DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
In accordance with MPEP 609.02, all references cited in IDS document of parent application(s) have been considered in this application. If Applicant would like the references in the parent IDS document(s) to be printed in this published patent (if allowed), then the IDS documents need to be submitted in this application.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 24-25, the language of “of the event time duration, sporting event comprising” is awkward. It appears that “the” should be inserted before “sporting event”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the plurality of users" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is noted that “a plurality of users” is introduced in claim 1, lines 13-14.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
2019 PEG Analysis
Step 1: Are the claims directed to a statutory category (e.g., a process, machine, etc.)
Claim 1 is directed to a process.
Step 2A (Prong 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature or natural phenomenon?
Yes, the claims recite an abstract idea. The following specific limitations in the claims under examination recite an abstract idea:
Determining initial states and possible future states of a live event
Creating a betting market
Determining probabilities and odds of possible future states
Creating a betting market and accepting user bets, then closing the betting market
Determining if user selected the actual future state
Paying out based on the user’s bet being a winning bet
The above listed identified limitations fall within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in the 2019 PEG:
Mental Processes: concepts preformed in the human mind (including on observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion).
Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity:
fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk)
managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions or relationships of interaction between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions.
The claims are primarily directed to rules for playing a wagering game, wherein the game rules align with a method of organizing human activity. Determining probabilities and generating betting odds equates to hedging and mitigating financial risks. The recited method steps may be performed by a human mind.
Step 2A (Prong 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
Overall, the following additional claim limitations appear to merely implement the abstract idea, add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, or generally link the judicial exception to a particular environment or field of use, as outlined below:
Receiving sporting event information (insignificant extra-solution activity);
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
The claim as a whole does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself. The above listed additional claim limitations display and process game data in a well-understood, routine, and conventional way. Further, the computer hardware of claim 1 (e.g., a processor) are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
In order to satisfy the Berkheimer factual determination of conventional elements in the art, U.S. Patent No. 7,819,742 to Chamberlain is cited for disclosing the conventional features of slot machines including processors (e.g., see at least column 11, lines 14-16). Therefore, claim 1 is not patent eligible under 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claim 1 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0068633 to Schlaifer.
With regard to claim 1, Schlaifer discloses a method, comprising:
receiving by at least one processor state information of a live event in real time (e.g., see at least paragraph 15, “real-time odds-based gaming system 10”), in which the live event comprises a sporting event played by human players (e.g., see at least paragraph 31, “wagering on any type of sporting or other event”; see also paragraph 16 that lists football, baseball, and basketball, among many other “human” based events) according to predetermined rules that are used to determine at least one winner of the sporting event;
determining by the at least one processor an initial state and a plurality of possible future states of a performance parameter of the live event based on the state information (e.g., see at least paragraph 39, “before the game starts” or “before some other predetermined point before the game is over”);
creating by the processor a first betting market for betting on at least one of the plurality of possible future states (e.g., see at least Fig. 2 that shows creating a betting market), in which the plurality of users comprises a first user (e.g., see at least Fig. 5 that shows player 1, player 2, and player 3, via user interfaces 318), and in which the act of creating a first betting market comprises:
determining by the processor probabilities for the plurality of possible future states (e.g., see at least paragraph 24 that discloses “probabilities of events occurring”); and based at least in part on the probabilities, determining by the processor odds for betting on at least one of the plurality of possible future states (e.g., see at least paragraph 24 that discloses creation of “payout odds” based on probabilities);
after creating the first betting market, receiving by the processor from a first of a plurality of users a first bet comprising a selection of one of the plurality of possible future states (e.g., see at least Fig. 2, step 120 “Select Outcome and Wager Amount”);
after receiving the first bet, closing by the processor the first betting market prior to an end time of the initial state (e.g., see at least paragraph 39, “before the game starts” or “before some other predetermined point before the game is over”);
sending from the processor an instruction signal to close the first betting market (e.g., see at least Fig. 2, step 122 “Determine Actual Outcome”);
determining by the processor an actual future state of the performance parameter (e.g., see at least Fig. 2, step 122 “Determine Actual Outcome”);
determining by the processor that the possible future state selected by the first user is the actual future state (e.g., see at least Fig. 2, step 124 “Compare Selected Outcome and Actual Outcomes”); and
automatically paying a payout to the first user based on the first bet and the act of determining that the possible future state selected by the first user is the actual future state (e.g., see at least Fig. 2, step 126, “Determine Credit or Debit Score Amoun[t]”), in which the sporting event occurs during an event time duration such that the sporting event begins at the beginning of the event time duration and ends at the end of the event time duration (e.g., see at least Fig. 2, step 128, “Game Over?”), sporting event comprising a plurality of portions of the event occurring during sequential portions of the event time duration, in which a plurality of possible future states comprises a possible future state occurring at the end of one of the sequential time periods, and in which at least one betting market is created for each of the sequential time periods (e.g., see at least paragraph 16 that discloses “quarters…innings…periods…holes…games, sets, and/or matches” as examples of sequential time periods).
Conclusion
The Examiner notes that the prosecution history of all cited parent applications were reviewed for double patenting.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES S MCCLELLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7167. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (8:30AM-5:00PM).
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.
/James S. McClellan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights