DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okuaki et al., US 2018/0082514.
In Reference to Claims 1 and 7
Okuaki et al. teaches a non-transitory computer readable recording medium storing instructions from controlling a lottery game (Fig. 3 and Par. 107, 186-187), and a lottery game machine that executes a lottery game featuring a lottery medium (Fig. 1A and abstract), the lottery game machine comprising: a plurality of satellites, each of which receives an operation input from a player playing a game (Fig. 1A, Fig. 3-4 and Par. 100, 108 “station machines.” Fig. 4 and Par. 149 which teaches an operation unit for receiving input operations from the player at the station machine); a lottery board, onto which the lottery medium is fed in response to the operation input received from the satellites (Fig. 2 and Par. 101. See Par. 24 and Par. 156-159 which teaches a game where in response to player game selections at the station machines balls are “injected” on to the lottery playing field to travel to the holes), comprising: ball pockets (Fig. 2 and Par. 101. See also Fig. 25-26); and satellite holes formed in a periphery of the lottery board and respectively corresponding to the satellites (Fig. 2, 26 and Par. 158 where examiner considers the ball pockets that have been selected by the player stations via their inputs at the “satellite” station machines to constitute “satellite holes” since they are directed associated with the designated player station via the station number marking. Further examiner considers these to be formed in a “periphery” of the lottery board since they are arranged around the center portion of the lottery wheel, See Fig. 9. In particular the area defined by the ball receptacles can constitute the “lottery board” as claimed. See the annotated Fig. 9 below where the area within the dashed line could be designated the lottery board since that’s where the lottery results occur and the surrounding ramped section is part of the injection mechanism);
PNG
media_image1.png
560
570
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and a central processing unit (CPU) (Fig. 3 and Par. 102 “center control unit” and Par. 107 “processor”) that executes a first lottery that determines a lottery result shared among all the satellites based on whether the lottery medium has entered any one of the ball pockets (Fig. 24 and Par. 159-161 which teaches a 1st Stage lottery where balls are injected and the settle in either the unselected ball pockets or the player selected satellite holes. And all of the players receive different award amounts based on where the ball enters), executes a second lottery that determines one of the satellites associated with any one of the satellite holes that the lottery medium has entered (Fig. 24, 30 and Par. 159-162 and 167-169 which teaches that if a ball enters each of the players designated satellite holes, then a 2nd Bonus Stage lottery is triggered for that player), applies the lottery result of the first lottery to all game settings respectively
corresponding to the satellites (Fig. 24 and Par. 159-161 which teaches the standard 1st stage award for players at the satellite stations), and adjusts, among the game settings, a game setting corresponding to the one of the satellites, to be favored or disfavored (Fig. 30 and Par. 159-162 and 167-169 which teaches that in the case that balls enter all of a players designated holes in the lottery, that player enters a second bonus stage and receives better award based on that 2nd stage. Examiner considers this to constitute a favored game setting).
In Reference to Claim 2
Okuaki et al. teaches wherein each of the satellite holes is disposed in a vicinity of a corresponding satellite among the satellites (See Fig. 1A where the lottery field and thus all of the satellite holes are surrounded by the player stations as part of the integrated game machine. Thus, lacking further specificity in the claims, examiner considers all of the satellite holes on the lottery board to be in “a vicinity” of all of the satellite stations and thus also in the vicinity of the station which it corresponds to in a given game).
In Reference to Claim 6
Okuaki et al. teaches the CPU executes the second lottery upon determining that a specific execution condition is met during execution of the first lottery (Fig. 24 “Match Trigger condition” and where examiner considers Triggering of the 2nd Stage to constitute executing the second lottery).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuaki et al., US 2018/0082514, in view of Connelly et al., US 2025/0118153.
In Reference to Claim 5
Okuaki et al. teaches a lottery game machine as described above in reference to Claim 1 including satellite holes that serve a receptacles for the lottery balls and a CPU which controls mechanical operation of the game machine (Fig. 3 and Par. 107). However, Okuaki et al. does not teach where the device controls the movement of the ball receptacles in a direction intersecting an upper surface of the periphery of the lottery board.
Connelly et al. teaches a roulette style lottery game machine which teaches where the device controls the movement of the ball receptacles in a direction intersecting an upper surface of the periphery of the lottery board (Par. 42 “The roulette gaming table of FIG. 3B may further include a control switch 160 to adjust a height of the table.” Where adjusting the height of the whole table with a roulette wheel on it would also raise or lower the ball receptacles that make up part of the roulette wheel in a direction intersecting an upper surface of the periphery of the lottery board. I.e. perpendicular to the table).
It would be desirable to modify the device of Okuaki et al. with the electronically adjustable gaming table height as taught by Connelly et al. in order to allow the gaming machine playing field to be adjusted for better visibility, such as by different players at the player stations.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the device of Okuaki et al. with the electronically adjustable gaming table height as taught by Connelly et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARL V LARSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday; 10:00 am - 6:30 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.
/CARL V LARSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights