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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 9-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Publication 2021/0090391 A1 to Shepherd et al. (hereinafter Shepherd) in view of US Publication 2012/0202573 A1 to Stanek et al. (hereinafter Stanek).
Concerning claim 1,
Shepherd discloses providing a bearer card to the player, the bearer card having a value at least equal to the prize assigned to the winning lottery ticket (0016, 0021, wherein a ticket voucher is considered a bearer card);
upon the player subsequently presenting the bearer card, issuing a virtual debit card to the player, the virtual debit card loaded with a value equal to the value of the bearer card, wherein the player can purchase goods or services charged against the virtual debit card up to the value of the virtual debit card (0028, 0041, Figure 2B).
Shepherd discloses an electronic gaming machine (EGM) which can payout a player. An example of such a gaming machine is a video lottery terminal (VLT). However, the reference does not explicitly disclose enabling for a player to present a winning lottery ticket in the lottery game for redemption of a prize (0011, 0041).
Stanek teaches enabling for a player to present a winning lottery ticket in the lottery game for redemption of a prize (0064, 0066, wherein the hybrid ticket is considered to be a lottery ticket).
It would have been obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the lottery ticket administration of Stanek with the gaming financial system of Shepherd as both relate to the monetary aspects of gambling. Incorporating the lottery ticket administration of Stanek into the gaming financial system of Shepherd increases the gaming avenues integrated into the platform, making it more multifaceted.
Concerning claim 2,
Shepherd does not disclose the lottery tickets are scratch-off lottery tickets.
Stanek teaches the lottery tickets are scratch-off lottery tickets (0056, Figure 1-2).
Concerning claim 3,
Shepherd discloses the bearer card is transferrable by the player to a third party, wherein the third party can present the bearer card and the virtual debit card is issued to the third party (0011, 0028, 0041, Figure 2B, wherein the paper ticket is anonymous and is, therefore, fungible).
Concerning claim 4,
Shepherd discloses the bearer card is a printed bearer card having a code (element 110) thereon, wherein upon the player subsequently scanning the code with an electronic smart device, the virtual debit card is created and stored on the electronic smart device (0028-0029, 0041, Figure 1A-B).
Concerning claim 5,
Shepherd does not disclose multiple winning lottery tickets are presented by the player for redemption at the same time, the bearer card having a value equal to a total of the prizes assigned to the multiple winning lottery tickets.
Stanek teaches multiple winning lottery tickets are presented by the player for redemption at the same time, the bearer card having a value equal to a total of the prizes assigned to the multiple winning lottery tickets (0013, 0077, Figure 16).
Concerning claim 6,
Shepherd discloses providing a personalized digital account for the player that indicates a running balance of an amount remaining on the virtual debit card (0022, 0029).
Concerning claim 9-15, see the rejections of claims 1-6 respectively.
Claim(s) 7-9 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Publication 2021/0090391 A1 to Shepherd et al. in view of US Publication 2012/0202573 A1 to Stanek et al. and further in view of US Publication 2019/0073651 A1 to Simms (hereinafter Simms).
Concerning claim 7,
Shepherd discloses the virtual debit card is sponsored by a third-party financial services provider (0022, 0029)
Shepherd does not disclose the personalized digital account is enabled by a mobile application provided by a lottery provider, the mobile application linked to the third-party financial services provider.
Simms teaches the personalized digital account is enabled by a mobile application provided by a lottery provider (element 20), the mobile application (element 22) linked to the third-party financial services provider (element 16) (0038, 0045-0048, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the card mobile application linking mechanism for lottery purchases from Simms with the gaming financial system of Shepherd as both relate to the monetary aspects of gambling. Incorporating the purchase methodology from Simms with the gaming financial system of Shepherd would allow for a more streamlined and integrated financial system, improving profits.
Concerning claim 8,
Shepherd does not disclose the mobile application is configured to generate a code that is linked to the virtual debit card, wherein the code enables the player to purchase additional lottery tickets that are charged directly against the virtual debit card by presenting the code at time of purchase of the additional lottery tickets.
Simms teaches the mobile application is configured to generate a code that is linked to the virtual debit card, wherein the code enables the player to purchase additional lottery tickets that are charged directly against the virtual debit card by presenting the code at time of purchase of the additional lottery tickets (0038, 0045-0048, Figure 1).
Concerning claim 9,
Shepherd does not disclose the player is provided with an incentive to use the mobile application and the code to purchase the additional lottery tickets.
Simms teaches the player is provided with an incentive to use the mobile application and the code to purchase the additional lottery tickets (0038, 0045-0048, Figure 1, As broadly claimed, the potential payout from the lottery ticket is considered to be an incentive to purchase).
Concerning claims 16-18, see the rejections of claims 7-9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISHAYU SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-3179. The examiner can normally be reached Flex.
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.
/I.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/DMITRY SUHOL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights