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 .
Priority
2. Applicant claims the benefit of US Provisional Application No. 63605092, filed December 1, 2023. Claims 1-18 have been afforded the benefit of this filing date
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 9-10, and 12-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chun (US Patent No. 20170124798).
Regarding claim 1 and substantially similar limitations in claim 18, Chun discloses “a gaming device, comprising: a gaming table (see abstract, “Gaming table systems can include multiple electronic gaming tables”) a processor in communication with a storage medium and memory (see paragraph 35, “A table processor and/or remote server can be used to administer the game”), the storage medium configured to store instructions accessible by the processor to operate the gaming table so to display a graphical user interface on a screen (see paragraph 41, “The eTable 200 can include […] a plurality of optional player stations 220, each of which may have its own displays 222, bill acceptor, card acceptor and other input components 224, and one or more community displays 230”); the gaming table configured to wirelessly connect to two or more remote devices such that when a game is played on a gaming table, two or more users of the two or more remote devices can play the game using information displayed on the gaming table and with unique information displayed on each of the two or more remote devices (see paragraph 3, “The use of remote gaming terminals can also allow players to play at multiple live gaming tables simultaneously while being present only at one table or even while not being present at any single table”).”
Regarding claim 2, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1, wherein the information displayed on the gaming table is displayed on the screen (“The eTable 200 can also have one or more displays. In one embodiment, there can be one or more community displays 230 to show common player information, such as community cards, table wager minimum, casino name, time, advertisement, and the like”).”
Regarding claim 3, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1, wherein the two or more remote devices comprise smartphones (see paragraph 45, “Such remotely located player terminals can take the form of any of gaming terminals 100, 198, 199 above, and/or can be implemented on a third party user device, such as a smart phone, tablet”).”
Regarding claim 4, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1, wherein the two or more remote devices comprise digital tablets (see paragraph 45, “Such remotely located player terminals can take the form of any of gaming terminals 100, 198, 199 above, and/or can be implemented on a third party user device, such as a smart phone, tablet”).”
Regarding claim 5, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1, wherein one or more additional users can play the game directly using the gaming table (see paragraph 41, “The eTable 200 can include a playing surface 210 adapted for the play of live table games using live physical components, a live dealer station or region 215”).”
Regarding claim 7, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1, wherein location information is used to confirm that the two or more users are within a specific physical proximity of the gaming table (see paragraphs 34, “[…] a multi-site games traffic server that receives remote game requests, verifies a player's eligibility (location, ID, funds, player profile, play history)” and 66, “For example, master game server 822 may also have a compliance component that determines whether a remote gaming terminal is in a proper gaming jurisdiction”).”
Regarding claim 9, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1, configured such that if a user of the two or more users is eliminated from the game, said user can use one of the two or more remote device to join a different game on a gaming table (see paragraph 36, “In various embodiments then, a player can view multiple games at varying stages along the full table gaming cycle of game states, including game open, wagering, confirmation, start, play, resolution, payouts, and close. The player can then pick and choose which game or games are desired for play, and can jump back and forth between many games with the aid of knowing when betting will open and close in a staggered manner for every table that is viewable”).”
Regarding claim 10, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1, configured such that if a user of the two or more users is eliminated from the game, the remaining users of the two or more users can be reorganized to play in a different order (Examiner notes that several of the card games supported by Chun’s system (see paragraph 32), such as poker and blackjack, feature sequential play where players take turns during the betting rounds; if a player is eliminated from the game, play normally continues with that player’s turn simply being skipped).
Regarding claim 12, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1, wherein the game is a digital playing card game, and wherein the two or more remote devices are used to display digital playing cards related to each user of the two or more users (see Fig. 7).”
Regarding claim 13, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 12, wherein digital playing chips associated with each user of the two or more users are displayed on the game table (see paragraph 58, “[…] a primary display 720 can be an enlarged representation of a featured or selected gaming table […] Larger representations of cards, wheels, tokens, chips, and the like may also be present, as well as added graphical features or items”).”
Regarding claim 14, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 12, wherein each user can transfer one or more of the digital playing cards from a remote device of the two or more remote devices to the gaming table to be displayed on the gaming table (see paragraph 44, “The eTable 200 can also have one or more displays. In one embodiment, there can be one or more community displays 230 to show common player information, such as community cards”; Examiner notes that many card games involve revealing cards in the players’ hands which were previously kept private, such as during the “showdown” phase of poker (which is one of the many card games supported by Chun’s system: see paragraph 32): this previously private information, which until that point would only have been displayed on the player’s personal terminals, would now become “common” player information which, as the cards are virtual, would then be displayed on the community display to allow other players to see them).”
Regarding claim 15, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1, further comprising: a second gaming table, whereby game play on the gaming table and game play on the second gaming table is associated with each other such that a single game can be played using the gaming table and the second gaming table (see paragraph 53, “In gaming table system 500, however, a remote player need not be constrained to any particular physical eTable. For instance, a player sitting at a seat on a local eTable can wager on the game on going at the local table and at another table at the same casino, or at an eTable at a casino located elsewhere”).”
Regarding claim 16, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 15, further comprising: a third gaming table, whereby the game play on the gaming table, the game play on the second gaming table, and game play on the third gaming table is associated with each other such that a single game can be played using the gaming table, the second gaming table, and the third gaming table (Chun’s system allows for users to play any arbitrary number of games at any arbitrary number of gaming tables: see paragraph 50, “In various embodiments, a player at a given gaming terminal 100x may be provided the ability, such as by way of a button or other input, to switch between any combination of different physical electronic gaming tables 200a-200n. Further, the player at the given gaming terminal 100x may also be allowed to play multiple wager-based table games simultaneously at multiple different physical electronic gaming tables 200a-200n. For example, the player may be permitted to play table games at one, some, many, or all of the gaming tables 200a-200n”).”
Regarding claim 17, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 15, wherein when one or more users of the gaming table and wherein one or more users of the second gaming table are eliminated from the single game, remaining users of the second gaming table are reorganized to be associated with remaining users of the first gaming table (Examiner notes that, as Chun’s system allows for users to play any arbitrary number of games at any arbitrary number of gaming tables (see paragraph 50), Chun’s system would be capable of associating any number of users of a second gaming table, or any number of other gaming tables for that matter, with users of a first gaming table).”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chun (US Patent No. 20170124798) in view of Rota et al (US Patent No. 20180047251).
Regarding claim 6, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1.”
However, Chun does not disclose “the two or more users can connect their remote device to the gaming table by scanning one or more quick response (QR) codes displayed on the gaming table.”
Rota et al, henceforth Rota, teaches a system for real time attendance from a remote game site at a game going on at a relocated game site. Rota teaches a gaming table equipped with a display for virtually recreating the game surface of a table at a remote location (see paragraph 38, “The game table 5 is equipped with apparatuses for implementing the function thereof of repeating the game surface 10. In particular, the game table 5 comprises a horizontal, preferably high-definition monitor, whereon an image is reproduced, shown by way of example in FIG. 5, updated in real time, of the game surface 10, existing in the relocated game site 3”), which is directly analogous to the gaming table of the claimed invention. Notably, Rota teaches displaying a QR code on the game table to allow a user to associate a personal device such as a smart phone with the game table (see paragraph 67-68, “In order to play in the room, a picture of the QR-Code reproduced onto the horizontal screen 5 of the table existing in the room itself is acquired. When the user selects the item “Accessing the game with QR-Code”, the App searches for and connects automatically to the dedicated Wi-Fi network, thus allowing to detect the user in the specific game room and, still, to associate the user to the specific game table”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the gaming system of Chun to allow players to connect a personal electronic device, such as a smartphone, to one of the electronic gaming tables and associated network of game servers, as taught by Chun, using a QR code displayed on one of the gaming tables, as taught by Rota, and they would have been motivated to do so to streamline the process of connecting the user’s personal device to the game server network and allow them to begin participating in wagering games hosted by the network in a quick and efficient manner.
7. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chun (US Patent No. 20170124798) in view of Phillips et al (US Patent No. 20080214262).
Regarding claim 8, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1.”
However, Chun does not disclose that the gaming device is “configured to rotate at least part of the information displayed on the gaming table depending upon which user of the two or more users is actively playing the game at a particular time/”
Phillips et al, henceforth Phillips, teaches an electronic gaming table device including a display adapted to provide a representation of a virtual dealer. Like Chun’s “eTables”, Phillips’ gaming tables feature a single common display alongside multiple individual player terminals, each with its own personal display (see Fig. 5 and paragraph 20). Notably, Phillips teaches displaying a representation of a virtual dealer on the common display which is dynamically manipulated by a processor to interact with players based on their physical location and orientation with respect to the table (see paragraph 35, “Based on the detected portion of the player, the dealer representation provided by the display 110 may be adjusted to interact with the player. For example, when dealing, the processor 130 may generate the dealer representation to look the player in the eyes, or more particularly, the dealer representation may be depicted to look at the point in space detected to be the location of the player's eyes. As another example, the processor 130 may adjust a video of the dealer representation to appear to deal a card toward the player's hand”). Of course, as each player stands at a different position around the game table (see Fig. 5), the processor “adjusting a video of the dealer representation” to “appear to deal a card” toward the different players’ hands necessarily implies that the three-dimensional graphical representation of the virtual dealer is being rotated by the processor so that the virtual dealer appears to “turn toward” each player. Finally, Examiner notes that Chun teaches that, just as in Phillips’ system, the dealer at an electronic gaming table may be a virtual dealer (see paragraph 58, “The dealer may be a live human dealer, or may be a virtual computerized dealer”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the gaming system of Chun to dynamically rotate the representation of a virtual dealer displayed by an electronic gaming table of Chun’s system to look at and deal toward each of the players physically present at the gaming table, as taught by Phillips, and they would have been motivated to do so to improve the realism of the virtual dealer, thereby improving the players’ engagement and enhancing the gaming experience.
8. Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chun (US Patent No. 20170124798) in view of Lutnick et al (US Patent No. 20110065490).
Regarding claim 11, Chun discloses “the gaming device of claim 1.”
However, Chun does not disclose “configured such that a user of the two or more users can use a remote device of the two or more remote devices to order food and/or beverage to be delivered to said user.”
Lutnick teaches a system allowing players to simultaneously participate in multiple wagering games using a mobile gaming device connected to a wireless gaming network hosted by a casino, similarly to Chun’s system. Notably, Lutnick teaches that the player’s mobile gaming device may be used to request food and/or beverages from a food transaction server, with the player’s location being used to determine where to deliver the request food and/or beverages (see paragraph 442, “In various embodiments, the location of the gaming communication device may be used to deliver goods and services purchased or ordered by the user of the device. For example, in various embodiments, the user may purchase food and beverages using the device. The location of the device may then be used to deliver the food and beverages to the user, even if the user relocates to another sub-zone after placing his or her order”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the gaming system of Chun to allow players to use their remote devices to order food and/or beverages to be delivered to them on the casino floor, as taught by Lutnick, and they would have been motivated to do so to increase the convenience and luxury of the players, thereby improving the players’ “customer” experience.
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH HAROLD JOHANSSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5755. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 8:30 to 6:30.
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, Peter Vasat can be reached at (571)270-7625. 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.
/K.H.J./
Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/WILLIAM H MCCULLOCH JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights