DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the initial filing filed on September 26, 2024 Claims 1-15 have been examined in this application.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 9/27/2024, has been acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1-11 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase "for example" or “e.g.” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-11 and 14-15 are drawn to a method and claims 12-13 are drawn to a device (i.e., a manufacture). As such, claims 1-15 are drawn to one of the statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
Under Step 2A Prong 1, the claims are analyzed to determine whether the claims recite any judicial exceptions including certain groupings of abstract ideas (i.e., mathematical concepts, certain methods of organizing human activity such as a fundamental economic practice, or mental processes).
Claims 1, and 12, recite a method, e.g. a computer-implemented method, for managing an electronic lottery game for a user of a user device, the game comprising consecutive rounds of different minigames, wherein the method comprises: starting the game with a first minigame, collecting data during the gameplay of the first minigame relating to achievement of the user, storing the collected achievement data of the user, when the first minigame ends, determining prize of the first minigame based at least in part on the achievement data of the user, and, repeating starting a next minigame, collecting achievement data during the gameplay of the played minigame relating to achievement of the user, storing the collected achievement data of the user, and determining prize of the played minigame based at least in part on the achievement data of the user until a predefined criteria for ending the game is fulfilled, and sending information relating to the prize of the game to the user device based at least in part on the prizes of the minigames of the game after the predefined criteria for ending the game is fulfilled. If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, include a mental process and/or certain methods of organizing human activity, the limitations fall under the abstract ideas judicial exception and therefore recite ineligible subject matter. Accordingly, claims 1, and 12 recite abstract ideas.
Representative Claim 1: a method, e.g. a computer-implemented method, for managing an electronic lottery game for a user of a user device, the game comprising consecutive rounds of different minigames, wherein the method comprises: starting the game with a first minigame, collecting data during the gameplay of the first minigame relating to achievement of the user, storing the collected achievement data of the user, when the first minigame ends, determining prize of the first minigame based at least in part on the achievement data of the user, and, repeating starting a next minigame, collecting achievement data during the gameplay of the played minigame relating to achievement of the user, storing the collected achievement data of the user, and determining prize of the played minigame based at least in part on the achievement data of the user until a predefined criteria for ending the game is fulfilled, and sending information relating to the prize of the game to the user device based at least in part on the prizes of the minigames of the game after the predefined criteria for ending the game is fulfilled.
Representative Claim 12: An arrangement, such as a computer and/or a server, for managing an electronic lottery game for a user of a user device, the game comprising consecutive rounds of different minigames, wherein the arrangement is configured: to start the game with a first minigame, to collect data during the gameplay of the first minigame relating to achievement of the user, to store the collected achievement data of the user, when the first minigame ends, to determine prize of the first minigame based at least in part on the achievement data of the user, and to start a next minigame, and to repeat starting a next minigame, collecting achievement data during the gameplay of the played minigame relating to achievement of the user, storing the collected achievement data of the user, and determining prize of the played minigame based at least in part on the achievement data of the user until a predefined criteria for ending the game is fulfilled, and to send information relating to the prize of the game to the user device based on the prize of the minigames of the game after the predefined criteria for ending the game is fulfilled.
(Examiner notes: The underlined claim terms above are interpreted as additional elements beyond the abstract idea and are further analyzed under Step 2A - Prong Two)
The additional elements are instructions for applying the judicial exceptions with a generic computing device as, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the additional elements of a user device, and a computer are generic computer components for performing the above method, per MPEP 2106.05(f). Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the additional elements are generic components of a computing device used to apply the abstract idea.
Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the recited steps of starting the game with a first minigame, collecting user achievement data, storing the collected achievement data, determining a prize based on user achievement, repeating the previous steps until a criteria for ending the game is fulfilled, and sending information to the user device (i.e., one or more concepts performed in the human mind, such as one or more observations, evaluations, judgments, opinions), then it also falls within the “Mental Processes” subject matter grouping of abstract ideas. The recited steps are a simulation that applies an abstract idea, specifically mental processes (observation (collecting user achievement data, storing the collected achievement data, sending information to a user device), evaluation (determining a prize based on user achievement, meeting a criteria for ending a game), and/or CMOHA (starting a game with a minigame)). If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, include a mental process and/or certain methods of organizing human activity (CMOHA), the limitations fall under the abstract ideas judicial exception and therefore recite ineligible subject matter. Accordingly, claims 1, and 12 recite abstract ideas.
Dependent Claims 2-11, and 13-15 further narrow the abstract ideas of starting a game with a first minigame, collecting user achievement data, storing the collected achievement data, determining a prize based on user achievement, repeating the previous steps until a criteria for ending the game is fulfilled, and sending information to the user device (i.e., one or more concepts performed in the human mind, such as one or more observations, evaluations, judgments, opinions), then it also falls within the “Mental Processes” and is an abstract idea and then it also falls within the “Organizing Human Processes” subject matter grouping of abstract ideas and then also falls within the “Organizing Human Processes” subject matter grouping of abstract ideas.
Independent claim(s) 1, and 12 recite/describe nearly identical steps (and therefore also recite limitations that fall within this subject matter grouping of abstract ideas), and this/these claim(s) is/are therefore determined to recite an abstract idea under the same analysis.
As such, the Examiner concludes that claims 1, and 12 recite an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong One: YES).
Under Step 2A Prong 2 the claims are analyzed to determine whether the claims recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2A - Prong Two: In prong two of step 2A, an evaluation is made whether a claim recites any additional element, or combination of additional elements, that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. An “addition element” is an element that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception (i.e., an element/limitation that sets forth an abstract idea is not an additional element). The phrase “integration into a practical application” is defined as requiring an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
The requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions using “starting the game with a first minigame”, “collecting user achievement data”, “storing the collected achievement data, determining a prize based on user achievement”, “repeating the previous steps until a criteria for ending the game is fulfilled”, and “sending information to the user device” etc. (Claims 1, and 12) are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer.
Similarly, the limitations of applying “starting the game with a first minigame”, “collecting user achievement data”, “storing the collected achievement data, determining a prize based on user achievement”, “repeating the previous steps until a criteria for ending the game is fulfilled”, and “sending information to the user device” etc. Independent Claim(s) 1, and 12, and dependent claims 2-11, and 13-15 are recited at a high level of generality and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components in a vehicle. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Further, the additional limitations beyond the abstract idea identified above, serves merely to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Specifically, it/they serve(s) to limit the application of the abstract idea to computerized environments (e.g., starting the game with a first minigame, collecting user achievement data, storing the collected achievement data, determining a prize based on user achievement, repeating the previous steps until a criteria for ending the game is fulfilled, and sending information to the user device etc.). This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
The recited additional element(s) of starting the game with a first minigame, collecting user achievement data, storing the collected achievement data, determining a prize based on user achievement, repeating the previous steps until a criteria for ending the game is fulfilled, and sending information to the user device (Claim(s) 1, and 12), additionally and/or alternatively simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea). This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. (See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Dependent claims 2-11, and 13-15 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective dependent claims is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim).
The Examiner has therefore determined that the additional elements, or combination of additional elements, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claim(s) is/are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong two: NO).
Step 2B: In step 2B, the claims are analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is/are sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. This analysis is also termed a search for an "inventive concept." An "inventive concept" is furnished by an element or combination of elements that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception, and is sufficient to ensure that the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the identified additional elements in independent claim(s) 1, and 12, and dependent claims 2-11, and 13-15 are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer, and/or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Therefore, the claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
The recited additional element(s) of starting the game with a first minigame, collecting user achievement data, storing the collected achievement data, determining a prize based on user achievement, repeating the previous steps until a criteria for ending the game is fulfilled, and sending information to the user device (Claim(s) 1, and 12), additionally and/or alternatively simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea) i.e. selecting users (i.e. using a user interface) is similar to “Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data”, is a well-understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here) (See MPEP 2106.05(d) (II)).
This conclusion is based on a factual determination. Applicant’s own disclosure on pages 8 (Lines 20-25), 14 (Lines 1-6), and 19 (Lines 23-27) acknowledges that “According to one aspect, the invention relates to a computer program, the computer program comprising instructions which, when the program is executed by a computing apparatus, e.g. the arrangement, cause the computing apparatus to carry out the method according to any embodiment of the invention, e.g. any method as defined above”, “As an example, the computer program code may include a computer program consisting of one or more sequences of one or more instructions which may relate to an execution of the electronic game, such as lottery and/or a gambling game, but also other operations, such as to a management of users in the electronic game in a manner as is described in the description”, and “More specifically, the arrangement may execute computer programs stored in memory 202 and executed by the processing unit 203 of the arrangement, e.g. a gaming server, wherein the computer program may cause an execution of a gaming engine portion and/or a player management portion” (i.e. conventional nature of using a computer and/or computer program). This additional element therefore does not ensure the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Viewing the additional limitations in combination also shows that they fail to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. When considered as an ordered combination, the additional components of the claims add nothing that is not already present when considered separately, and thus simply append the abstract idea with words equivalent to “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer or/and append the abstract idea with insignificant extra solution activity associated with the implementation of the judicial exception, and/or simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception.
The dependent claims 2-11, and 13-15 are dependent from claims 1, and 12 and include all the limitations of the independent claims, but fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective independent claims is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim). Therefore, the dependent claims recite the same abstract idea. The limitations of the dependent claims fail to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For example:
The limitations of claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, recite clarifications of selecting a prize before the first game has started, determining completion of criteria for ending a game, selecting a next minigame based on a user’s performance, minigames are different from each other, having a prize available for each minigame, user achievements not impacting the prize amount of a game, having the maximum prize for a minigame is less than the prize for the game, speeding up the prize amount if a user’s game performance is below a certain threshold, and where the next minigame is selected when the previous minigame ends. Such clarifications, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, are merely defining/selecting a type of data to be manipulated which, per MPEP 2106.05(g), is insignificant extra-solution activity. Therefore, the limitations fail to provide any teaching that integrates the judicial exceptions into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For this reason, the analysis performed on the independent claims is also applicable on these claims.
The limitations of claim 11, 13, 14, and 15 recite clarifications of preparing a selection of minigames based on collected data, an arrangement carrying out the claimed method, a computer program comprising instructions for carrying out the method, and a computer-readable medium comprising the computer program. The limitations are further instructions for applying the judicial exceptions with a generic computing device/interface acting as an intermediary for performing the abstract ideas of starting the game with a first minigame, collecting user achievement data, storing the collected achievement data, determining a prize based on user achievement, repeating the previous steps until a criteria for ending the game is fulfilled, and sending information to the user device, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Therefore, the limitations fail to provide any teaching that integrates the judicial exceptions into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For this reason, the analysis performed on the independent claims is also applicable on these claims.
The Examiner has therefore determined that no additional element, or combination of additional claims elements is/are sufficient to ensure the claim(s) amount to significantly more than the abstract idea identified above (Step 2B: NO).
Therefore, claims 1-15 are not eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
Claim Rejections – USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chhabra et al. (US 2017/0024954 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Chhabra discloses a method, e.g. a computer-implemented method, for managing an electronic lottery game for a user of a user device, the game comprising consecutive rounds of different minigames ([0031] Typically the game images are communicated through an internet or mobile phone transmission system where the player accesses the games using an app obtained onto their mobile or other terminal device from an app supplier where the app controls the game image access and communications, [0073] using a computer based system to generate on a medium visible to the customers a series of accessible games, [0083] A method and apparatus for managing a lottery are shown in FIGS. 1 to 3 which includes a computer control system shown schematically at 10 which creates and prints a set of lottery access components or tickets A1, A2 to AN arranged to be purchased by customers requiring entry into the lottery through retailers R1 to RN, [0087] Each game has a plurality of game steps (minigames) indicated in FIG. 2 as Screen 1 to Screen N in which an image is displayed to the customer and in which the customer is required to enter a selected action responsive to the image displayed), wherein the method comprises:
starting the game with a first minigame ([0087] Each game has a plurality of game steps indicated in FIG. 2 as Screen 1 to Screen N in which an image is displayed to the customer and in which the customer is required to enter a selected action responsive to the image displayed, [0091] Thus in Screen 1 after option 2 is selected, the accumulator indicates that step prize P2 has been accumulated),
collecting data during the gameplay of the first minigame relating to achievement of the user ([0017] at least one of the game steps having a plurality of options from which the customer can select the action, where the customer has allocated different step prizes for selecting different options, [0033] the options presented to the player or customer are arranged to be selected by the player based on a skill level of the player so that a player of more skill playing the same game can get more step prizes or step prizes of greater value),
storing the collected achievement data of the user ([0018] providing an accumulation of the step prizes to generate a total prize for the game after all of the game steps are completed, [0099] A further advantage is obtained by providing a memory component 10A of the control system 10 recording the total of step prizes or tokens obtained by customers, [0101] a memory component 10B of the control system 10 recording a time taken by a customer to play the game),
when the first minigame ends, determining prize of the first minigame based at least in part on the achievement data of the user ([0016] at least some of the game steps (minigames) having an associated step prize which is allocated to the player for selecting an associated action, [0037] the players receive a step prize of higher value for selecting options using greater skill, [0091] after a selection is made, the screen shows the step prize awarded and the accumulation of those step prizes in the game as the game proceeds), and,
repeating starting a next minigame, collecting achievement data during the gameplay of the played minigame relating to achievement of the user ([0015] wherein the game, which is accessed by a purchased one of the lottery access components, is completed by the customer entering the selected action for all of the game steps (repeating starting a next minigame), [0056] The successive options at each game step (minigame) are dependent on selected option in the previous game step, [0090] The player typically will be aware of the value of the step prize so that they can monitor their progress (relating to achievement of the user), [0091] Thus in screen N at the end of the game the accumulator indicates that step prizes P2, P8 and PN have been accumulated (collecting achievement data of the played minigame)),
storing the collected achievement data of the user, and determining prize of the played minigame based at least in part on the achievement data of the user until a predefined criteria for ending the game is fulfilled ([0018] providing an accumulation of the step prizes to generate a total prize for the game after all of the game steps are completed (predefined criteria for ending the game), [0091] This accumulation leads the system to generate a total prize for the game after all of the game steps are completed), and
sending information relating to the prize of the game to the user device based at least in part on the prizes of the minigames of the game after the predefined criteria for ending the game is fulfilled ([0018] providing an accumulation of the step prizes to generate a total prize for the game after all of the game steps are completed (predefined criteria for ending the game), [0020] validating a payment to the customer of the prize value, [0077] a confirmation code or PIN that is awarded or displayed to the player through the mobile app (sending information relating to the prize) after they complete the game on their Mobile Device).
Regarding Claim 2, Chhabra discloses wherein the prize for the game is drawn before the player starts to play the first minigame of the game ([0001] ensuring that a prize arising as an outcome of the game is wholly predetermined allowing the lottery to properly predict the total payout from all of the games, [0033] Even though the actual prize is predetermined, the player does not of course know what that prize is until the final reveal, [0072] assigning each of the lottery access components a predetermined win status having a prize value which is selected from a plurality of potential prizes including zero prize, [0083] The computer control system 10 assigns as part of the creation step each of the lottery access components a predetermined win status having a prize value).
Regarding Claim 3, Chhabra discloses wherein the criteria for ending the game comprises at least one of the following: the player has collected the drawn and/or full prize amount for the game from the completed and/or played minigames of the game, and/or all the selected minigames are played and/or completed by the user ([0015] wherein the game, which is accessed by a purchased one of the lottery access components, is completed by the customer entering the selected action for all of the game steps, [0018] providing an accumulation of the step prizes to generate a total prize for the game after all of the game steps are completed, [0019] controlling by the computer based system, in the accessed game, the accumulation of the step prizes of the accessed game in order that the total prize matches the prize value, [0098] This is of course equal to the predetermined prize allocated to the ticket by the computer system 10 during the creation of the ticket set for the lottery. In FIG. 3B it will be noted that the player has accumulated twice as many tokens but the computer system has allocated those to different columns so that the only filled column is column 24).
Regarding Claim 5, Chhabra discloses wherein the minigames played in the game are different minigames from each other, and/or selected from a list of available minigames ([0012] using a computer based system to generate on a medium visible to the customers a series of accessible games, [0046] the game can be played repeatedly for each game access component and is different every time the game is replayed for the same component, [0084] an access code 11 which the respective customer can use to access computer games provided on an associated website 12 operated by the control system 10… The access it provided to a specific game event stored for that access code, [0085] the control system 10 acts to generate through the web site on a terminal screen D1 to DN or other medium visible to the customers C1 to CN a series of accessible games (list of available minigames)).
Regarding Claim 6, Chhabra discloses wherein a prize is available for each minigame of the game, the prize being zero or more, and the prize of the whole game is a combination of the prizes of the minigames of the game ([0010] assigning each of the lottery access components a predetermined win status having a prize value which is selected from a plurality of potential prizes including zero prize, [0016] at least some of the game steps having an associated step prize which is allocated to the player for selecting an associated action, [0032] These may be single or multiple blocks, token or units depending on how the step was played, [0092] the total prize may be zero so that the ticket concerned is not a winning ticket).
Regarding Claim 7, Chhabra discloses wherein the prize for a minigame is adjusted based on the user's achievement in the minigame of the game, and/or wherein user achievements during the minigames of the game do not have effect on the prize amount of the game ([0033] options presented to the player or customer are arranged to be selected by the player based on a skill level of the player (user’s achievement) so that a player of more skill playing the same game can get more step prizes or step prizes of greater value, [0089] if the player chooses a more skilled option and matches four symbols, they will get a different prize or multiple prizes, [0090] the step prize can be a single token for a simple selection and two or more tokens for a more complex or skilled selection).
Regarding Claim 8, Chhabra discloses wherein the maximum prize for a minigame is less than the prize for the game, wherein the maximum prize amount is divided between the minigames of the game, which maximum prize of each minigame is awarded for the user if the user successfully executes the required task(s) of the minigame ([0018] providing an accumulation of the step prizes to generate a total prize for the game after all of the game steps are completed, [0037] the players receive a step prize of higher value for selecting options using greater skill, [0040] one option to be selected has a first number of tokens (typically one token) and a second option to be selected has a different number of tokens (such as two tokens or in some cases even more tokens), [0097] Each column is associated with respective prize of the lottery as shown from S2 up to $50,000).
Regarding Claim 12, Chhabra discloses an arrangement, such as a computer and/or a server, for managing an electronic lottery game for a user of a user device, the game comprising consecutive rounds of different minigames (Abstract A method is provided of managing awards to players in a lottery where players purchase lottery access tickets, each of which is assigned a predetermined prize in the lottery and each of which provides access to a selected one of a series of accessible video games on a computer medium, [0022] using a computer based system to generate a game having display images on a medium visible to a customer, [0031] Typically the game images are communicated through an internet or mobile phone transmission system where the player accesses the games using an app obtained onto their mobile or other terminal device from an app supplier where the app controls the game image access and communications, [0073] using a computer based system to generate on a medium visible to the customers a series of accessible games, [0083] A method and apparatus for managing a lottery are shown in FIGS. 1 to 3 which includes a computer control system shown schematically at 10 which creates and prints a set of lottery access components or tickets A1, A2 to AN arranged to be purchased by customers requiring entry into the lottery through retailers R1 to RN, [0087] Each game has a plurality of game steps (minigames) indicated in FIG. 2 as Screen 1 to Screen N in which an image is displayed to the customer and in which the customer is required to enter a selected action responsive to the image displayed), wherein the arrangement is configured:
to start the game with a first minigame ([0087] Each game has a plurality of game steps (minigames) indicated in FIG. 2 as Screen 1 to Screen N in which an image is displayed to the customer and in which the customer is required to enter a selected action responsive to the image displayed, [0091] Thus in Screen 1 after option 2 is selected, the accumulator indicates that step prize P2 has been accumulated),
to collect data during the gameplay of the first minigame relating to achievement of the user, to store the collected achievement data of the user, when the first minigame ends, to determine prize of the first minigame based at least in part on the achievement data of the user ([0017] at least one of the game steps having a plurality of options from which the customer can select the action, where the customer has allocated different step prizes for selecting different options, [0033] the options presented to the player or customer are arranged to be selected by the player based on a skill level of the player so that a player of more skill playing the same game can get more step prizes or step prizes of greater value), and
to start a next minigame, and to repeat starting a next minigame, collecting achievement data during the gameplay of the played minigame relating to achievement of the user ([0087] Each game has a plurality of game steps (minigames) indicated in FIG. 2 as Screen 1 to Screen N in which an image is displayed to the customer and in which the customer is required to enter a selected action responsive to the image displayed, [0091] Thus in Screen 1 after option 2 is selected, the accumulator indicates that step prize P2 has been accumulated (collecting achievement data)),
storing the collected achievement data of the user ([0018] providing an accumulation of the step prizes to generate a total prize for the game after all of the game steps are completed (predefined criteria for ending the game), [0099] A further advantage is obtained by providing a memory component 10A of the control system 10 recording the total of step prizes or tokens obtained by customers, [0101] a memory component 10B of the control system 10 recording a time taken by a customer to play the game), and
determining prize of the played minigame based at least in part on the achievement data of the user until a predefined criteria for ending the game is fulfilled, and to send information relating to the prize of the game to the user device based on the prize of the minigames of the game after the predefined criteria for ending the game is fulfilled ([0016] at least some of the game steps (minigames) having an associated step prize which is allocated to the player for selecting an associated action, [0037] the players receive a step prize of higher value for selecting options using greater skill, [0077] a confirmation code or PIN that is awarded or displayed to the player through the mobile app (sending information relating to the prize) after they complete the game on their Mobile Device, [0091] after a selection is made, the screen shows the step prize awarded and the accumulation of those step prizes in the game as the game proceeds).
Regarding Claim 13, Chhabra discloses wherein the arrangement is configured to carry out a method ([0019] controlling by the computer based system, in the accessed game, the accumulation of the step prizes of the accessed game in order that the total prize matches the prize value).
Regarding Claim 14, Chhabra discloses a computer program comprising instructions which, when executed by a computer, such as a server, cause the computer to carry out the method according to claim 1 ([0022] using a computer based system to generate a game having display images on a medium visible to a customer).
Regarding Claim 15, Chhabra discloses a computer-readable medium comprising the computer program according to claim 14 (Abstract A method is provided of managing awards to players in a lottery where players purchase lottery access tickets, each of which is assigned a predetermined prize in the lottery and each of which provides access to a selected one of a series of accessible video games on a computer medium, [0022] using a computer based system to generate a game having display images on a medium visible to a customer).
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chhabra et al. (US 2017/0024954 A1) in view of Gupta et al. (US 2021/0118267 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, Chhabra discloses the user’s achievement performance ([0037] Another example is to cause the computer system to vary the award of the value of step prizes so that the accumulations reach only a predetermined result. That is the players receive a step prize of higher value for selecting options using greater skill (user achievement performance), but the difference in the amount of an increase in value can be controlled by the computer system so that the total accumulation is controlled).
However, Chhabra is not relied upon disclosing wherein the next minigame of the game is selected based on the user’s achievement performance and/or the remaining prize amount.
Gupta teaches wherein the next minigame of the game is selected based on the user’s achievement performance and/or the remaining prize amount ([0031] As indicated herein, the player skill level(s) or rating(s) may be measured against past performance and used to create future games/events with varying difficulties and/or payouts).
Chhabra and Gupta are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, because they are in the same field of managing gambling games/systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying a computer-implemented method, for managing an electronic lottery game for a user of a user device, as disclosed by Chhabra, further including wherein the next minigame of the game is selected based on the user’s achievement performance and/or the remaining prize amount, as taught by Gupta for the purpose of allowing players to choose games with the appropriate difficulty to create a challenging game, and allow them to wager and win money while playing (Gupta, [0210]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chhabra et al. (US 2017/0024954 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2016/0121219 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Chhabra discloses wherein the user’s performance is below a threshold level in the game ([0090] In a simple system the step prize can be a single token for a simple selection and two or more tokens for a more complex or skilled selection, [0098] FIG. 3A 1.0 shows one extreme situation where the player is unskilled and receives only a single token for each step. FIG. 3B shows an opposed extreme situation where the player is very skilled and receives two tokens for each step (below the threshold of skilled – accumulating two tokens per step, is unskilled – accumulating one token per step; Also see Paragraph [0090] cited above)).
However, Chhabara is not relied upon disclosing wherein the prize win amount per minigame is speeded up if the user’s performance is below a threshold level in multiple minigames of the game.
Kim teaches wherein the prize win amount per minigame is speeded up if the user’s performance is below a threshold level in multiple minigames of the game ([0035] For example, in one instance, event scoring module 20 may triple (speeded/sped up) the gameplay metric values (prize win amount) associated with the accomplishment of an achievement for users with gameplay metric values below a specified threshold).
Chhabra and Kim are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, because they are in the same field of games where users can win prizes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying a computer-implemented method, for managing an electronic lottery game for a user of a user device, as disclosed by Chhabra, further including wherein the prize win amount per minigame is speeded up if the user’s performance is below a threshold level in multiple minigames of the game, as taught by Kim for the purpose of allowing users to derive a benefit from completing achievements during the temporary period of time of potential for increased game achievement (Kim, [0034]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chhabra et al. (US 2017/0024954 A1) in view of Itagaki et al. (US 2012/0184369 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Chhabra is not relied upon disclosing wherein the minigames are selected from a list of available minigames by the user and/or by the system, and wherein the next minigame is selected when a previous minigame ends, or wherein the list of selected minigames is prepared before the user starts to play minigames of the game.
However, Chhabara is not relied upon disclosing wherein the minigames are selected from a list of available minigames by the user and/or by the system, and wherein the next minigame is selected when a previous minigame ends, or wherein the list of selected minigames is prepared before the user starts to play minigames of the game.
Itagaki teaches wherein the minigames are selected from a list of available minigames by the user and/or by the system ([0113] The selection bonus game according to the embodiment is a game in which an image that is indicative of a plurality of icons is displayed on a display device (analogous to a list of games), causing a player to select one of the plurality of icons, and which is to be played according to the contents assigned to the selected icon), and
wherein the next minigame is selected when a previous minigame ends, or wherein the list of selected minigames is prepared before the user starts to play minigames of the game ([0117] The number of free game icons is predetermined in correspondence with each of a plurality of continuation rates, [0129] The number-of-games icon is an icon in which the number of free games is determined when the routine reverts from a selection bonus game. In a case where a player selects the number-of-games icon in the selection bonus game, the number of games that is defined in the number-of-games icon when the routine reverts to a free game is added to the number of games and then, a free game can be played. By doing this, the number of unit games that a player can play as a free game can be increased (next minigame is prepared before user starts to play games), so that a possibility of transfer to an extended bonus game (a selection bonus game) can be increased).
Chhabra and Itagaki are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, because they are in the same field of lottery games/gaming. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying a computer-implemented method, for managing an electronic lottery game for a user of a user device, as disclosed by Chhabra, further including wherein the minigames are selected from a list of available minigames by the user and/or by the system, as taught by Itagaki for the purpose of diversifying entry into extended games and increasing the number of games a player can play (Itagaki, [0111] and [0129]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chhabra et al. (US 2017/0024954 A1), in view of Jordan (US 9,387,392 B1).
Regarding Claim 11, Chhabra discloses wherein further data is collected from the user and/or minigames played by the user during the gameplay of the mini games in the game and/or after a minigame of the game has ended ([0099] a memory component 10A of the control system 10 recording the total of step prizes or tokens obtained by customers), and/or
wherein the collected data relates to at least one of the following:
user interactions, feedback, preference of the user, gaming history of the user and/or commitment of the user for a certain minigame and/or game type, win/loss outcomes, game thematic, game universe, pace of the minigame, game duration, win frequency, game developer credentials ([0062] The game can also include a time component. This will record the amount of time (commitment (amount of time) of the user) a player took to complete the game, [0099] a memory component 10A of the control system 10 recording the total of step prizes or tokens obtained by customers so that customers can compare results either to their own previous attempts or to those of others of the lottery or of a group of customers of the lottery (gaming history, and win/loss outcomes), [0101] a memory component 10B of the control system 10 recording a time taken by a customer to play the game for purposes of comparisons with other games (commitment (time taken) of the user)).
However, Chhabra is not relied upon disclosing wherein the method comprises preparing a proposed selection of minigames from a list of available minigames for the user, wherein the proposed selection of minigames is prepared at least in part based on the collected data.
Jordan teaches wherein the method comprises preparing a proposed selection of minigames from a list of available minigames for the user, wherein the proposed selection of minigames is prepared at least in part based on the collected data,
wherein the collected data relates to at least one of the following: user interactions, feedback, preference of the user, gaming history of the user and/or commitment of the user for a certain minigame and/or game type, win/loss outcomes, game thematic, game duration, win frequency (Col. 1 Lines 49-56 preferred embodiments of recommendation system involving a computer implemented method for generating player recommendations for electronic gaming machines is described. The system collects data on player history playing particular electronic gaming machines and analyzes the collected data to generate a matrix of similar games based on the player history, Col. 1 Lines 62-63 the history including information on play time and bet size (collected data of the user), Col. 2 Lines 60-62 Each bet and game outcome, win or loss, is tracked by the system based on the identifying card (win/loss outcomes, and win frequency), Col. 3 Lines 30-32 The data can be direct ratings of the 30 games, such as one to five stars, or can be playing time data, such as is collected by the casino management system, Col. 3 Lines 37-39 Other knowledge sources could include user feedback, game features, user item feedback, or other relevant data, Col. 3 Lines 54-57 The demographic data can include data on the player's sex, age, geographic location, income, household size, and other personal information that would be relevant to the system, Col. 4 Lines 26-36 recommendation system 10 from FIG. 1 can use the collected data, whether it be from the casino or player, to produce a “personalized” list of games that would be of interest to a particular player by matching that player's preferences to other players with similar tastes in games, or by identifying a set of game characteristics in those preferred games and matching those to other games with similar characteristics. A few game preferences expressed by the player as well as the player's demographic characteristics could be used to provide the player with a list of games that would be well suited to the player's gaming tastes; Col. 5 Lines 10-12 This information includes play history 41 that shows the game type (game thematic), the casino where the rating came from, the date of the rating, session length, and points earned, Col. 7 Lines 51-54 The quantification of the amount of play involves the amount of time actively engaged in the activity (game duration), the amount of money spent on the activity, and the frequency of play).
Chhabra and Jordan are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, because they are in the same field of managing gambling games/systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying a computer-implemented method, for managing an electronic lottery game for a user of a user device, as disclosed by Chhabra, further including wherein the method comprises preparing a proposed selection of minigames from a list of available minigames for the user, wherein the proposed selection of minigames is prepared at least in part based on the collected data, wherein the collected data relates to at least one of the following: user interactions, feedback, preference of the user, gaming history of the user and/or commitment of the user for a certain minigame and/or game type, win/loss outcomes, game thematic, game duration, win frequency, as taught by Jordan for the purpose of aiding those who oversee games (e.g. casinos) in creating applications and promotions that enhance the players’ experience (Jordan, Col. 3 Lines 14-25).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Katz et al. (US 2022/0270443 A1) systems for implementing enhanced gaming and prizing parameters in an electronic environment (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMID TARIQ HAFIZ whose telephone number is (571) 272-4629. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM, Monday through Thursday.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at 571-270-1344. 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.
/HAMID TARIQ HAFIZ/
Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/ROBERT J UTAMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights