DETAILED ACTION
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, 7 and 12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1 and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,175,829 (hereinafter ‘829) in view of Castro et al., US 2016/0335836. Claim 1 of ‘829 teaches all of the limitations of Claims 1, 7 and 12 with the exception of “a link pivotably coupled to the cabinet.” Castro et al. teaches these limitations as described below in reference to Claims 1 and 12 (See Castro et al. Fig. 4-6 and Par. 9, 48-50). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the system of ‘829 to include a link pivotably coupled to the cabinet in order to allow the display to be pivoted away from the cabinet for adjustment before being pivoted back against the cabinet for it to be locked into place for play, similar to the functionality described in Castro et al. Par. 10.
The limitations of dependent claim 7 of the present application are taught by Claim 11 of ‘829.
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 1-6, 8, 12-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castro et al., US 2016/0335836, in view of Gurr et al., US 2019/0317549.
In Reference to Claim 1 and 12
Castro et al., teaches an electronic gaming machine comprising a cabinet (Fig. 1 and Par. 29); a monitor configured to display an electronic game the monitor including a monitor frame (Fig. 1 and Par. 30. Fig. 4 and Par. 45 and 49 which teaches a display assembling that includes a display housing 104 for containing displays 112, 114, and 116 to which a housing mounting plate 136 is attached); a link pivotably coupled to the cabinet (Fig. 4-6 and Par. 9, 48-50 which teaches a “second bracket 134” which pivotably attaches to the gaming cabinet); a carriage coupled to the link (Fig. 4-6 and Par. 49-50 “first bracket” 132);
Further, Castro et al. teaches where the bracket 132 might be rotatably attached to the cabinet (Fig. 4 and Par. 49) and teaches where one version of the monitor can be attached in other a horizontal or vertical orientation (Fig. 7 and 8 and Par. 56). However, Castro et al. does not explicitly teach a bearing assembly rotatably coupling the frame to the carriage, the bearing assembly including an arcuately extending guide track and a sliding connector extending into and engaged with the guide track, wherein movement of the sliding connector along the guide track causes the monitor to rotate relative to the cabinet.
Gurr et al. teaches a system for mounting a monitor to a support (Abstract) which includes a bearing assembly rotatably coupling the frame to a carriage, the bearing assembly including an arcuately extending guide track and a sliding connector extending into and engaged with the guide track, wherein movement of the sliding connector along the guide track causes the monitor to rotate relative to the cabinet (Fig. 8-1, 8-2, 9-1, and 9-2, 10 and Par. 102-108. Which teach a curved track 550 about a pivot point which interacts with one or more posts 552 which extend into and slide within the grooves in order to allow the display to rotate relative to its support. See in particular where Par. 106 teaches that circular curved tracks will allow the monitor to be rotated about a fixed point.).
It would be desirable to modify the system of Castro et al. to include a rotation assembly with arcuately extending guide tracks as taught by Gurr et al. in order to allow operator of the machine of Castro et al. to quickly and easily change the gaming machine display between a horizontal and a vertical configuration merely by pivoting the display outwards and then rotating it on the assembly rather than having to manually unscrew and re-screw brackets in a different orientation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the system of Castro et al. to include a rotation assembly with arcuately extending guide tracks as taught by Gurr et al.
In Reference to Claim 18
An electronic gaming machine comprising: a cabinet (Fig. 1 and Par. 29); a monitor configured to display an electronic game, the monitor including a monitor frame (Fig. 1 and Par. 30. Fig. 4 and Par. 45 and 49 which teaches a display assembling that includes a display housing 104 for containing displays 112, 114, and 116 to which a housing mounting plate 136 is attached); a mount configured to secure the monitor to the cabinet (Fig. 4 and Par. 48-50), the mount including a carriage coupled to the monitor and a linkage assembly (Fig. 4-6 and Par. 48-50 where examiner considers the “first bracket” 132 a carriage, and “second bracket” 134 part of a “linkage assembly”), the linkage assembly including a track frame and a link pivotably coupled to the cabinet and the track frame (Fig. 5A and 5B and Par. 51-53 which teach “ramped rails” 156 and 158 as part of the second bracket which are used to couple to the first bracket. See also Par. 9 and 48-50 which teaches that the second bracket is pivotably attached to the gaming cabinet. Examiner considers this to constitute a “link”), the carriage being slidably coupled to the track frame (Fig. 5-6 and Par. 51-54 which teaches where the first bracket is attached to the second bracket by sliding the ramped rails of the second bracket into corresponding channels in the first bracket);
Further, Castro et al. teaches where the bracket 132 might be rotatably attached to the cabinet (Fig. 4 and Par. 49) and teaches where one version of the monitor can be attached in other a horizontal or vertical orientation (Fig. 7 and 8 and Par. 56). However, Castro et al. does not explicitly teach a bearing assembly rotatably coupling the frame to the carriage, the bearing assembly including a guide track and a sliding connector extending into and engaged with the guide track, wherein movement of the sliding connector along the guide track causes the monitor to rotate relative to the cabinet.
Gurr et al. teaches a system for mounting a monitor to a support (Abstract) which includes a bearing assembly rotatably coupling the frame to a carriage, the bearing assembly including a guide track and a sliding connector extending into and engaged with the guide track, wherein movement of the sliding connector along the guide track causes the monitor to rotate relative to the cabinet (Fig. 8-1, 8-2, 9-1, and 9-2, 10 and Par. 102-108. Which teach a curved track 550 about a pivot point which interacts with one or more posts 552 which extend into and slide within the grooves in order to allow the display to rotate relative to its support. See in particular where Par. 106 teaches that circular curved tracks will allow the monitor to be rotated about a fixed point.).
It would be desirable to modify the system of Castro et al. to include a rotation assembly with arcuately extending guide tracks as taught by Gurr et al. in order to allow operator of the machine of Castro et al. to quickly and easily change the gaming machine display between a horizontal and a vertical configuration merely by pivoting the display outwards and then rotating it on the assembly rather than having to manually unscrew and re-screw brackets in a different orientation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the system of Castro et al. to include a rotation assembly with arcuately extending guide tracks as taught by Gurr et al.
In Reference to Claims 2, 13, and 19
Castro et al. and Gurr et al. teach wherein the carriage includes the guide track, the sliding connector being attached to the monitor frame and extending outwardly therefrom through the carriage. (Gurr et al. Par. 108 “FIG. 10 illustrates the non-circular curved tracks 750-1, 750-2, 750-3, 750-4 positioned in the base 704 and the posts 752 fixed to the display mount 710” where Castro et al. teaches the carriage is attached to the cabinet support structure and the frame is attached to the monitor as described above).
In Reference to Claims 3 and 14 and 20
Castro et al. teaches a track frame assembly comprising at least one track bar pivotably coupled to the link, the at least one track bar defining a track and the carriage being slidably received in the track for moving the carriage longitudinally within the track. (Fig. 5A and 5B and Par. 51-53 which teach “ramped rails” 156 and 158 extending as part of the second bracket which are used to couple to the first bracket. See also Par. 9 and 48-50 which teaches that the second bracket is pivotably attached to the gaming cabinet. and Fig. 5-6 and Par. 51-54 which teaches where the first bracket is attached to the second bracket by sliding first bracket and second bracket together. See in particular the “complementary flanges” 174 and 176 which are received in the groove between the ramped rail and the extending “guide flanges” 170 and 172. See the annotated Fig. 5B below pointing to the right angle groove between the ramped rails and guide flanges that examiner considers a track into when the carriage is slidably received)
PNG
media_image1.png
412
518
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In Reference to Claim 4
Castro et al. and Gurr et al. teach wherein the monitor is configured to be moved between a closed position, in which the monitor is operable to display the electronic game, and an extended position, in which the monitor is laterally spaced from the cabinet, wherein, in the extended position, the link is rotated relative to the closed position. (Castro et al. Fig. 4, 6 and Par. 10 “To mount the display arrangement to the cabinet, the second bracket is pivoted from a first (functional) position, whereat the second bracket is in a generally vertical orientation with respect to the cabinet, to a second (non-functional) position, whereat the second bracket is in a generally oblique orientation with respect to the cabinet.”).
In Reference to Claim 5
Castro et al. and Gurr et al. teach where, when in the extended position, the monitor is configured to be moved to a lowered position, wherein, in the lowered position, the carriage is moved longitudinally within the track from the extended position (See Fig. 6A-6D and Par. 54 which teaches while in the extended position the monitor is moved longitudinally down to its lowered mounting position before the display is returned to the closed position).
In Reference to Claim 6
Castro et al. and Gurr et al. teach where the bearing assembly is configured to rotate the frame approximately 90 degrees relative to the carriage between a portrait orientation and a landscape orientation, when the monitor is in the extended position (Castro et al. Fig. 7 and 8 and Par. 56 and Gurr et al. Fig. 8-1, 8-2, 9-1, and 9-2, 10 and Par. 102-108).
In Reference to Claim 8 and 15
Castro et al. and Gurr et al. teach wherein the carriage comprises a body defining the guide track, the guide track being a slot extending through the body of the carriage, and wherein the sliding connector includes a mounting pin attached to the monitor frame and extending through the guide track. (Gurr et al. Par. 108 “FIG. 10 illustrates the non-circular curved tracks 750-1, 750-2, 750-3, 750-4 positioned in the base 704 and the posts 752 fixed to the display mount 710” where Castro et al. teaches the carriage is attached to the cabinet support structure and the frame is attached to the monitor as described above).
Claim 7 and 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castro et al., US 2016/0335836, Gurr et al., US 2019/0317549, further in view of Hart, US 6,416,027.
In Reference to Claim 7
Castro et al. and Gurr et el. teaches a carriage and where the carriage is movable relative to the cabinet between a first position, in which the monitor is operable to display the electronic game, and a second position, in which the monitor is spaced from the cabinet (Castro et al. Par. 10). However, they do not teach a drive mechanism and a harness extending from the drive mechanism to the carriage the drive mechanism operable to move the carriage relative to the housing.
Hart teaches a drive mechanism and a harness extending from the drive mechanism to a carriage the drive mechanism operable to move the carriage relative to its housing (Fig. 1-2 and Col. 2 lines 1-43 which teaches a drive mechanism for automatically moving a display about a pivot using motors which drive pulleys with wires attached to the door on which a display is mounted. The motors and the force of gravity allow the display carriage to move between a first a second position).
It would be desirable to modify the system of Castro et al. and Gurr et al. to include a drive mechanism and harness for the pivoting display as taught by Hart in order to allow the display to be safely and smoothing extended on its pivot without significant effort from the user, better allowing display to be easily changed between open and closed position even if the display assembly is very heavy.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the system of Castro et al. and Gurr et al. to include a drive mechanism and harness for the pivoting display as taught by Hart.
In Reference to Claim 10
Castro et al. and Gurr et el. teaches a carriage and where the carriage is movable relative to the cabinet between a first position, in which the monitor is operable to display the electronic game, and a second position, in which the monitor is spaced from the cabinet (Castro et al. Par. 10). However, they do not teach a lift assembly including a pulley coupled to the support structure and positioned above the monitor and a harness extending through the pulley and to the carriage.
Hart teaches a lift assembly including a pulley coupled to the support structure and positioned above the monitor and a harness extending through the pulley and to the carriage (Fig. 1-2 and Col. 2 lines 1-43 which teaches a drive mechanism for automatically moving a display about a pivot using motors which drive pulleys above the display with wires attached to the door on which a display is mounted. The motors and the force of gravity allow the display carriage to lift between a first a second position).
It would be desirable to modify the system of Castro et al. and Gurr et al. to include a pulley based drive mechanism and harness for the pivoting display as taught by Hart in order to allow the display to be safely and smoothing extended on its pivot without significant effort from the user, better allowing display to be easily changed between open and closed position even if the display assembly is very heavy.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the system of Castro et al. and Gurr et al. to include a pulley based drive mechanism and harness for the pivoting display as taught by Hart.
Claims 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castro et al., US 2016/0335836, Gurr et al., US 2019/0317549, further in view of Yamada, US 2021/0247018.
In Reference to Claims 9 and 16
Castro et al. and Gurr et al. teach a gaming machine as described above in reference to Claim 8. However, they do not explicitly teach at least one disc positioned between the monitor frame and the carriage the disc defining an aperture sized to receive the mounting pin therethrough.
Yamada teaches a system for mounting a rotatable display to a support structure (See Fig. 1A and Fig. 1B) which teaches at least one disc positioned between the monitor frame and the carriage the disc defining an aperture sized to receive the mounting pin therethrough (Fig. 4 ref. 35 and Par. 74 which teaches “large spacer” 35 which is a disc made a material which allows for a smooth and stable sliding friction during rotation of the display and stand mount and which has holes sized to receive attachment bolts which slide within arc shaped slots, see Par. 71 and 90).
It would be desirable to modify the system of Castro et al. and Gurr et al. to include a disc positioned between the monitor frame and carriage as taught by Yamada in order to provide a more smooth and stable sliding friction during rotation of the display as taught by Par. 74 of Yamada.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the system of Castro et al. and Gurr et al. to include a disc positioned between the monitor frame and carriage as taught by Yamada.
Claims 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castro et al., US 2016/0335836, Gurr et al., US 2019/0317549, further in view of Kozlowski, JR. et al., US 2017/0105529.
In Reference to Claims 11 and 17
Castro et al. and Gurr et al. teaches a gaming machine and mounting assembly of a gaming machine as described above including a carriage and a link which allow a monitor to be pulled away from a gaming device cabinet supporting the display (Fig. 4-8). However, they do not explicitly teach where the carriage comprises a frame and a body positioned within the frame, and wherein the link comprises a first arm rotatably coupled to the structural support and a second arm secured to the carriage frame and rotatably coupled to the first arm.
Kozlowski, JR. et al. teaches a system for mounting a display to a support which teaches where a carriage comprises a frame and a body positioned within the frame (Fig. 1 ref. 320 and 340), and wherein the link comprises a first arm rotatably coupled to the structural support and a second arm secured to the carriage frame and rotatably coupled to the first arm (Fig. 1, 8, 10A -10B and Par. 53-55 and 60 Which teaches where a display mount can be extended on arms out and away from a support structure or pushed back against the support structure to mount flatter. And, with reference to Fig. 8 and Par. 53-55 where the extension is provided via articulating arms that are rotatably connected to bracket 320 which is for mounting the display, and plate 180 which is connected to support structure. Specifically center arm 314 is rotatably coupled to the support at hub bracket 315 and the side arms are secured to the carriage frame 320, and the center and side arms are rotatably coupled together as described in Par. 54).
It would be desirable to modify the system of Castro et al. and Gurr et al. to include a carriage a link assembly for extending the display such as the one described by Kozlowski, JR. et al. in order to allow the display to move only horizontally when extended, as taught by Kozlowski, Jr. et al. Par. 60, not horizontally and vertically such as in the tilting mechanism of Castro et al. Thus providing more clearance for the display for operations such as rotating a large triple display.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the system of Castro et al. and Gurr et al. to include a carriage a link assembly for extending the display such as the one described by Kozlowski, JR. et al.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARL V LARSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday; 10:00 am - 6:30 pm.
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.
/CARL V LARSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights