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 .
35 USC § 101
In regards to 35 USC 101, while the application discloses a gaming machine, the current claim language does not include steps of wagering, which is considered to be a fundamental economic practice and an abstract idea. Per current USPTO guidelines, the answer to Step 2A, Prong One, would be No and the claims would be patent eligible under Pathway B.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonney et al. (US patent 8,371,925) in view of Gauselmann (US PG pub 2004/0102240) and Gnanasundram et al. (US PG pub 2016/0240040).
Bonney et al. shows all of the limitations of the claims except for specifying that
the trigger is at least one trigger symbol;
a first electronic gaming device associated with a player account;
cause gameplay data to be stored in the at least one memory, the gameplay data being associated with the player account and the upgradeable object being in the second state;
receive an input associated with the player account from a second electronic gaming device; and
based upon the input, cause the upgradeable object to be displayed in the second state at the second electronic gaming device.
Bonney et al. shows
In regards to claims 1, 11, and 19-20,
An electronic gaming system comprising:
a memory device with instructions stored thereon; (figure 2, system memory 22) and
a processor (figure 2, CPU 18) in communication with the memory device, wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
cause an upgradeable object to be displayed in a first state at a first electronic gaming device, wherein the upgradeable object being in the first state is associated with a first value of the upgradeable object; (figure 13, house 80 in disrepair or first state)
determine that a plurality of symbols for a first play of an electronic game includes at least one trigger symbol; (column 6, lines 23-26, “figure 12 illustrates a second basic slot game having a different game theme. In this slot game, a combination of three HOUSE reel symbols anywhere on the display triggers a house repair game feature.”)
cause an upgrade to be applied to the upgradeable object based upon determining that the plurality of symbols includes the at least one trigger symbol, wherein application of the upgrade causes the upgradeable object to be displayed in a second state, wherein the upgradeable object being in the second state is associated with a second value of the upgradeable object; (figures 12 & 14, figure 12 shows the trigger and figure 14 shows the application of a fixed window 82b upgrade on the house 80 or upgradeable object. The house 80 is in a second state in figure 14.)
Gauselmann teaches, paragraph [0027], “The secondary game may be activated by the player betting a maximum bet, or activated by the player wagering additional amounts, or activated by the player getting a certain winning symbol combination or trigger symbol in the initial game, or activated after each game.”
Based on the teaching of Gauselmann, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Bonney et al. to substitute the trigger symbol combination with a trigger symbol or any other trigger mechanism in order to give game designers options in triggering a secondary game.
Gnanasundram et al. teaches, paragraph [0106], “Gaming service provider server 130 maintains repositories of game data 134 indicative of available games, which enables a client device to display available games for selection by a user, user registration data 136, which maintains user records which respectively uniquely identify each user, and in some embodiments user credit data 135, which maintains a real-time record of credit associated with a user.” (The registration data that uniquely identify each user is considered to be a player account.)
Gnanasundram et al. also teaches, paragraphs [0037-41], “identifying a user playing a given game at a first device;
[0038] saving, at a central location, data indicative of the game session at the first device as a first game session;
[0039] identifying the user via a second device;
[0040] presenting to the user, via the second device, data indicative of one or more saved game sessions, including the first game session; and
[0041] enabling the user to continue the first game session at the second device.”
(This is considered to be cause gameplay data to be stored in the at least one memory, the gameplay data being associated with the player account and the upgradeable object being in the second state; receive an input associated with the player account from a second electronic gaming device; and based upon the input, cause the upgradeable object to be displayed in the second state at the second electronic gaming device. Given the teaching, the user could go back to the first device and finish the first game. This also teaches claims 9 and 17.)
Based on the teaching of Gnanasundram et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Bonney et al. to incorporate the flexibility of Gnanasundram et al. by using registration data that uniquely identify each user is considered to be a player account and to allow gameplay data to be stored in the at least one memory, the gameplay data being associated with the player account and the upgradeable object being in the second state; receive an input associated with the player account from a second electronic gaming device; and based upon the input, cause the upgradeable object to be displayed in the second state at the second electronic gaming device in order to allow users to play games in a casino environment or in private.
In regards to claims 2-5 and 12-15,
wherein the first electronic gaming device is one of a mobile device or an electronic gaming machine, wherein the second electronic gaming device is one of a mobile device or an electronic gaming machine, wherein the first electronic gaming device and the second electronic gaming device are the same electronic gaming device, wherein the first electronic gaming device and the second electronic gaming device are different electronic gaming devices. (The teaching of Gnanasundram et al., the alternative claim language and figure 1 of Bonney et al. teach these limitations.)
In regards to claims 7-8 and 16,
wherein the second value is greater than the first value and wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to: determine that a second plurality of symbols for a second play of the electronic game includes one or more trigger symbols; and cause a second upgrade to be applied to the upgradeable object based upon determining that the second plurality of symbols includes the one or more trigger symbols, wherein application of the second upgrade causes the upgradeable object to be displayed in a third state, wherein the upgradeable object being in the third state is associated with a third value of the upgradeable object, and wherein the third value is greater than the second value. (see figures 13-15)
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonney et al. (US patent 8,371,925), Gauselmann (US PG pub 2004/0102240) and Gnanasundram et al. (US PG pub 2016/0240040) in further view of Baerlocher (US PG pub 2003/0224857).
The combination invention of Bonney et al., Gauselmann, and Gnanasundram et al., as applied above, shows all of the limitations of the claims except for specifying an initial value of an upgradeable item being nonzero and applying selected volatility level to the upgradeable object.
Baerlocher teaches, figures 10E-H, paragraphs [0080 & 0081], Referring now to FIG. 10E, the display device 30 or 32 illustrates that the player chooses the violin item 122. The gaming device displays the initial award of one hundred to the player and preferably provides a suitable audio message recorded by the selected actor 132 for the picked item 122, which introduces the item 122 and alternatively annunciates the initial award 182. Referring now to FIG. 10F, the display device 30 or 32 illustrates the first review 144 of the profile #4, which is a value increase or upgrade. The initial award 182 is considered to be a non-zero value of an upgradeable object in a gaming system.
Based on the teaching of Baerlocher, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination invention of Bonney et al., Gauselmann, and Gnanasundram et al. to include a bonus meter to start with an initial value in order to make the game more realistic in flipping or improving houses or objects because even beat up houses have some value.
Claims 10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonney et al. (US patent 8,371,925), Gauselmann (US PG pub 2004/0102240) and Gnanasundram et al. (US PG pub 2016/0240040) in further view of McPhail et al. (US PG pub 2022/0148384).
The combination invention of Bonney et al., Gauselmann, and Gnanasundram et al., as applied above, shows all of the limitations of the claims except for specifying wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to determine the upgrade to apply to the upgradeable object based upon a selected volatility level of a plurality of volatility levels, wherein upgrades based upon selection a low volatility level of the plurality of volatility levels are associated with less significant upgrades to the upgradeable object than upgrades based upon selection of a high volatility level of the plurality of volatility levels.
McPhail et al. teaches, paragraph [0054], applying selected volatility level to pay tables.
Based on the teaching of McPhail et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination invention of Bonney et al., Gauselmann, and Gnanasundram et al. to include applying selected volatility level to the upgradeable object just like a pay table in order to allow the customer to go for the big payoff (major upgrade – roof) or to receive smaller, but more frequent payoffs. (minor upgrade – a window).
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. 11,430,298 and claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,170,003 in view of Gnanasundram et al. (US PG pub 2016/0240040).
claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,430,298 and claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,170,003 shows all of the limitations of the claims except for specifying that
a first electronic gaming device associated with a player account;
cause gameplay data to be stored in the at least one memory, the gameplay data being associated with the player account and the upgradeable object being in the second state;
receive an input associated with the player account from a second electronic gaming device; and
based upon the input, cause the upgradeable object to be displayed in the second state at the second electronic gaming device.
Gnanasundram et al. teaches, paragraph [0106], “Gaming service provider server 130 maintains repositories of game data 134 indicative of available games, which enables a client device to display available games for selection by a user, user registration data 136, which maintains user records which respectively uniquely identify each user, and in some embodiments user credit data 135, which maintains a real-time record of credit associated with a user.” (The registration data that uniquely identify each user is considered to be a player account.)
Gnanasundram et al. also teaches, paragraphs [0037-41], “identifying a user playing a given game at a first device;
[0038] saving, at a central location, data indicative of the game session at the first device as a first game session;
[0039] identifying the user via a second device;
[0040] presenting to the user, via the second device, data indicative of one or more saved game sessions, including the first game session; and
[0041] enabling the user to continue the first game session at the second device.”
(This is considered to be cause gameplay data to be stored in the at least one memory, the gameplay data being associated with the player account and the upgradeable object being in the second state; receive an input associated with the player account from a second electronic gaming device; and based upon the input, cause the upgradeable object to be displayed in the second state at the second electronic gaming device. Given the teaching, the user could go back to the first device and finish the first game.)
Based on the teaching of Gnanasundram et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,430,298 and claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,170,003 to incorporate the flexibility of Gnanasundram et al. by using registration data that uniquely identify each user is considered to be a player account and to allow gameplay data to be stored in the at least one memory, the gameplay data being associated with the player account and the upgradeable object being in the second state; receive an input associated with the player account from a second electronic gaming device; and based upon the input, cause the upgradeable object to be displayed in the second state at the second electronic gaming device in order to allow users to play games in a casino environment or in private.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A CUFF whose telephone number is (571)272-6778. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-5.
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, Xuan Thai can be reached on 571 272-7147. 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.
/MICHAEL A CUFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights