Office Action
Examiner 101 Recommendation
1. The claims have been rejected under 35 USC § 101 for being abstract and lacking a practical application. As most specifications are not drafted to anticipate a rejection under 101, make your best arguments for either non-abstractness or a practical application. As to the former, make a case that it is either not abstract or it is abstract but is not a mental process, mathematical concept, or certain method of organizing human activity. As to the latter, focus on a structural element and not an administrative process (e.g., merely organizes or categorizes), logistical process (e.g., assigns priorities), emotional process (e.g., improves player excitement or loyalty), financial process (e.g., increases gaming revenues), or legal process (e.g., overcomes jurisdictional prohibitions). In almost every case, these processes are the “why” but not the “what and how.” As a practical application analysis framework, it can be most persausive to liken your technological problem and technological solution to case law supporting eligibility. For example, drawing parallels between your added claim element and solution to the self-referential tables to facilitate data retrieval and conserve memory of Enfish; the remote, customized, filtering of ISP services without compromising local security safeguards of Bascom; the automatic creation and insertion of animation keyframes in lip syncing based on specific rule-sets never before possible manually of McRO; or the memory efficient, improvements in AI techniques that result in mitigating catastrophic forgetting by preserving information of Desjardins. For either abstractness or practical application, and lacking any rock solid help from the disclosure, make the best possible argument you can. Providing only a one line argument that “the amendments recited make clear the inventions eligibility” does not give the Examiner anything to advocate for your case. Bonafide, well-intentioned, arguments can make the difference.
2. Here, the best way to overcome the 101 rejection is not to challenge that the claim is abstract wagering. Instead, present a practical application as best you can. From your disclosure, add an element to the claim that is a technological solution to a technological problem or improves a technological field. Your best bet is to focus on what data sources and structures have improved the generation and changing of the odds presented in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
5. Step 1
Claims 1-20 are directed to an apparatus or method meeting the requirements for Step 1.
6. Step 2A Prong 1
In independent Claim 1 (and similarly for Claims 7 and 20), rules for playing a game, mental processes, mathematical relationships, and wagering which are certain methods of organizing human activity. For the purposes of analysis these are consolidating into abstract wagering.
A method for managing a game of chance, comprising:
generating a grid with a processing device, wherein the grid is comprised of a plurality of squares defined by a plurality of rows of the squares and a plurality of columns of the squares, wherein the rows are each numbered with one of a plurality of row numbers, and wherein the columns are each numbered with one of a plurality of column numbers; {Mental process as this can be drawn by hand just like one would play tic-tac-toe on paper}
establishing a first of two teams in a sporting event as a rows team and establishing a second of the two teams as a columns team with the processing device; {mental process}
establishing betting odds for each of the squares with the processing device, wherein the betting odds of each of the squares are associated with a likelihood of the square being established as a winning square, wherein each of the squares correlates with the one of the row numbers associated with the row in which the square is located and the one of the column numbers associated with the column in which the square is located, and wherein the squares are each designated as a winning square in response to the score of the sporting event including a digit of a score of the rows team being the same as the one of the row numbers associated with the square, and a digit of a score of the columns team being the same as the one of the column numbers associated with the square at the end of the predetermined interval of the sporting event;{mental process to watch a football game on tv and visually inspect the intersection of the scores across the rows and columns/also following the rules of a game to perform the activity; the odds can be both a mental process or rules of the game to make up simple 1:1 odds or even money}
presenting the plurality of squares and the betting odds associated with each of the squares on a plurality of graphical user interfaces located remote from one another with the processing device:
changing the betting odds for a plurality of the squares with the processing device to reflect an updated likelihood of the plurality of the squares being established as a winning square, wherein the likelihood is based on at least one occurrence associated with the sporting event, and dynamically updating the plurality of graphical user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device; {mathematical relationships of observing events and application of statistical relationships/ mental process to perform the updating}
receiving a selection of one of the squares and an associated wager from a plurality of users with a plurality of input devices located remote from one another, wherein the betting odds are established prior to receiving the selection; {rules for playing a game/wagering}
establishing a winning square after passage of the predetermined interval in the sporting event;{wagering, following the rules of a game}
determining if the winning square was selected by any of a plurality of the users with the processing device;{wagering, following the rules of a game}. and
transferring funds to any of the plurality of users that selected the winning square upon a determination that the winning square was selected by the users, wherein the funds correlate with the wager and the betting odds associated with the square, and wherein the funds are transferred from an account that is at least partially funded apart from the wagers associated with the game of chance.{wagering, following the rules of a game}
7. Step 2A Prong II
The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. Applicant’s Specification does not disclose that the claimed elements of the processing device, memory, or user interface, are directed to a technological solution to a technological problem. Above the presenting, changing odds, and receiving a selection steps are extra-solution activity. Thus, Claim 1, and similarly Claims 7 and 20, lack the eligibility requirements of Step 2 Prong II.
8. Step 2B
The presenting the presenting the squares and odds is merely the well-known displaying of information deemed extra-solution activity (See Electric Power Grid). The receiving a selection and the wager could also be well-known data gathering (receiving or transmitting data over a network (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)). The changing of the odds may also be considered well-known performing repetitive calculations (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(ii). Thus, Claim 1, and similarly Claims 7 and 20, are ineligible.
9. Dependent Claims 2-6, 8-14, 16-20
Claims 2-4, 8-10, and 18-19 recite specific types of interfaces deemed extra-solution activity. Claims 5-6 and 11-12 recite extra-solution funding and accounts akin the shadow accounts as part of the computing environment in Alice. Claims 13-17 either amplifies the abstract odds processes or amplifies the extra-solution activity, or both. Thus, none of the claims supply a practical application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
11. 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.
12. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
13. Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2007/0102877 to Personius in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2013/0102383 to Smith.
In Reference to Claims 1, 2, 7, 8, and 20
Personius discloses a method for managing a game of chance (Fig. 1), comprising:
a plurality of graphical user interfaces, input devices, processor (computers user interface, computer network 0055, computer interface “touchpad, keypad” 0106, with “a central processing unit or computer network running an appropriate accounting and tabulation software system 0108);
generating a grid with a processing device, wherein the grid is comprised of a plurality of squares defined by a plurality of rows of the squares and a plurality of columns of the squares, wherein the rows are each numbered with one of a plurality of row numbers, and wherein the columns are each renumbered with one of a plurality of column numbers (Fig. 1A);
establishing a first of two teams in a live sporting event as a rows team and establishing a second of the two teams as a columns team with the processing device (Fig, 1A);
establishing betting odds ( Personius discloses up-to-the-minute odds 0010 as well as preset odds 0019 according to standard pari-mutuel calculations (0111). Up-to-the- minute odds are odds that reflect the game activity based on the number of gamblers and amounts placed in the pool. The odds are created by dividing the wager pool by all paced bets (0010). The amounts in pari-mutuel games change the likelihood of winning or odds associated with each wagerable event or square in the present claims; and using a totalizer to determine at the end of the betting window or close of wagering (0050), final odds 0071; see also 0072, 0111, 0112 initial odds; such that Examiner deems Personius to disclose that the row and column boxes receive initial odds which are continuously updated until the end of betting and the setting of final odds) for each of the squares with the processing device (Fig. 1A 0017 using totalizers 0010 and wherein in the electronic form 0051, 0055 the gambling squares would display payout odds), wherein the betting odds of each of the squares are associated with a likelihood of the square being established as a winning square, wherein each of the squares correlates with the one of the row numbers associated with the row in which the square is located and the one of the column numbers associated with the column in which the square is located, and wherein the squares are each designated as a winning square in response to the score of the live sporting event including a digit of a score of the rows team being the same as the one of the row numbers associated with the square, and a digit of a score of the columns team being the same as the one of the column numbers associated with the square at the end of the predetermined interval of the live sporting event (Fig. 1A demonstrating the home team and away team and the two digit configuration representing the scores with each box showing assigned odds 80 0058-0061);
presenting the plurality of squares and the betting odds associated with each of the squares on a plurality of graphical user interfaces located remote from one another (Fig. 1A and 0054-0055, wherein the wager format 10 can be in electronic form on a computer user interface on a computer network and “wherein the electronic format could further provide tor individual wagering to be conducted in areas generally remote from the wagered upon sporting event so that invention could be allowed in kiosks, sports bars, sporting venues, internet, restaurants and the like, outside the traditional off-track betting sporting events centers” 0055 which is understood to mean participation among a the plurality of graphical user interfaces located remote from one another, i.e., many gamblers 18 on the network of Fig. 1);
changing the betting odds for at least one of the squares to reflect an updated likelihood of the square being established as a winning square, wherein the likelihood is based on at least one occurrence associated with the live sporting event, and dynamically updating the plurality of graphical user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds (Personius discloses up-to-the- minute odds 0010 as well as preset odds 0019. Up-to-the-minute odds are odds that reflect the game activity based on where players are placing their bets and change with the number of gamblers betting at any given time 0110. The amounts in pari-mutuel games change the likelihood of winning or odds associated with each wagerable event or square in the present claims; and using a totalizer to determine at the end of the betting window final odds 0071; see also 0072, 0111, 0112 initial odds);
receiving a selection one of the squares and an associated wager from a plurality of users with a plurality of input devices located remote from one another, wherein the betting odds are established prior to receiving the selection (Fig. 1A and 0051, 0035, 0058-0061 wherein the electronic format could further provide for individual wagering to conducted in areas generally remote from the wagered upon sporting event 0055, odds are pre-established prior to receiving the selection 0017, 0019 until the close of wagering 0050);
establishing a winning square after passage of the predetermined interval in the live sporting event (Personius designates not only a final score at the end of the game 0048 but also discloses sub-evet wagers, such as each quarter of a football game 0078, see also “The invention may also provide for increased gambler interest and participation by also substantially allowing wagering upon various non-final or non-ultimate outcome sub-events (e.g., a performance of a certain player during a certain portion of the game) of a sporting event that was generally not previously provided for by sports square gambling.” 0114);
determining if the winning square was selected by a plurality of users (0077, 0082); and
transferring funds to the plurality of users user upon a determination that the winning square was selected by the plurality of users, wherein the funds correlate with the wager and the betting odds associated with the square (0050, 0073); and
However, Personius is silent wherein funds are transferred from an account that is at least partially funded apart from the wagers associated with game of chance (Fig. 1A and 0051,, and 0058-0061).
Smith teaches sponsoring awards based on play (or other activity) at gaming machines in a casino (0010). When the gaming a machine determines that a sponsored award is to be awarded, the gaming machine selects the prize from the sponsor award paytable. The prizes are awarded in conjunction with a normal base game to maintain its standard payout percentage. According to Smith, there exists a need “to establish a establish a structured gaming or promotional system and method that enables casinos and other gaming establishments to generate additional revenue by providing third part advertisers access to the specific and refined customer data to typically maintained by player tracking systems directly at gaming machines associate with the casino” 0012, thus increasing a user’s chances of an increased payout and encouraging longer game play.
The Supreme Court in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; and
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Here it would require only routine skill in the art to modify Personius to include funds transferred from an account to partially fund, apart from the wagers associated with game of chance, game play as taught by Smith to establish a structured gaming or promotional system and method that enables casinos and other gaming establishments to generate additional revenue by providing third part advertisers access to the specific and refined customer data typically maintained by player tracking systems directly at gaming machines associate with the casino to achieve the predictable result of increasing user chances of increased payouts and longer game play. The Courts have held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results to be indicia of obviousness.
In Reference to Claims 4 and 10
Personius discloses graphical user interfaces are touchpads 0106.
In Reference to Claims 5-6 and 11-12
According to Applicant, the mechanism can include a receiving mechanism and a currency emitting mechanism (Spec. 0023) where funds can be electronic or cash and a user’s cash itself constitutes a user account 25. Personius discloses manual and electronic transfers of funds via a wager processing center 14 0070-0073 which is the currency transferring mechanism from gaming accounts to user accounts 0009, 0050, 0069, wherein ”The payment or payout of any such winning wager(s) may be accomplished by generally transferring calculated winning payouts, credits and the like from the common wager pool 16 (e.g., sub-pools 43) directly to the gambler 17 or indirectly to the gambler 17 by depositing such funds with an account designated by the gambler for receiving the gambler's winnings.” 0073
14. Claims 3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Personius, Smith, further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2014/0274332 to Carlin.
Personius discloses the claimed invention as discussed above however is silent in regards to, where: the at least one graphical user interface and the at least one input device are each located on one of a smart phone and a tablet.
Carlin teaches a wagering game with a ten by ten matrix having opposing teams for a chosen event that are assigned separately to either the horizontal or vertical axis, each square is a potential win based on the outcome of a sporting event such as American football. Carlin further teaches that the game is capable of being played on a user terminal such as a personal or mobile computer, smartphone or other computing machine associated with the user (Fig. 1), would essentially have a graphical user interface and an input device to select the particular squares to wager upon. By having at least one graphical user interface and the at least one input device are each located on one of two smart phone and a tablet, one of ordinary skill in the art would allow users to make and place wagers on the earning system from different places and location that is convenient to a user.
Here, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Personius to include a smart phone or tablet of Carlin to allow users to make and place wagers on the gaming system from different places and location most familiar and convenient to a user. The Courts have held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results to be indicia of obviousness.
15. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Personius, Smith, further in view of U.S. Pat. No. 5,842,921 to Mindes.
Personius discloses the invention substantially as claimed to include preset or predetermined odds. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose odds based on the evaluation of past performances. One of skill in the art would be aware of Mindes.
Mindes discloses wagering and odds on sprting events (Titl.) wherein “The house preferably would also use its judgment and initially set odds associated with each team for each handicap pool. Alternatively, these initial odds could be determined by the system. For example, historical data could be kept on the final odds on a large number of events after pre-game wagering is completed (i.e., just before the event starts). These data on the final odds for each handicap which differed from the even money handicap by a fixed number of points could be averaged and used as the initial odds for the handicaps which differ from even money by a like number of points.” Col. 8, ll. 33-44.
It would require only routing skill to amplify how the odds are preset or predetermined in Personius by the process of Mindes to achieve the predictable result of establishing odds based on historical data. The Courts have held that the use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way to be indicia of obviousness.
16. Claims 14, 15, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Personius, Smith, further in view of U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,032 to Grippo.
Personius discloses the invention substantially as claimed and discloses that the odds are determined by the number of gamblers betting on an event 0010 and dynamically updating the user interfaces to reflect the changed netting odds (up-to-the-minute odds 0010. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose odds based on how many bets or the size of bets placed. One of skill in the art would be aware of Grippo.
According to Grippo in pari-mutuel games (Col. 3 Il. 59-65), “bettors to judge and select ticket options not only according to the denomination or amount of the ticket purchase, but also according to the perceived odds, which will vary according to the number of bettors placing wagers in any one denomination level. Generally, higher ticket denominations will attract fewer bettors, thus increasing the chances of winning for a single bettor. Also, the pool amount per bettor is higher for bettors placing higher valued wagers. A bettor must weigh these factors prior to placing a bet at a given wager level, in the present lottery game.” (Col. 4 Il. 57-67).
One of skill in the art would immediately recognize that the odds will change based on at least the number of bettors and the size or denomination {amount} of said bets they place of Grippo can be applied to explain or amplify the understanding of the changing odds and pools of Personius. The Courts have held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is indicia of obviousness.
17. Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Personius, Smith, further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2007/0265055 to Berman.
Personius discloses the invention substantially as claimed to include generating a
plurality of grids associated with sporting events as described above (Specifically, “In at least one embodiment, several different sets of wager formats 10 could be presented and operated by the invention operator 18 simultaneously with each set being generally associated with a different wagered-upon sporting event (e.g., one set of wager formats 10 could be associated with a Chicago Bears-Green Bay Packers football game while another set of wager formats 10 could be issued for a New England Patriots-New York Giants game). Once the wager data is substantially entered by the gambler 17 using the wager format 10, the wager data along with the wagered upon funds may be transferred to the wager processing center 14.” [0050]. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose them on the graphical user interface of a plurality of tabs for selecting grids.
Berman teaches of a method for configuring an interface for games wherein activities are associated with a reference (Fig. 2 step 206) and a system of organizing games to be played by a series of labels (Fig. 7B 734). The labels are used to facilitate access to one of a plurality of games to be played.
One of skill in the art would recognize that the electronic graphical user interface of Personius can be configured to best organize a plurality of sporting events of the player as taught by Berman. The Courts have held that applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is indicia of obviousness.
Double Patenting
18. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
19. Claims 1-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,837,053. The claims are substantially identical but for what is bolded (below). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant genus claims are anticipated by the granted species claims as shown in the table below.
U.S. Pat. No. 11,837,053
U.S. Pat. App. No. 19/049,810
1. A method for managing a game of chance, comprising:
generating a grid with a processing device, wherein the grid is comprised of a plurality of squares defined by a plurality of rows of the squares and a plurality of columns of the squares, wherein the rows are each numbered with one of a plurality of row numbers, and wherein the columns are each numbered with one of a plurality of column numbers;
establishing a first of two teams in a live sporting event as a rows team and establishing a second of the two teams as a columns team with the processing device;
establishing betting odds for each of the squares with the processing device, wherein the betting odds of each of the squares are associated with a likelihood of the square being established as a winning square, wherein each of the squares correlates with the one of the row numbers associated with the row in which the square is located and the one of the column numbers associated with the column in which the square is located, and wherein the squares are each designated as a winning square in response to the score of the live sporting event including a digit of a score of the rows team being the same as the one of the row numbers associated with the square, and a digit of a score of the columns team being the same as the one of the column numbers associated with the square at the end of the predetermined interval of the live sporting event;
presenting the plurality of squares and the betting odds associated with each of the squares on a plurality of graphical user interfaces located remote from one another with the processing device;
receiving a selection of one of the squares and an associated wager from a plurality of users with a plurality of input devices located remote from one another, wherein the betting odds are established prior to receiving the selection;
establishing a winning square after passage of the predetermined interval in the live sporting event;
determining if the winning square was selected by any of a plurality of the users with the processing device;
transferring funds to any of the plurality of users that selected the winning square upon a determination that the winning square was selected by the users, wherein the funds correlate with the wager and the betting odds associated with the square, and wherein the funds are transferred from an account that is at least partially funded apart from the wagers associated with the game of chance; and
changing the betting odds for a plurality of the squares with the processing device during play of the live sporting event to reflect an updated likelihood of the plurality of the squares being established as a winning square, wherein the likelihood is based on at least one occurrence associated with the live sporting event during play of the live sporting event, and
dynamically updating the plurality of graphical user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device.
2. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the plurality of graphical user interfaces and the plurality of input devices are located on a plurality of kiosks.
3. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the plurality of graphical user interface and the at least one input device are each located on one of a smart phone and a tablet.
4. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the plurality of input devices are touch-screens of the plurality of graphical user interfaces.
5. The method as set forth in claim 1, further including receiving funds into a game account from a user account via a currency transferring mechanism.
6. The method as set forth in claim 5, further including transferring funds to a user account from a game account via the currency transferring mechanism.
7. A system for managing a game of chance, comprising:
a plurality of graphical user interfaces located remote from one another for displaying aspects of the game of chance to users;
a plurality of input devices located remote from one another for receiving inputs from the users;
at least one processing device electrically connected to the plurality of graphical user interfaces and the plurality of input devices;
wherein the at least one processing device is configured to:
generate a grid comprised of a plurality of squares defined by a plurality of rows of the squares and a plurality of columns of the squares, wherein the rows are each numbered with one of a plurality of row numbers, and wherein the columns are each numbered with one of a plurality of column numbers;
establish a first of two teams in a live sporting event as a rows team and establish a second of the two teams as a columns team with the processing device;
establish betting odds for each of the squares, wherein the betting odds of each of the squares are associated with a likelihood of the square being established as a winning square, wherein each of the squares correlates with the one of the row numbers associated with the row in which the square is located and the one of the column numbers associated with the column in which the square is located, and wherein the squares are each designated as a winning square in response to the score of the live sporting event including a digit of a score of the rows team being the same as the one of the row numbers associated the square, and a digit of a score of the columns team being the same as the one of the column numbers associated with the square at the end of the predetermined interval of the live sporting event;
present the plurality of squares and the betting odds associated with each of the squares on the plurality of graphical user interfaces;
receive a plurality of wagers and a selection of one of the squares from a plurality of users with the plurality of input devices, wherein the betting odds are established prior to receiving the plurality of wagers;
establish a winning square after passage of the predetermined interval in the live sporting event;
determine if the winning square was selected by a plurality of the users; and
transfer funds to a plurality of the user accounts of the plurality of users upon a determination that the winning square was selected by the plurality of users, wherein the funds correlate with the wager and the betting odds associated with the square, and wherein the funds are transferred from an account that is at least partially funded apart from the wagers associated with the game of chance;
change the betting odds for each of the squares a plurality of times periodically during play of the live sporting event such that the odds reflect an updated likelihood of the squares being established as winning squares based on activity in the live sporting event, and
dynamically updating the plurality of graphical user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odd.
8. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein the plurality of graphical user interfaces and the plurality of input devices are located on a plurality of kiosks.
9. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein the plurality of graphical user interfaces and the at least one input device are each located on one of a smart phone and a tablet.
10. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein the plurality of input devices are each a touch-screen of the plurality of graphical user interfaces.
11. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein the processing device is further configured to receive funds from the plurality of users via a currency transferring mechanism.
12. The system as set forth in claim 11, wherein the processing device is further configured to transfer funds to the plurality of users via the currency transferring mechanism.
13. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the odds are established based on an evaluation of prior performances of the first and second teams.
14. The method as set forth in claim 1, further including further changing the betting odds for the plurality of the squares with the processing device based on how many bets have been placed on the at least one of the squares, and dynamically updating the plurality of user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device.
15. The system as set forth in claim 14, further including further changing the betting odds for the plurality of the squares with the processing device based on a size of the bets placed on the at least one of the squares, and dynamically updating the plurality of user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device.
16. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to further change the betting odds for at least one of the squares with the processing device based on how many bets have been placed on the at least one of the squares, and dynamically updating the plurality of user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device.
17. The system as set forth in claim 16, wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to further change the betting odds for at least one of the squares with the processing device based on a size of the bets placed on the at least one of the squares, and dynamically updating the plurality of user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device.
18. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein generating a grid includes generating a plurality of grids each associated with a unique one of a plurality of sporting events with the processing device, and wherein each of the plurality of graphical user interfaces presents a plurality of tabs for allowing a user to select the grids associated with each of the plurality of sporting events.
19. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein generating a grid includes generating a plurality of grids each associated with a unique one of a plurality of sporting events with the processing device, and wherein each of the plurality of graphical user interfaces presents a plurality of tabs for allowing a user to select the grids associated with each of the plurality of sporting events.
1. A method for managing a game of chance, comprising:
generating a grid with a processing device, wherein the grid is comprised of a plurality of squares defined by a plurality of rows of the squares and a plurality of columns of the squares, wherein the rows are each numbered with one of a plurality of row numbers, and wherein the columns are each numbered with one of a plurality of column numbers;
establishing a first of two teams in a sporting event as a rows team and establishing a second of the two teams as a columns team with the processing device;
establishing betting odds for each of the squares with the processing device, wherein the betting odds of each of the squares are associated with a likelihood of the square being established as a winning square, wherein each of the squares correlates with the one of the row numbers associated with the row in which the square is located and the one of the column numbers associated with the column in which the square is located, and wherein the squares are each designated as a winning square in response to the score of the sporting event including a digit of a score of the rows team being the same as the one of the row numbers associated with the square, and a digit of a score of the columns team being the same as the one of the column numbers associated with the square at the end of the predetermined interval of the sporting event;
presenting the plurality of squares and the betting odds associated with each of the squares on a plurality of graphical user interfaces located remote from one another with the processing device;
receiving a selection of one of the squares and an associated wager from a plurality of users with a plurality of input devices located remote from one another, wherein the betting odds are established prior to receiving the selection;
establishing a winning square after passage of the predetermined interval in the sporting event;
determining if the winning square was selected by any of a plurality of the users with the processing device;
transferring funds to any of the plurality of users that selected the winning square upon a determination that the winning square was selected by the users, wherein the funds correlate with the wager and the betting odds associated with the square, and wherein the funds are transferred from an account that is at least partially funded apart from the wagers associated with the game of chance.
changing the betting odds for a plurality of the squares with the processing device to reflect an updated likelihood of the plurality of the squares being established as a winning square, wherein the likelihood is based on at least one occurrence associated with the sporting event, and
dynamically updating the plurality of graphical user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device;
2. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the plurality of graphical user interfaces and the plurality of input devices are located on a plurality of kiosks.
3. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the plurality of graphical user interface and the at least one input device are each located on one of a smart phone and a tablet.
4. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the plurality of input devices are touch-screens of the plurality of graphical user interfaces.
5. The method as set forth in claim 1, further including receiving funds into a game account from a user account via a currency transferring mechanism.
6. The method as set forth in claim 5, further including transferring funds to a user account from a game account via the currency transferring mechanism.
7. A system for managing a game of chance, comprising:
a plurality of graphical user interfaces for displaying aspects of the game of chance to users;
a plurality of input devices for receiving inputs from the users;
at least one processing device electrically connected to the plurality of graphical user interfaces and the plurality of input devices;
wherein the at least one processing device is configured to:
generate a grid comprised of a plurality of squares defined by a plurality of rows of the squares and a plurality of columns of the squares, wherein the rows are each numbered with one of a plurality of row numbers, and wherein the columns are each numbered with one of a plurality of column numbers;
establish a first of two teams in a sporting event as a rows team and establish a second of the two teams as a columns team with the processing device;
establish betting odds for each of the squares, wherein the betting odds of each of the squares are associated with a likelihood of the square being established as a winning square, wherein each of the squares correlates with the one of the row numbers associated with the row in which the square is located and the one of the column numbers associated with the column in which the square is located, and wherein the squares are each designated as a winning square in response to the score of the sporting event including a digit of a score of the rows team being the same as the one of the row numbers associated the square, and a digit of a score of the columns team being the same as the one of the column numbers associated with the square at the end of the predetermined interval of the sporting event;
present the plurality of squares and the betting odds associated with each of the squares on the plurality of graphical user interfaces;
receive a plurality of wagers and a selection of one of the squares from a plurality of users with the plurality of input devices, wherein the betting odds are established prior to receiving the plurality of wagers;
establish a winning square after passage of the predetermined interval in the sporting event;
determine if the winning square was selected by a plurality of the users; and
transfer funds to a plurality of the user accounts of the plurality of users upon a determination that the winning square was selected by the plurality of users, wherein the funds correlate with the wager and the betting odds associated with the square, and wherein the funds are transferred from an account that is at least partially funded apart from the wagers associated with the game of chance.
change the betting odds for each of the squares such that the odds reflect an updated likelihood of the squares being established as winning squares based on activity associated with the sporting event, and
dynamically updating the plurality of graphical user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odd;
8. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein the plurality of graphical user interfaces and the plurality of input devices are located on a plurality of kiosks.
9. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein the plurality of graphical user interfaces and the at least one input device are each located on one of a smart phone and a tablet.
10. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein the plurality of input devices are each a touch-screen of the plurality of graphical user interfaces.
11. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein the processing device is further configured to receive funds from the plurality of users via a currency transferring mechanism.
12. The system as set forth in claim 11, wherein the processing device is further configured to transfer funds to the plurality of users via the currency transferring mechanism.
13. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the odds are established based on an evaluation of prior performances of the first and second teams.
14. The method as set forth in claim 1, further including further changing the betting odds for the plurality of the squares with the processing device based on how many bets have been placed on the at least one of the squares, and dynamically updating the plurality of user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device.
15. The system as set forth in claim 14, further including further changing the betting odds for the plurality of the squares with the processing device based on a size of the bets placed on the at least one of the squares, and dynamically updating the plurality of user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device.
16. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to further change the betting odds for at least one of the squares with the processing device based on how many bets have been placed on the at least one of the squares, and dynamically updating the plurality of user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device.
17. The system as set forth in claim 16, wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to further change the betting odds for at least one of the squares with the processing device based on a size of the bets placed on the at least one of the squares, and dynamically updating the plurality of user interfaces to reflect the changed betting odds with the processing device.
18. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein generating a grid includes generating a plurality of grids each associated with a unique one of a plurality of sporting events with the processing device, and wherein each of the plurality of graphical user interfaces presents a plurality of tabs for allowing a user to select the grids associated with each of the plurality of sporting events.
19. The system as set forth in claim 7, wherein generating a grid includes generating a plurality of grids each associated with a unique one of a plurality of sporting events with the processing device, and wherein each of the plurality of graphical user interfaces presents a plurality of tabs for allowing a user to select the grids associated with each of the plurality of sporting events.
Conclusion
20. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is in the Notice of References Cited.
21. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Paul A. D’Agostino whose telephone number is (571) 270-1992.
22. Examiner interviews may be available depending on the stage of prosecution and provided 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.
23. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kang Hu can be reached on (571) 270-1344. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-2992.
/PAUL A D'AGOSTINO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
