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 .
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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-20 of US Patent No. 12,175,831. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the inventions are directed to substantially similar subject matter. The subject matter claimed in the instant application is anticipated by the referenced US Patent, as follows: the difference between independent Claim 1 of instant application, 18/937793 and Claim 1 of US Patent No. 12,175,831 are highlighted in the following table.
Claim 1 of 18/937793
Claim 1 of 12,175,831
An electronic gaming device comprising:
An electronic gaming device comprising:
a first display device;
a first display device configured to display an historical event;
a second display device;
a second display device;
at least one memory device with instructions stored thereon; and
at least one memory device with instructions stored thereon; and
at least one processor in communication with the first display device, the second display device, and the at least one memory device, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:
at least one processor in communication with the first display device, the second display device, and the at least one memory device, wherein execution of the instructions by the at least one processor causes the at least one processor to:
determine a first game outcome for an electronic game, wherein the first game outcome is associated with a first historical event;
cause display of a first historical event associated with a first game outcome on the first display device, wherein the first historical event is displayed in a first screen resolution associated with the first display device;
cause display of the first historical event on the first display device;
determine that the first display device is one of defective or disconnected; and
determine that the first display device is one of defective or disconnected;
determine a second game outcome for the electronic game, wherein the second game outcome is associated with a second historical event; and
cause display of a second historical event associated with a second game outcome on the second display device based upon determining that the first display device is one of defective or disconnected, wherein the second historical event is displayed in a second screen resolution associated with the second display device.
automatically cause display of the second historical event on the second display device.
Furthermore, at least claims 8, 16, and 20 of the instant application contain substantially identical claimed subject matter to claims 2, 9, and 16 of the referenced US Patent.
Prior Art
The Examiner notes that after a thorough search on the claims as currently presented, the claims currently overcome prior art. The closest prior art found to date are the following:
Hussain (US 2007/0046697 A1) discloses the concept of a physical change (e.g. a change in screen orientation) is detected at a display device that is attached to a graphics subsystem of a host device and on which images are currently being displayed, a hot plug detect signal may be provided to the graphics subsystem and the graphics subsystem may adjust its processing of images to account for the physical change (e.g. the image may be rotated). .
Scott (US 2019/0304241 A1) discloses the concept of a display control system for a gaming machine, wherein the display control system allows a gaming machine controller to directly control attributes of one or more video displays coupled to a gaming machine, and display attributes can be adjusted to account for different machine states which can occur when the gaming machine is operating in an attract mode, game play mode and tilt mode.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure and is listed on the attached Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHASE E LEICHLITER whose telephone number is (571)270-7109. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (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, 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.
/CHASE E LEICHLITER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights