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 a judicial exception. The claims will be analyzed with respect to the Subject Matter Eligibility Test at MPEP§2106.
Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 1 (see MPEP§2106.03)
The claims recite one of the four statutory categories of subject matter.
Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 2A Prong 1 (see MPEP§2106.04(a-c))
The claims recite abstract ideas in the following categories;
Mental processes (MPEP§2106.04(a)(2)III) (hereinafter “MP”).
The abstract ideas have been noted in the claims below.
Regarding claim 1, following an occurrence of a community game participant selection event, select a plurality of users at a plurality of devices determined eligible to operate as a streaming device for at least a portion of a live stream (mental process of curating and selecting what is to be displayed and who is to be allowed to play during a broadcast as is done within a control room for a traditional sports broadcast), and following an occurrence of a community game triggering event: enable the plurality of selected users to participate in a community game (mental process of curating and selecting what is to be displayed and who is to be allowed to play during a broadcast as is done within a control room for a traditional sports broadcast), and responsive to a receipt of data associated with the community game displayed by one of the plurality of devices of one of the selected users operating as the streaming device, cause a client device to display the live stream comprising at least the community game (mental process of curating and selecting what is to be displayed and who is to be allowed to play during a broadcast as is done within a control room for a traditional sports broadcast).
Claims 2-20 recite similar abstract ideas as noted above regarding claim 1.
Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 2A Prong 2 (see MPEP§2106.04(d))
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements are generic computer hardware; insignificant extra solution activity such as collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis to data; and the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer. These additional elements individually and in combination provide for limitations that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. These additional elements (1) add “insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(g)” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) and (2) generally link “the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(h).” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I).
These additional elements individually and in combination are not limitations that provide for “improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, as discussed in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) apply or use the “judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) implement the “judicial exception with, or using a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(b);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) effect “a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(c);” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I) or apply or use “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, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(e).” (MPEP§2106.04(d)I). As such the claims as a whole do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Subject Matter Eligibility – Step 2B (see MPEP§2106.05)
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements are well-understood, routine and conventional generic computer hardware and insignificant extra solution activity (see MPEP§2106.05). The claimed additional elements with citations indicating their well-understood, routine and conventional nature are provided below.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. 2019/0118086 by Gentile.
Regarding claim 1, Gentile discloses 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 (para. 30-33 – see the computer hardware, terminals, servers etc.): following an occurrence of a community game participant selection event, select a plurality of users at a plurality of devices determined eligible to operate as a streaming device for at least a portion of a live stream (fig. 5-10; para. 94-111 – see the potential individual players for streaming), and following an occurrence of a community game triggering event: enable the plurality of selected users to participate in a community game, and responsive to a receipt of data associated with the community game displayed by one of the plurality of devices of one of the selected users operating as the streaming device, cause a client device to display the live stream comprising at least the community game (fig. 5-10; para. 94-111 – see display of the selected gameplay).
Regarding claim 2, Gentile discloses the system of Claim 1, wherein the live stream further comprises audio/video data of a live host (para. 28-30 – see commentators).
Regarding claim 3, Gentile discloses the system of Claim 2, wherein the community game participant selection event occurs based on an availability of the live host (para. 27-32 – see commentator/broadcast selection criteria).
Regarding claim 4, Gentile discloses the system of Claim 1, wherein the plurality of selected users sequentially participate in the community game (fig. 5-10; para. 94-111 – see the selected players playing through a BR type game).
Regarding claim 5, Gentile discloses the system of Claim 4, wherein different devices of the plurality of devices sequentially operate as the streaming device (fig. 5-10; para. 30-33, 94-111 – see the data provided by the client devices for display).
Regarding claim 6, Gentile discloses the system of Claim 1, wherein a first device of the plurality of devices comprises a personal gaming device operating with a remote gaming platform (para. 30-33 – see remote hardware arrangements).
Regarding claim 7, Gentile discloses the system of Claim 1, wherein a first user of the plurality of users is selected based on an eligibility factor (para. 41, 61-82 – see criteria for automated/metric based targeting).
Regarding claim 8, Gentile discloses the system of Claim 7, wherein the eligibility factor is based on an attribute of the first user (para. 41, 61-82 – see criteria for automated/metric based targeting).
Regarding claim 9, Gentile discloses the system of Claim 7, wherein the eligibility factor is based on an attribute of the device of the first user (para. 41, 61-82 – see criteria for automated/metric based targeting).
Regarding claims 10-20, these claims are rejected as noted above regarding claims 1-9, mutatis mutandis.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER J IANNUZZI whose telephone number is (571)272-5793. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30AM-5:30PM EST.
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.
/PETER J IANNUZZI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights