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 § 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 (What is the statutory category?):
Claims 1-20 are drawn to at least one of the four statutory categories of invention (ie: process, machine, manufacture, or composition).
Step 2A; Prong I (Does the claim recite an abstract idea?):
Claim 1 (and similarly Claim 13) recites: A live streaming platform server comprising:
a processor; and
a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
during a first period of time occurring responsive to a receipt, from a device associated with a live host, of a first selection of a first electronic gaming machine eligible to operate as a streaming device:
receive, from the first electronic gaming machine, data associated with a play of a first wagering game of the first electronic gaming machine, and
communicate, to a client device and at least partially based on the play of the first wagering game of the first electronic gaming machine, first data associated with a first portion of a live stream, and
during a second, subsequent period of time occurring responsive to a receipt, from the device associated with the live host, of a second selection of a second, different electronic gaming machine eligible to operate as the streaming device:
receive, from the second, different electronic gaming machine, data associated with a play of a second wagering game of the second, different electronic gaming machine, and
communicate, to the client device and at least partially based on the play of the second wagering game of the second, different electronic gaming machine, second data associated with a second portion of the live stream.
Claim 9 recites:A system comprising:
a processor; and
a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
determine a plurality of electronic gaming machines eligible to operate as a streaming device for at least a portion of a live stream associated with a live host,
communicate data that results in a device associated with the live host displaying identifying information associated with the determined plurality of electronic gaming machines, and
responsive to a receipt, from the device associated with the live host and based on the displayed identifying information, of data associated with a selection of a first electronic gaming machine of the plurality of electronic gaming machines, enable data associated with a play of a wagering game occurring at the selected first electronic gaming machine to form part of the live stream communicated, via a live streaming platform server, from the selected first electronic gaming machine to a client device.
[the Examiner submits that the foregoing underlined elements recite certain method of organizing human activity because they describe “managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)”]
According to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Guidelines, Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity, Managing Personal Behavior or Relationships or Interactions Between People (e.g. social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) "encompasses both activity of a single person (for example a person following a set of instructions) and activity that involves multiple people (such as a commercial or legal interaction). Thus, some interactions between a person and a computer (for example a method of anonymous loan shopping that a person conducts using a mobile phone) may fall within this grouping." (Emphasis added)
To further elaborate on the Examiner’s interpretation regarding the claimed invention being directed towards certain methods of organizing human activity, the Examiner believes the invention describe managing interactions between people and machine (ie: a gaming machine) in which rules or instructions for the gaming machine is being implemented (ie: communicating play of wagering games.)
Step 2A; Prong II (Does the claim recite a practical application?):
The Examiner submits that the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons discussed above with respect to the conclusion that the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The dependent claims merely include limitations that either further define the abstract idea (and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract) or amount to no more than instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer, or use a computer as tool to perform the abstract idea.
Taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For example, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology.
The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application for the following reasons. The claim elements of claims 1, 9, and 13 above that are not underlined constitute additional limitations.
The Examiner submits that the following additional limitation merely uses a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea: processor, memory, server, and client device.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually.
For example, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology; there is no additional element that applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception; the additional elements merely recite the words ‘‘apply it’’ (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; the additional elements do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Step 2B (Are there additional elements that are “something more” than an abstract idea?):
Dependent Claims 2-8, 10-12, 14-20 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons discussed above with respect to the conclusion that the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. 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.
In addition, with regards to dependent claims, the courts have recognized the computer functions as well-understood, routine, and conventional activities when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (ie: at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity because each claim describes physical or software elements that provide a generic environment in which to carry out the abstract idea, which is similar to the conventional activity or as insignificant extra-solution activity of selecting information, based on types of information, for collection, analysis and display in EPG, gathering, receiving and transmitting data in Symantec, TLI, OIP Techs., buySAFE, and performing repetitive calculation in Flook, Bancorp.
Therefore, the dependent claims are not drawn to eligible subject matter as they are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 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 –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nelson et al., US 20240321047 (Nelson).
Regarding Claim 9. Nelson discloses a system comprising: a processor; and
a memory device (para 4, 104, 112-113) that stores a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
determine a plurality of electronic gaming machines eligible to operate as a streaming device for at least a portion of a live stream associated with a live host (Abstract, para 18-21, 24, 79, 102.)
communicate data that results in a device associated with the live host displaying identifying information associated with the determined plurality of electronic gaming machines (para 49, 57, 59-60, 66, 108, 169. For chatting, identifying information of those chatting, such as their usernames, are displayed.), and
responsive to a receipt, from the device associated with the live host and based on the displayed identifying information, of data associated with a selection of a first electronic gaming machine of the plurality of electronic gaming machines, enable data associated with a play of a wagering game occurring at the selected first electronic gaming machine to form part of the live stream communicated, via a live streaming platform server, from the selected first electronic gaming machine to a client device.
Regarding Claim 10. Nelson discloses the system of Claim 9, wherein the displayed identifying information comprises a recommendation of a second electronic gaming machine of the plurality of electronic gaming machines (para 69-71, 73.)
Regarding Claim 11. Nelson discloses the system of Claim 10, wherein the recommendation is based on an activity tracked in association with the plurality of electronic gaming machines (para 167).
Regarding Claim 12. Nelson discloses the system of Claim 10, wherein the first electronic gaming machine is different from the second electronic gaming machine (para 19, 57, 102).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY WONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3003. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5pm.
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.
/JEFFREY K WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights