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
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “are” at the end of line 5 should be replaced with --area-- for consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 10 & 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Makhoul et al. (US 20100105460 A1, “Makhoul”) in view of Yoseloff (US 20140087799 A1).
For Claim 10, Makhoul discloses a card table for hybrid gaming (as discussed in at least ¶0076, Makhoul), comprising:
a first card gaming area (one of seats 170) and a second card gaming area provided on a top surface of a standalone gaming cabinet (another of 170 on table 400), wherein a first hand of physical cards for a first card game is dealt at the first card gaming area and a second hand of physical cards for a second card game is dealt at the second card gaming area (the aforementioned gaming areas provide the space in which multiple card games may be played, meeting the claimed limitation);
at least one camera (cameras 120) capturing a live feed of the first card gaming area and the second card gaming area ¶0037,46;
at least one display ¶0073.
Makhoul is silent to wherein the at least one display directed toward a dealer operating the card table, the at least one display comprises the live feed of the first card gaming area and the second card gaming area; an interactive dealer interface provided on the at least one display to enable the dealer to operate gaming events at the first card gaming area and the second card gaming area, wherein the interactive dealer interface opens a betting window for a gaming event at the second card gaming area during a gaming event in progress at the first gaming area.
Yoseloff, like prior art above, teaches a card gaming system (title, disclosure) further comprising at least one display (dealer interface 418, ¶0114) directed toward a dealer operating the card table (“a camera may be also be trained on a player, and the players' video feeds may be transmitted to the dealer and also be shared among the players at the table,” ¶0074), the at least one display comprises the live feed of the first card gaming area and the second card gaming area (Id.); an interactive dealer interface (418) provided on the at least one display to enable the dealer to operate gaming events at the first card gaming area and the second card gaming area ¶0114, wherein the interactive dealer interface opens a betting window for a gaming event at the second card gaming area during a gaming event in progress at the first gaming area (the interactive dealer interface is capable of being used in this manner, meeting the claimed limitation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify the gaming system of Makhoul with a dealer console as taught by Yoseloff, in order to provide the dealer with more information to do a more detailed job in real time, yielding predictable results.
For Claim 11, Makhoul in view of Yoseloff teaches the card table of claim 10, and the resulting device further teaches wherein the standalone gaming cabinet comprises an interior portion for housing electronic components (as discussed in ¶0111, the electronic components of such a system would be housed within the device, and thus it would be capable of housing electronic components).
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 12, & 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Makhoul et al. (US 20100105460 A1, “Makhoul”) in view of Yoseloff (US 20140087799 A1) and Cleveland (US 20230013623 A1).
For Claim 1, Makhoul discloses a card gaming system (title, disclosure), comprising:
a card table (game table 110) comprising a playing surface defining a first gaming area and a second gaming area (seats 170);
at least one camera capturing a live feed of the first gaming area and the second gaming area (cameras 120, ¶0037);
a timer ¶0081-82; and
a gaming interface (350) provided at a player display, wherein the gaming interface provides live feed of at least one of the first gaming area and the second gaming area ¶0073, and the gaming interface is configured to, in response to a selection made at the gaming interface, place a bet for the first gaming event during the betting window set at the dealer console (“Such game decisions can include decisions to fold, raise, check, call, or various other decisions that the remote player may have to make during a card game,” ¶0073-74), wherein the first gaming event comprises a first hand of physical cards dealt at the first gaming area for a first card game and the second gaming event comprises a second hand of physical cards dealt at the second gaming area for a second card game (the aforementioned gaming areas provide the space in which multiple card games may be played, meeting the claimed limitation).
Makhoul is silent to a dealer console provided at the card table, the dealer console comprising an interactive user interface to enable a dealer to manage aspects of gaming events at the card table, wherein the dealer console opens a betting window for a first gaming event at the first gaming area during a second gaming event in progress at the second gaming area, and closes the betting window in response to at least one of: a selection at the interactive user interface and a time expiration of the betting window.
Yoseloff, like prior art above, teaches a card gaming system (title, disclosure) further comprising a dealer console (dealer interface 418, ¶0114) provided at the card table, the dealer console comprising an interactive user interface to enable a dealer to manage aspects of gaming events at the card table (“The table 400 may further include a dealer interface 418, which, like the player interfaces 414a through 414g, may include touch screen controls for assisting the dealer in administering the wagering game,” ¶0114).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify the gaming system of Makhoul with a dealer console as taught by Yoseloff, in order to provide the dealer with more information to do a more detailed job in real time, yielding predictable results.
Cleveland, like prior art above, teaches a card gaming system (title, disclosure) comprising dealer console (“table management system” ¶0160) opens a betting window for a first gaming event, and closes the betting window in response to at least one of: a selection at the interactive dealer interface and a time expiration of the betting window (“time periods” discussed in ¶0160).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify the dealer console of the above-modified reference with timing abilities as taught by Cleveland, in order to provide the dealer with more information to do a more detailed job in real time, yielding predictable results.
For Claim 2, Makhoul as modified above teaches the card gaming system of claim 1, and Yoseloff further teaches wherein the dealer console provides at least one selection, at the gaming interface, for at least one of: a time left to accept bets, no more bets, and1 gaming event results (“The table 400 may further include a dealer interface 418, which, like the player interfaces 414a through 414g, may include touch screen controls for assisting the dealer in administering the wagering game,” ¶0114).
For Claim 3, Makhoul as modified above teaches the card gaming system of claim 1, and Makhoul further teaches wherein the gaming interface displays a result of the first gaming event, in real-time ¶0050.
For Claim 4, Makhoul as modified above teaches the card gaming system of claim 1, and Makhoul further teaches further comprising: one or more player stations arranged around the card gaming table (Fig. 1A), wherein each of the player stations comprise a display providing the gaming interface (350, Fig. 1A).
For Claim 5, Makhoul as modified above teaches the card gaming system of claim 4, and Makhoul further teaches wherein the one or more player stations are located in an arena on a casino floor ¶0030, wherein the arena comprises an interior area (near to the table) and a perimeter (outside of the area near to the table), and the one or more player stations face the card gaming table (Fig. 1A).
For Claim 7, Makhoul as modified above teaches the card gaming system of claim 1, and Makhoul further discloses wherein the betting layout comprises a plurality of areas2 representing individual games playable against a dealer hand (as discussed in ¶0051-57, the remote and/or local players have access to the cards played in the public region 116).
For Claim 8, Makhoul as modified above teaches the card gaming system of claim 1, and the resulting device further teaches further comprising: a card shoe (115, Makhoul) in communication with the dealer console (modified from Yoseloff), wherein a card drawn from the card shoe is displayed on at least one of3 the interactive user interface and the gaming interface (in order to operate as intended, the system would display the cards to the user locally 414, 418 of Yoseloff or remotely via 350, Makhoul).
For Claim 9, Makhoul as modified above teaches the card gaming system of claim 1, and Yoseloff further suggests wherein the interactive user interface (418) is configured to automatically resolve the bet for the first gaming event after the result of the first gaming event is confirmed (the interactive dealer interface is at least partially responsible for resolving the bets, as discussed in ¶0114,90, the calculations being done automatically).
For claim 12, Makhoul as modified above teaches the card gaming system of claim 1, and Makhoul further discloses wherein the player display is a display of a remote computing device located remote from the card table (350: “Such game decisions can include decisions to fold, raise, check, call, or various other decisions that the remote player may have to make during a card game,” ¶0073-74).
For claim 13, Makhoul as modified above teaches the card gaming system of claim 1, and the resulting device further teaches wherein a temporary result of the first gaming event is automatically determined at the dealer console, and a result of the first gaming event is displayed the gaming interface in response to a confirmation of the temporary result at the interactive user interface (as discussed in ¶0146 of Yoseloff).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Makhoul in view of Yoseloff and Cleveland as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Bergant (US 20190108714 A1).
For Claim 6, Makhoul as modified above teaches the card gaming system of claim 4.
Makhoul is silent to wherein the one or more player stations are arranged in a stadium configuration, wherein the stadium configuration comprises a plurality of rows extending outwardly from the card gaming table, and wherein the one or more player stations face the card gaming table.
Bergant, like prior art above, teaches one or more player stations are arranged in a stadium configuration (140, 142, ¶0020), wherein the stadium configuration comprises a plurality of rows extending outwardly from the gaming table (100), and wherein the one or more player stations face the card gaming table (Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify the arrangement of the player stations of the above-modified reference with a stadium configuration as taught by Bergant, in order to provide a different aesthetic, attracting different players, and yielding predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 17 August 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
RE Applicant arguments surrounding the first and second card gaming areas, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The manner in which the gaming areas have been claimed introduce an intended use to each area. There appears to be no structural requirement for the differing areas, in fact, there appears to be nothing precluding overlapping areas reading on the first and second gaming areas.
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.
The cited prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Special attention is drawn to the disclosures of US 20030027632 A1, US 20070045957 A1, US 20080237987 A1, US 20010000118 A1, US 20060058091 A1, US 20060068868 A1, US 20060084505 A1, US 20060189365 A1, US 20070114723 A1, US 20070298873 A1, US 20090131151 A1, US 7727060 B2, US 8333652 B2, US 11213740 B1 as disclosing an invention or aspects of the invention which are similar to those claimed and/or disclosed in the instant invention. The remaining references cited establish the state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Morgan T. Jordan whose telephone number is (571)272-8141. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30-5:30.
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, PETER POON can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/MORGAN T JORDAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
1 Interpretation note: only one aspect is required due to the alternative construction triggered by the broadest reasonable interpretation of “at least one of” limitation.
2 Interpretation note: the function of multiple areas of the computer device does not arise to more than an intended use; the option of the remote device 350 allowing the player to bet or fold meets the claim limitation.
3 Interpretation note: only one aspect is required due to the alternative construction triggered by the “at least one” limitation.
Prosecution Insights