Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a game element grant unit configured to grant”
“a presentation unit configured to… present”
“a provision unit configured to select”
“a presentation control unit configured to… cause”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. However, it is unclear what exactly is performing the functionality of the “game element grant unit” “presentation unit”, “provision unit”, and “presentation control unit”.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
.Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1 (and similarly claim 12), the recitation of “game element grant unit” and “presentation unit”, are not described in the specification in such a way to reasonably convey one of ordinary skill in the art as in possession of the invention. In light of the claim interpretation above, what exactly is the performing the claimed functionality of each unit? Clarification is required.
Regarding claim 13 (and similarly claim 21), the recitation of “provision unit”, and “presentation control unit”, are not described in the specification in such a way to reasonably convey one of ordinary skill in the art as in possession of the invention. In light of the claim interpretation above, what exactly is the performing the claimed functionality of each unit? Clarification is required.
Claims 2-10 and 14-20 are rejected here based on at least dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nagura (US 2021.0154580).
Regarding claim 1, Nagura disclose:
a game element grant unit configured to grant at least one or more game elements which are associated with value information; and a presentation unit configured to, in a first stage, present the granted game elements in one of a first mode and a second mode, and to, in a second stage subsequent to the first stage, present the granted game elements in a mode according to the value information of the game elements (see Fig. 5, 11, 19-21; [0060-0068, 0114]; game element grant unit 71; game elements (cards) associated with value (character) information; presentation unit 72 to present game elements at first stage in one of a first mode (possessed by user) and second mode (not possessed by user); and in a second stage present cards according to value information (e.g., cost)).
Regarding claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
in the first stage, present character information associated with the game elements in an unrecognizable manner, and to, in the second stage, present the character information associated with the game elements in a recognizable manner (see Fig. 11, 19)
Regarding claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
the presentation unit is configured to, in the first stage, present part of the granted game elements, the part having value information higher than predetermined value information, and to present other game elements in the second mode (see Fig. 11; in the situation where possessed have ‘higher value’ than non-possessed game elements)
Regarding claim 4, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
the first mode is a mode in which the game elements are emphasized, and the second mode is a mode in which the game elements are not emphasized (see Fig. 11; colored cards vs grayscale cards)
Regarding claim 5, the rejection of claim 4 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
the first mode includes a plurality of modes according to the value information of the game elements (see Fig. 5, 13, 14; where card C in first mode has plurality of modes (e.g., detail information) about the value (character) information
Regarding claim 6, the rejection of claim 4 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
in the first stage, present game elements having a same picture pattern in one of the first mode and the second mode (see Fig. 11)
Regarding claim 7, the rejection of claim 4 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
in response to a first operation of selecting a game element presented in one of the first mode and the second mode, cause the selected game element to make a transition from the first stage to the second stage (see Fig. 15, 17, 19)
Regarding claim 8, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
in the second stage, present a game element in a mode different from a mode in which game elements are presented in the first mode in the first stage, the game element having value information higher than the predetermined value information among game elements presented in the second mode in the first stage (see Fig. 15, 17, 19; in the situation where the value information of elements is higher in second mode)
Regarding claim 9, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
in response to a second operation of a user, present all of game elements presented in one of the first mode and the second mode so that the character information associated with the game elements is recognizable (see [0128]).
Regarding claim 10, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
the game elements having value information higher than the predetermined value information and being presented in the second mode in the first stage have highest value information among the granted game elements (see Fig. 19-21; in the situation the cost presented in second mode cards is the highest)
Regarding claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
the value information is at least one of rarity information and attribute information of the game elements (see [0062]).
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, Nagura disclose:
a provision unit configured to select at least one or more game elements from a plurality of game elements associated with value information by drawing lots, and to provide the selected game elements; and a presentation control unit configured to, in a first stage, cause the provided game elements to be presented in one of a first mode and a second mode, and to, in a second stage subsequent to the first stage, cause the provided game elements to be presented in a mode according to the value information of the game elements (see Fig. 5, 11, 19-21; [0060-0068, 0114]; provision unit 72 to select plurality of game elements(cards) with value (card) information; drawing lots (deck setting); presentation control unit 72 to present game elements at first stage in one of a first mode (possessed by user) and second mode (not possessed by user); and in a second stage present cards according to value information (e.g., cost)).
Regarding claims 14-19 and 21, claims 14-19 and 21 are rejected under the same rationale as claims 2-7, 11 and 13, respectively.
Regarding claim 20, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated herein. Nagura further disclose:
the provision unit is configured to provide the game elements by exchange with a price (see Fig. 19-21).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH BUKOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-7913. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday // 0730-1530.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at 571.272.7764. 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.
/kenneth bukowski/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights