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 § 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.
Claims 1-16 and 19-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites "the mobile device" (line 6). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Dependent claims 2-16 inherit this discrepancy by nature of their dependencies. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 recites “remote input” (line 3). Claim 1, upon which claim 5 depends, recites “remote input” (line 7). The first instance of a claim element should generally subsequently be followed by referring to the element using “the” or “said”. Reciting “remote input” a second time makes it unclear whether the two instances of “remote input” refer to the same claim element or different claim elements. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 19 recites "the token" (line 3). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 recites "the processor circuit" (line 2). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Prior Art of Record
The closest prior art of record includes Nelson et al., US 2021/0350674 A1 (hereinafter Nelson); DOUGLAS et al., US 2020/0154278 A1 (hereinafter Douglas); Panambur et al., US 2016/0093166 A1 (hereinafter Panambur); and Patel, US 2020/0349571 A1 (hereinafter Patel).
Nelson discloses an example process for validating a connection with a mobile device (Nelson [0054]). As part of an initial handshake process, the slot machine interface board (SMIB) on the EGM generates a nonce value or one-time password which is transmitted to the mobile device over a short distance, local communication channel such as Bluetooth or NFC (Nelson [0054]). The application on the mobile device transmits the nonce value and an identifier for the EGM to a backend server which then transmits the nonce value back to the identified EGM over a network connection (Nelson [0054]). If the EGM determines that the nonce values match, the EGM continues with establishing the connection with the mobile device and allowing remote control of the EGM (Nelson [0054]). In place of or in addition to exchanging a nonce value, the EGM may only allow connections with a mobile device that has a high signal strength, which prevents players not sitting at the targeted EGM from hijacking a machine remotely (Nelson [0054]). The requirement for a high signal strength connection may be relaxed or eliminated if a successful nonce value validation has occurred (Nelson [0054]).
Douglas discloses Systems, devices, methods, and computer readable media for electronically controlling a user's access to one or more controlled resources are provided (Douglas [Abstract]). A near-field communication-based mobile credential data payload is provisioned on a mobile device capable of establishing a contactless payment transaction and a low energy proximity beacon signal is periodically broadcasted (Douglas [Abstract]). The beacon signal and an emulated contactless payment transaction can be utilized in concert to determine that the identity is authorized to access the one or more controlled resources (Douglas [Abstract]).
Panambur discloses a system configured to pair a mobile device with a terminal device, track interactions between the mobile device and the terminal device while paired, and un-pair the mobile device from the terminal device (Panambur [Abstract]). The terminal device includes a touch screen terminal display and communication interface that communicates with a host server through a communication network (Panambur [Abstract]). The host server has access to a database storing user accounts (Panambur [Abstract]). The user mobile device includes a touch screen display and a wireless transceiver (Panambur [Abstract]). Panambur further discloses an embodiment of a wireless-enabled player-sensing and card-in system, the area around gaming machine is divided into three areas; a card-in area, a player sensing area, and an out of range area (Panambur [0060]). The card-in area is the area in front of the gaming machine (Panambur [0060]). This is the area where the received signal strength (RSS) is the strongest (Panambur [0060]). In the Bluetooth receiver of the gaming machine, the RSSI threshold value is configured such that the signals from smartphones brought into the card-in area are higher than the configured RSSI threshold (Panambur [0060]). Only under this condition, may a “card-in” event take place (Panambur [0060]). The Player sensing area is the area outside the card-in area of the gaming machine (Panambur [0060]). The RSSI threshold value in the gaming machine is configured such that the signals from smartphones brought into the player sensing area are less than the configured RSSI threshold (Panambur [0060]). During this condition, the gaming machine can sense that a player is in front of the gaming machine, but a “card-in” event cannot take place (Panambur [0060]). The Out of range area is an area Outside Player Sensing area where Bluetooth signal strength is very weak, and devices are unlikely to be detected (Panambur [0060]). Accordingly, devices present in this area cannot be sensed by a gaming machine (Panambur [0060]).
Patel discloses a mobile-device-to-machine payment processing system disclosed herein allows a user (having a mobile device with a mobile application thereon) to make a cashless purchase from a payment accepting unit (having an adapter module associated therewith) (Patel [0051]). The functions performed by the adapter module can be divided into distinct zones: a first “communication zone” (e.g., “Bluetooth range”), a second “authorization zone”, and a third “payment zone” (Patel [0090]). The payment zone is smaller than or equal to (overlapping completely) the authorization zone (Patel [0090]). Put another way, the payment zone is within or coextensive with the authorization zone. The payment zone is a subset of the authorization zone with a ratio of the payment zone to the authorization zone ranging from 0.01:1 to 1:1 (Patel [0090]). It is not necessarily a fixed ratio and can vary between different payment accepting units, different mobile devices, different users, and over time (Patel [0090]).
The prior art, alone or in combination, absent hindsight, does not fairly teach or suggest the claimed invention, at least including “modify a signal strength threshold for the transceiver from a first signal strength threshold associated with a first distance between the transceiver and the mobile device to a second signal strength threshold associated with a second distance between the transceiver and the mobile device, wherein the second distance is greater than the first distance”.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,148,264 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present claims are broader than the claims in the parent patent.
18/293062
US 12,148,264 B2
1. A gaming device comprising:
1. A gaming device comprising:
a transceiver;
a first transceiver; a second transceiver;
a processor circuit; and
a processor circuit; and
a memory comprising machine-readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit, cause the processor circuit to:
a memory comprising machine-readable instructions that, when executed by the processor circuit, cause the processor circuit to:
determine, based on receipt of a validation request from the mobile device, that the mobile device is authorized to provide remote input to the gaming device;
receive, at the first transceiver, a validation request from a mobile device;
determine, based on the validation request, that the mobile device is authorized to provide remote input to the gaming device;
transmit, by the first transceiver, a token to the mobile device;
modify a signal strength threshold for the transceiver from a first signal strength threshold associated with a first distance between the transceiver and the mobile device to a second signal strength threshold associated with a second distance between the transceiver and the mobile device, wherein the second distance is greater than the first distance;
modify a signal strength threshold for the second transceiver from a first signal strength threshold associated with a first distance between the second transceiver and the mobile device to a second signal strength threshold associated with a second distance between the second transceiver and the mobile device, wherein the second distance is greater than the first distance;
receive, at the transceiver, a remote connection request from the mobile device;
receive, at the second transceiver, a remote connection request from the mobile device;
determine, based on receipt of a remote connection request from the mobile device, whether the remote connection request meets the second signal strength threshold; and
determine whether the remote connection request meets the second signal strength threshold;
determine whether the remote connection request comprises the token; and
in response to determining that the remote connection request meets the second signal strength threshold, allow the mobile device to provide remote input instructions to the gaming device.
in response to determining that the remote connection request meets the second signal strength threshold and that the remote connection request comprises the token, allow the mobile device to provide remote input instructions to the gaming device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WERNER G GARNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7147. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-15:30 EST.
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, DAVID LEWIS can be reached at (571) 272-7673. 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.
/WERNER G GARNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights