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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a grouping of abstract ideas without significantly more. The claims, as exemplified by independent Claim 1, recite limitations directed to a grouping of abstract ideas such as:
1. A system comprising:
a processor; and a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
responsive to a cashless ticket voucher creation event: -certain method of organizing human activity;
create cashless ticket voucher data associated with an amount of funds, -certain method of organizing human activity; and
store, in a ticket voucher database, a first entry associated with the cashless ticket voucher data, and -certain method of organizing human activity;
responsive to a tracking ticket voucher creation event: -certain method of organizing human activity;
create tracking ticket voucher data associated with a gaming establishment account, and store, in the ticket voucher database, a second entry associated with the tracking ticket voucher data. -certain method of organizing human activity;
The limitations, as underlined above, are found to recite a certain method of organizing human activity, specifically to the sub-grouping of a fundamental economic activity and/or commercial or legal interactions, because they recite concepts similar to what the courts have indicates as being abstract such as: an accounting ledger for mitigating settlement risk of a bearer instrument associated with an amount of funds and a gaming establishment account (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). For at least these reasons, the claims, as exemplified by independent Claim 1, are found to recite a grouping of abstract ideas under Step 2A-prong 1.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional limitations such as: “store, in a ticket voucher database” and “store, in the ticket voucher database,” amount to insignificant extra solution activity of the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). The remaining limitations such as: “a processor; and a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:” recite highly generalized computer components that amount to invoking a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a technological environment in which to perform the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f) and (h)). For at least these reasons, the additional limitations are not found to integrate the claim into a practical application under Step 2A-prong 2.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements such as “a processor”, “a memory”, and “a ticket voucher database” when viewed individually and/or as a collection of elements are analogous to Alice v. CLS, in which performing the abstract idea by merely invoking a computer as a tool, perform insignificant extra solution activity, and/or provide a technological environment does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)-(h)). For at least these reasons, the claims, as exemplified by independent Claim 1, are not found to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea under Step 2B.
Regarding independent Claims 10 and 12, the claims recite substantially the same subject matter but are different in that the explicitly recite limitations directed to a technological environment (e.g., a system and an electronic gaming machine). However, these additional elements recite highly generalized computer components known to one of ordinary skill in the gaming arts. For instance, Vancura (US 2010/0029381) discloses a conventional electronic gaming machine comprises components for cashless gaming including a processor and a memory (see Vancura, Fig. 1, 0008, 0037-0040). For at least substantially the same reasons as independent Claim 1, independent Claims 10 and 12 are found to recite a grouping of abstract ideas without significantly more.
With respect to dependent Claims 2-9, 11, and 13-20, the additional limitations have been analyzed and were found to recite at least one of: a limitation of a grouping of abstract ideas (see MPEP 2106.04(a)), invoking a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea, insignificant extra solution activity, and/or provide a technological environment in which to perform the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)-(h)). For at least these reasons, claims 1-20 are found to recite a grouping of abstract ideas without significantly more.
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.
Claims 6, 9, 11, 17, and 20 are 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.
With respect to claims 9 and 20, the limitation “a state different from any state associated with the cashless ticket voucher data” renders the claim unclear as to a state different from any state associated with the cashless ticket voucher data when the tracking ticket voucher data is associated with tracking a state of the cashless ticket voucher data as recited by independent Claim 1 and 12 from which they depend..
With respect to claims 6 and 11, the limitation wherein “tracking ticket voucher data is independent of any credit balance of any electronic gaming machine” renders the claim unclear as to how the ticket voucher data is independent of any credit balance of any electronic gaming machine when the ticket voucher data is associated with an amount of funds based on the credit balance of the electronic gaming machine of the cashless ticket voucher data as stored in a ticket voucher database recited by independent Claims 1 and 10 from which it depends.
Similarly, claim 17 is rendered indefinite because it is unclear how the “tracking ticket voucher is not associated with any amount of funds” when it is associated with a cashless ticket voucher data that is associated with an amount of funds of the ticket voucher database as recited by independent Claim 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-7, 10, and 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wolf et al. (US 2008/0026823 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wolf discloses a system (see Wolf, Figs. 1-2, 0026, 0041) comprising:
a processor (see Wolf, Fig. 5, 0067); and
a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor (see Wolf, Fig. 5, 0032), cause the processor to:
responsive to a cashless ticket voucher creation event (see Wolf, 0049-0051), wherein the cashless instruction creation event occurs during a cash-in, cash-out, or redemption for a cashless instruction transaction):
create cashless ticket voucher data associated with an amount of funds, and store, in a ticket voucher database (see Wolf, Fig. 2, 0044, 0049-0050, 0054-0060, 0064, wherein database 90 and the reusable ticket includes a monetary amount), a first entry associated with the cashless ticket voucher data (see Wolf, Fig. 2-9, 0049-0050, 0064), and
responsive to a tracking ticket voucher creation event (see Wolf, Figs. 2-9, 0055-0056, 0058, 0065-0066):
create tracking ticket voucher data associated with a gaming establishment account, and store, in the ticket voucher database, a second entry associated with the tracking ticket voucher data (see Wolf, Figs. 2-9, 0044, 0053-0058).
Regarding claim 10, Wolf discloses a ticket voucher system (see Wolf, Figs. 1-2, 0026, 0041, wherein the cashless transaction system is a reusable ticket voucher system) comprising:
a processor (see Wolf, Fig. 5, 0067); and
a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions that, when executed by the processor (see Wolf, Fig. 5, 0032), cause the processor to:
responsive to a receipt, from an electronic gaming machine, of data associated with a credit balance of the electronic gaming machine (see Wolf, 0049-0051, wherein the cashless instruction creation event occurs during a cash-in, cash-out, or redemption for a cashless instruction transaction for the credit meter):
create cashless ticket voucher data associated with an amount of funds based on the credit balance of the electronic gaming machine (see Wolf, Fig. 2, 5, 0044, 0049-0050, 0054-0060, 0064, wherein the reusable ticket is associated with a credit balance of the electronic gaming machine),
store, in a ticket voucher database (see Wolf, 0044) a first entry associated with the cashless ticket voucher data (see Wolf, Fig. 2-9, 0049-0050, 0064),
communicate, to the electronic gaming machine, data that results in the electronic gaming machine issuing a cashless ticket voucher associated with the cashless ticket voucher data (see Wolf, Fig. 9, 0047-0058, wherein the system issues reusable tickets that can be exchanged for the associated amount of funds); and
responsive to a receipt, from a component of a player tracking system, of data associated with a player tracking account (see Wolf, Figs. 2-9, 0055-0056, 0058, 0065-0066):
create tracking ticket voucher data associated with a gaming establishment account (see Wolf, Fig. 2-9, 0044, 0049-0058),
store, in the ticket voucher database, a second entry associated with the tracking ticket voucher data (see Wolf, Figs. 2-9, 0044, 0053-0058), and
communicate to the electronic gaming machine, data that results in the electronic gaming machine issuing a tracking ticket voucher associated with the tracking ticket voucher data (see Wolf, Fig. 2-9, 0050, 0053-0054, 0067).
Regarding claim 12, Wolf discloses a method of operating a system (see Wolf, Figs. 1-2, 0026, 0041), the method comprising:
responsive to a cashless ticket voucher creation event (see Wolf, Fig. 5, 0049-0051, 0067):
creating, by a processor, cashless ticket voucher database, a first entry associated with the cashless ticket voucher data (see Wolf, Fig. 2, 0044, 0049-0050, 0054-0060, 0064, wherein database 90 and the reusable ticket), a first entry associated with the cashless ticket voucher data (see Wolf, Fig. 2-9, 0049-0050, 0064, wherein the first entry is associated with a monetary amount and the cashless ticket voucher data), and
responsive to a tracking ticket voucher creation event (see Wolf, Figs. 2-9, 0055-0056, 0058, 0065-0066):
creating, by the processor, tracking ticket voucher data associated with a gaming establishment account, and storing, by the processor and in the ticket voucher database, a second entry associated with the tracking ticket voucher data (see Wolf, Figs. 2-9, 0044, 0053-0058).
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Wolf discloses the system of Claim 1 and the method of Claim 12, wherein the cashless ticket voucher creation event comprises a receipt, from an electronic gaming machine, to cashout a credit balance of the electronic gaming machine (see Wolf, Fig. 9, 0050, 0081-0085).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Wolf discloses the system of Claim 1 and the method of Claim 12, wherein the tracking ticket voucher creation event comprises a receipt of data associated with a creation of the gaming establishment account (see Wolf, Fig. 2-9, 0049-0053, 0081-0085).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Wolf discloses the system of Claim 1 and the method of Claim 12, wherein the gaming establishment account comprises a player tracking account (see Wolf, Fig. 2-9, 0055-0057, wherein the reusable ticket is associated with an account number or file record; 0060-0061; 0065-0066).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Wolf discloses the system of Claim 1 and the method of Claim 12, wherein a cashless ticket voucher associated with the cashless ticket voucher data is redeemable one time and a tracking ticket voucher associated with the tracking ticket voucher data is redeemable a plurality of times (see Wolf, 0049-0056, wherein the account balance associated with the voucher is redeemable one time and a tracking voucher data is reusable for a plurality of times for various functions associated with cashless transactions).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Wolf discloses the system of Claim 1 and the method of Claim 12, wherein the tracking ticket voucher data is not associated with any amount of funds (see Wolf, 0055-0056).
Regarding claims 7 and 18, Wolf discloses the system of Claim 1 and the method of Claim 12, wherein the cashless ticket voucher data is associated with a first ticket voucher number digraph and the tracking ticket voucher data is associated with a second, different ticket voucher number digraph (see Wolf, 0050-0056, 0062, 0081-0085, wherein the short code printed on the reusable ticket is a digraph printed to be checked upon for acceptance of the ticket for validation or prevention of counterfeit and the second different ticket voucher number is a validation code).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN HSU whose telephone number is (571)272-7148. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00-6:00 PM.
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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. 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.
/RYAN HSU/EXAMINER, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights