Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/964,019

System and Method for Ensuring Fairness in Virtual Golf Tournament

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Nov 29, 2024
Priority
Dec 18, 2023 — provisional 63/611,483 +1 more
Examiner
IANNUZZI, PETER J
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Trackman A/S
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
12m
Est. Remaining
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
357 granted / 525 resolved
+8.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
560
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§103
54.5%
+14.5% vs TC avg
§102
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
§112
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 525 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 1-19 and 40 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, a system for ensuring fairness in a virtual golf tournament, comprising: a tournament server configured to manage the virtual golf tournament with multiple golfers playing golf on a plurality of golf simulators (mental process – an individual with alone or with pen and paper could track and manage players in a golf tournament), the tournament server has access to a list of permitted hardware configurations for the golf simulators (MP – an individual checking and verifying that permitted hardware is being used); and each of the golf simulator configured to allow a playing golfer to play the virtual golf tournament, wherein the tournament server is configured to permit participation in the virtual golf tournament from a specific golf simulator based on the hardware configuration of the specific golf simulator (MP – after checking, allowing the player to be put on the list of players eligible to play). Claims 2-19 and 40, recite additional mental processes regarding the operations, hardware compliance and setup for a golf tournament. 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 sensors, 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. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 29, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12684281
GAMING HEADSET WITH ACTIVE NOISE CANCELLATION
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12670768
GAMING SYSTEM AND METHOD WITH MULTI-PLAY NUDGE FEATURE
2y 0m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12661581
JOYSTICK MECHANISM AND GAMEPAD
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12654098
MANAGING SHARED ACCOUNT ACCESS
3y 9m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12654095
INPUT DEVICE, GAME CONTROLLER, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS
3y 0m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+14.1%)
2y 7m (~12m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 525 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month