Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/926,478

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING A MULTIPLE-STAGE CONTEST

Non-Final OA §101§102
Filed
Oct 25, 2024
Priority
Apr 12, 2005 — provisional 60/670,373 +2 more
Examiner
HENRY, THOMAS HAYNES
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Cfph LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
Est. Remaining
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allowance Rate
273 granted / 533 resolved
-8.8% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 12m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
559
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.9%
-36.1% vs TC avg
§103
81.5%
+41.5% vs TC avg
§102
12.5%
-27.5% vs TC avg
§112
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 533 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. 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. Claim 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 1 pass step 1 of the test for eligibility. As per step 2A prong one, the claims are evaluated to determine whether the claims recite a judicial exception. Representative claim 1 recites, with emphasis added: A method of providing a multiple-stage contest, comprising: at each of a plurality of stages in a contest, causing a portion of a plurality of contest entries eligible to win the contest to become ineligible to win the contest; and determining at least one winning contest entry from one or more contest entries remaining eligible after the plurality of stages. The above underlined portion of representative claim 1 recites a judicial exception because they are certain methods of organizing human activity, as they are following rules or instructions, as the invention is directed towards rules for conducting a game. Further they are mental processes as a human could perform the steps merely mentally or with pen and paper, as a human could cause a portion of contest entries to become ineligible and the determine a winning contest entry, such as with a single elimination bracket like what is used in professional sports. Next, as per step 2A prong two, the claims are evaluated to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. The elements recited above that are not underlined in representative claim 1 comprise the additional elements. As discussed in more detail below, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. There are no additional steps Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Next, as per step 2B, the claims as a whole are analyzed to determine whether any element, or combination of elements, is sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception. There are no additional steps Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the exception. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 – (b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Asher (US 20040243504). In claim 1, Asher discloses At each of a plurality of stages in a contest, cause a portion of a plurality of contest entries eligible to win the contest to become ineligible to win the contest and (paragraph 17, the NCAA tournament is a single elimination tournament bracket, which causes a portion of the contest entries to become ineligible to win the contest each round) Determining at least one winning contest entry from one or more contest entries remaining eligible after the plurality of stages (paragraph 17 “all or a portion of the $6400 may be paid to a single or multiple winners”) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS HAYNES HENRY whose telephone number is (571)270-3905. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6. 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 Vasat can be reached at 571-270-7625. 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. /THOMAS H HENRY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 25, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12673254
GAME SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12661590
PROGRAM, INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, METHOD, AND SYSTEM
2y 10m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12661589
GAME DATA PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICE, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND PROGRAM PRODUCT
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12661593
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, AND METHOD AND PROGRAM FOR CONTROLLING THE SAME
2y 6m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12654106
COMPUTER-READABLE NON-TRANSITORY STORAGE MEDIUM HAVING GAME PROGRAM STORED THEREIN, GAME SYSTEM, GAME APPARATUS, AND GAME PROCESSING METHOD
3y 5m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
51%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+35.9%)
3y 12m (~2y 3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 533 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month