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 .
This communication is responsive to Application No. 19/028,747 filed on 01/17/2025.
Claims 2-20 are currently pending and have been examined. Claim 1 is cancelled.
Information Disclosure Statement
IDS filed on 01/17/2025 is considered.
The drawings filed on 01/17/2025 are noted.
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.
7. Claims 2, 9, 15, and all dependent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite the limitation of: “a method of operating a gaming establishment fund management”.
The limitation of operating a gaming establishment fund management, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. That is, nothing in the claims preclude the steps from practically being performed in the mind. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, claims 2-20 recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims only recite one additional element – using a processor to determine a fund transfer event occurs independent of any input made by any user to cause a transfer of any funds between any gaming establishment accounts, and responsive to an occurrence of the fund transfer event, causing by the processor, a amount of funds associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event to be transferred from a subsidiary gaming establishment account associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event to a master gaming establishment account associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event to perform both operating and determining steps. The device in both steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic computer configured to enable funds associated with certain controlling gaming establishment) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
In the instant case, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of wherein the subsidiary gaming establishment account is maintained for a first user, the master gaming establishment account is maintained for a different, second user and the first user and the second user have a predefined relationship with one another prior to the occurrence of the fund transfer event. Thus, taken alone, the additional element fails to ensure the claims as a whole amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Accordingly, claims 2-20 are ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 2-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NICHOLAS [US20150243133], in view of Rowe et al. [US20020039921], hereinafter Rowe.
Regarding claims 2 and 6-8, NICHOLAS discloses a system (Fig. 1) comprising: a processor; and a memory device which stores a plurality of instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
Determine if a fund transfer event occurs independent of any input made by any user to cause a transfer of any funds between any gaming establishment accounts, and responsive to an occurrence of the fund transfer event, cause an amount of funds associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event, cause an amount of funds associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event to be transferred from a subsidiary gaming establishment account (see, subsidiary account paragraph 0045) associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event (see., NICHOLAS, paragraphs 0010-0047, 0111, master account 0135, account balance 520). For example, players can request funds transfers between various accounts, such as game session accounts, checking accounts, savings accounts, .sctn.529 accounts, charity accounts, etc.”).
However, NICHOLAS does not explicitly disclose that a master gaming establishment account associated with the occurrence of the funds transfer event, wherein the subsidiary gaming establishment account is maintained for a first user, and the master gaming establishment account is maintained for a different, second user, and the first user and the second user have a predefined relationship with one another prior to the occurrence of the fund transfer event.
Nevertheless, Rowe teaches a master account and a subsidiary account that are both gaming establishment fund management account and having restrictions on the subsidiary account, wherein the master account is associated with a first user, and the subsidiary account is associated with a second different user ([0011], “The present invention comprises methods and apparatus for effectuating financial and reward transactions in a casino or gaming environment”, [0039], “parents may establish a customer account from which funds are periodically transferred, such as every two weeks, into an allowance account which is accessible by one or more of their children” and [0040], “The allowance account may be used to define an amount of money for a particular discretionary purpose”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system disclosed by NICHOLAS, to apply the system on a master gaming establishment fund management account and a subsidiary gaming establishment fund management account, wherein the master account is associated with a first user, and the subsidiary account is associated with a second different user, as taught by Rowe, in order to provide convenience to the players to manage multiple gaming establishment fund management accounts associated with different users to put restrictions on the spending of the subsidiary account.
As per claim 3, Nicholas discloses the claimed limitations as stated in claim 2 above wherein the fund transfer event occurs at a scheduled point in time (see., paragraphs 0010-0047).
As per claim 4, Nicholas discloses the claimed limitations as stated in claim 2 above, wherein the fund transfer event occurs responsive to a determination of a deposit of funds into the subsidiary gaming establishment account (see., paragraphs 0010-0047).
As per claim 5, Nicholas discloses the claimed limitations wherein the deposit of funds is associated with cashing out a balance of an electronic gaming machine to the subsidiary gaming establishment account (see., paragraphs 001-0047).
Regarding claims 9-14, NICHOLAS discloses a system (Fig. 1) comprising: a processor; and a memory device which stores a plurality of instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
Determine if a fund transfer event occurs independent of any input made by any user to cause a transfer of any funds between any gaming establishment accounts, and responsive to an occurrence of the fund transfer event, cause an amount of funds associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event, cause an amount of funds associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event to be transferred from a subsidiary gaming establishment account (see, subsidiary account paragraph 0045) associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event (see., NICHOLAS, paragraphs 0010-0047, 0111, master account 0135, account balance 520). For example, players can request funds transfers between various accounts, such as game session accounts, checking accounts, savings accounts, .sctn.529 accounts, charity accounts, etc.”).
However, NICHOLAS does not explicitly disclose that a master gaming establishment account associated with the occurrence of the funds transfer event, wherein the subsidiary gaming establishment account is maintained for a first user, and the master gaming establishment account is maintained for a different, second user, and the first user and the second user have a predefined relationship with one another prior to the occurrence of the fund transfer event.
Nevertheless, Rowe teaches a master account and a subsidiary account that are both gaming establishment fund management account and having restrictions on the subsidiary account, wherein the master account is associated with a first user, and the subsidiary account is associated with a second different user ([0011], “The present invention comprises methods and apparatus for effectuating financial and reward transactions in a casino or gaming environment”, [0039], “parents may establish a customer account from which funds are periodically transferred, such as every two weeks, into an allowance account which is accessible by one or more of their children” and [0040], “The allowance account may be used to define an amount of money for a particular discretionary purpose”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system disclosed by NICHOLAS, to apply the system on a master gaming establishment fund management account and a subsidiary gaming establishment fund management account, wherein the master account is associated with a first user, and the subsidiary account is associated with a second different user, as taught by Rowe, in order to provide convenience to the players to manage multiple gaming establishment fund management accounts associated with different users to put restrictions on the spending of the subsidiary account.
Regarding claims 15-20, NICHOLAS discloses a system (Fig. 1) comprising: a processor; and a memory device which stores a plurality of instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
Determine if a fund transfer event occurs independent of any input made by any user to cause a transfer of any funds between any gaming establishment accounts, and responsive to an occurrence of the fund transfer event, cause an amount of funds associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event, cause an amount of funds associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event to be transferred from a subsidiary gaming establishment account (see, subsidiary account paragraph 0045) associated with the occurrence of the fund transfer event (see., NICHOLAS, paragraphs 0010-0047, 0111, master account 0135, account balance 520). For example, players can request funds transfers between various accounts, such as game session accounts, checking accounts, savings accounts, .sctn.529 accounts, charity accounts, etc.”).
However, NICHOLAS does not explicitly disclose that a master gaming establishment account associated with the occurrence of the funds transfer event, wherein the subsidiary gaming establishment account is maintained for a first user, and the master gaming establishment account is maintained for a different, second user, and the first user and the second user have a predefined relationship with one another prior to the occurrence of the fund transfer event.
Nevertheless, Rowe teaches a master account and a subsidiary account that are both gaming establishment fund management account and having restrictions on the subsidiary account, wherein the master account is associated with a first user, and the subsidiary account is associated with a second different user ([0011], “The present invention comprises methods and apparatus for effectuating financial and reward transactions in a casino or gaming environment”, [0039], “parents may establish a customer account from which funds are periodically transferred, such as every two weeks, into an allowance account which is accessible by one or more of their children” and [0040], “The allowance account may be used to define an amount of money for a particular discretionary purpose”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system disclosed by NICHOLAS, to apply the system on a master gaming establishment fund management account and a subsidiary gaming establishment fund management account, wherein the master account is associated with a first user, and the subsidiary account is associated with a second different user, as taught by Rowe, in order to provide convenience to the players to manage multiple gaming establishment fund management accounts associated with different users to put restrictions on the spending of the subsidiary account.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to PIERRE E ELISCA whose telephone number is (571) 272-6706. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Thursday; 6:30AM- 7:30PM. Hoteler.
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, Hu Kang can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PIERRE E ELISCA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights