display in claim 4, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Atkinson with a second display to manage gaming aspects of the second roulette wheel since it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (see MPEP 2144.04, VI, B Duplication of Parts. In this case there is no new and unexpected result. Regarding claim 5, Atkinson discloses wherein the dealer console provides current wheel status information for the first roulette wheel (current status wheel information includes results and confirming games results is done through the touchscreen interface 124; ¶39).
Atkinson does not explicitly disclose the dealer console providing current wheel status information for the second roulette wheel; however, this is a duplication of parts. Since the dealer console providing current wheel status information for the second roulette wheel has the exact same structure and function for the first roulette wheel in claim 5, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Atkinson with the dealer console providing current wheel status information for the second roulette wheel since it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (see MPEP 2144.04, VI, B Duplication of Parts. In this case there is no new and unexpected result.
Regarding claim 6, Atkinson discloses wherein the current wheel status information includes at least one of: a wheel communication status, an idle status, a movement status, a roulette ball status, a result, and an error status (current status wheel information includes results and confirming games results is done through the touchscreen interface 124; ¶39).
Regarding claim 7, Atkinson discloses wherein the gaming interface provides, on a display, a first area comprising a betting layout for the first roulette wheel, and a second area comprising a betting layout for the second roulette wheel (betting layout for both a first wheel 610 and a second wheel 620; Fig 6).
Regarding claim 8, Atkinson discloses wherein the gaming interface displays the result of the gaming event (recent results shown in the player terminal; ¶30), in real-time (live visual feed is in real time; ¶31).
Regarding claim 9, Atkinson discloses wherein the first area comprises the live feed of the first roulette wheel, and the second area comprises the live feed of the second roulette wheel (live feed on player terminals in ¶40 and being shown in Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 10, Atkinson discloses wherein the gaming interface displays a time left in the betting window (timed countdown ¶43).
Regarding claim 11, Atkinson discloses a roulette table (system applied to roulette and dealer station 120 has a gaming table; ¶31); at least one camera capturing a live feed of the first roulette wheel and a live feed of the second roulette wheel (camera providing live feed in ¶40 and Fig 6); at least one display to be directed toward a dealer operating the dual roulette table (dealer terminal used to administer the game and for other purposes; ¶31), wherein the at least one display comprises the live feed of the first roulette wheel and the live feed of the second roulette wheel (provides visual feed to player's terminal; ¶31 and Fig 6); and an interactive dealer interface provided on the at least one display to enable the dealer to operate gaming events at the first roulette wheel and the second roulette wheel (dealer terminal used to administer the game and for other purposes; ¶31).
However, Atkinson does not explicitly disclose the table to be a dual roulette table comprising: a first roulette wheel and a second roulette wheel provided on a top surface of a standalone gaming cabinet, wherein initiation of a gaming event at the second roulette wheel is conditioned on receipt of a dealer confirmation of a result of the gaming event at the first roulette wheel. However, Nicely teaches a dual roulette table (table with 2 or more roulettes; Fig 3) comprising: a first roulette wheel and a second roulette wheel provided on a top surface of a standalone gaming cabinet (provided on the top surface as shown in Fig 3).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Atkinson to implement the teachings of Nicely for the benefit of increasing game frequency by reducing downtime between spins. By having more roulettes, the players are allowed more play time and they can develop different strategies that take into consideration the amount of roulettes on the table.
Chun teaches wherein initiation of a gaming event at the second roulette wheel is conditioned on receipt of a dealer confirmation of a result of the gaming event at the first roulette wheel (the master game server has the ability of scheduling or controlling the start time and/or pace for various table games administered across the system, such as depending upon start times of the previous or other recently started games in ¶69-71, so one of ordinary will conclude that a second roulette game in ¶33 will be controlled to start whenever the system wants, such as after the previous or other recently started games finish).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Atkinson to implement the teachings of Chun for the benefit of increasing game frequency by reducing downtime between spins. By having more roulettes, the players are allowed more play time and they can develop different strategies that take into consideration the amount of roulettes on the table.
Regarding claim 12, Atkinson discloses wherein the standalone gaming cabinet comprises an interior portion for housing electronic components (inherent because this is an electronic table that has an electronic placard display 126; ¶31 and Fig 1).
Regarding claim 13, Atkinson discloses further comprising at least one computing device configured to provide, to a player display (player terminal 110; ¶31 and Fig 1), the live feed of the first roulette wheel and the live feed of the second roulette wheel (live feed on player terminals in ¶40 and being shown in Fig. 6), and wherein the player display is further configured to receive wagers during a betting window set via the interactive dealer interface (touchscreen interface to enter bets in ¶30 with betting layout for both a first wheel 610 and a second wheel 620; Fig 6).
Regarding claim 14, Atkinson discloses wherein the interactive dealer interface opens a betting window for the second roulette wheel during a wheel spin associated with a gaming event at the first roulette wheel, and closes the betting window when a result of the gaming event at the first roulette wheel is confirmed (Atkinson does not mention doing the alternating betting windows but the dealer gets to have direct control to close the betting period in ¶45, which allows the dealer to close the betting window when he wants).
Regarding claim 15, Atkinson discloses wherein the top surface of the standalone gaming cabinet is a semi-circular shape (semicircular shape for dealer terminal station 120 shown in Fig 1).
Regarding claim 16, Atkinson discloses further comprising a first display displaying the live feed of the first roulette wheel (large screen displays used to provide a live visual feed of the game; ¶31 and Fig 1 – third large screen on the bottom is displaying a roulette game), a second display displaying the live feed of the second roulette wheel (large screen displays used to provide a live visual feed of the game; ¶31 and Fig 1 – fourth large screen on the bottom is displaying a second roulette game), and a third display displaying the interactive dealer interface (touchscreen interface 124 to allow the dealer to interact with the dealer station; ¶31).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson in view of Nicely as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Witty et al. (AU2012203634A1; hereinafter Witty).
Regarding claim 2, Atkinson does not explicitly disclose wherein the dealer console provides a selection for the dealer to a choose a next spin direction for the first roulette wheel and a next spin direction for the second roulette wheel.
However, Witty teaches wherein the dealer console provides a selection for the dealer to a choose a next spin direction for the first roulette wheel and a next spin the second roulette wheel (having the ability to spin the roulette is necessary for the roulette game to be played and in the Figure 1 the ball 5 has settled in the pocket market "24" and the roulette wheel normally spins continuously however when launching the ball, the croupier will reverse the spin direction of both ball and wheel from the previous game; ¶92)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Atkinson to implement the teachings of Witty because it is necessary for a roulette game to spin in order to be played.
Conclusion
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 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 JOSE ANGELES whose telephone number is (703)756-5338. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 8am-5pm.
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.
/JOSE ANGELES/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/Jay Trent Liddle/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights