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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2026/06/03 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer approval is noted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-7, 9, 11-12, 16-17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipate by Kroupp; Rachel Wolf et al. (US 20210082226 A1).
With respect to claims 1 and 11, Kroupp discloses a plurality of token sensors mountable to an upper surface at respective locations of a gaming table and communicatively coupled to an electronic table controller of the gaming table (fig. 4a, element 401b, the PX layer is the token sensor and fig. 2, the sensors are connected to the table controller), each of the plurality of token sensors comprising:
a top surface (element 403) including a respective electronic display device upon which text or graphics related to a respective potential award of a game is displayed by the respective electronic display device (fig. 4B-4E and par 0071. the ring around the outer edge of 105 displays messages via electronic lights), the respective potential award independently and randomly selected by the electronic table controller for each of the plurality of token sensors (pars 0058-0059, players who wager on the token sensor are given opportunities to spin a wheel for a chance at a prize for that player);
logic circuitry comprising one or more processors (par 0072, microcontroller on 401d); and
at least one light emitter paired with a light detector (fig. 4A, light 460), the at least one light emitter positioned to transmit light above the top surface to its paired light detector (light 460 is above the detector and cast light on and across 403), the at least one light emitter and its paired light detector positioned such that light transmitted by the at least one light emitter is detectable by its paired light detector (par 0077, as the chip or token covers the Px layer, it detect that a chip is present);
wherein, via the logic circuitry, each of the plurality of token sensors communicates to the electronic table controller the presence of a token on its respective top surface when the light transmitted by its at least one light emitter is blocked by the token from being detected by its paired light detector (par 0077 and fig. 2, lines 1007 communicate from each sensor to the controller).
With respect to claims 2 and 12, Kroupp discloses the plurality of token sensors of claim 1, wherein the random selection of each potential award is based on how many tokens are detected by the plurality of sensors (par 0058, player places a bonus wager to enable a random selection of a prize from the wheel).
With respect to claims 6 and 16, Kroupp discloses the plurality of token sensors of claim 1, wherein the electronic display devices further display attract animations, celebratory animations, or instructions to players of the game played at the gaming table (par 0071, the lights provide instruction on when to do activities and could be attractive to others).
With respect to claims 7 and 17, Kroupp discloses the plurality of token sensors of claim 1, wherein each token sensor further comprises a gesture sensor for providing input to the electronic table controller (par 0035, the proximity detector 105 is also a gesture detector).
With respect to claims 9 and 19, Kroupp discloses the plurality of token sensors of claim 1, wherein at least one of the displayed potential awards may be won only in response to occurrence of a qualifying hand at the location associated with the displayed potential award (par 0058 describes giving an award opportunity to players with base game qualifying outcomes and discusses the use with card games).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 3-5, 8, 10, 13-15, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kroupp in view of Maya; Darren (US 20230245529 A1).
With respect to claims 3, 8, 13 and 18 Kroupp discloses the plurality of token sensors of claim 1, where the sensors are in coupled to the controller, but does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the potential awards comprises a progressive award and wherein the electronic table controller is communicatively coupled to a remote progressive controller system and wherein the presence of a token on any of the plurality of token sensors provides an input to the progressive controller system.
In related prior art, Maya discloses an award system for use with electronic table games (par 19) where secondary game awards comprise a progressive award (par 22) and wherein the electronic table controller is communicatively coupled to a remote progressive controller system (par 68, game machines and servers work in concert, par 22 local area or wide area progressives) and wherein the presence of a token on any of the plurality of token sensors provides an input to the progressive controller system (Kroupp uses the wager to enable a secondary game and Maya par 23 teaches a side progressive wager to increment the value of the progressive prize). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the advantages of a progressive game to provide large award values that attract and entertain patrons.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of effective filing to have modified Kroupp in view of Maya to have the secondary game be a progressive game that increments based on wager amounts sent to a server in order to attract more patrons through higher potential awards and manage that award automatically via a server.
With respect to claims 4-5 and 14-15, Kroupp discloses claim 1 above, but does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the potential awards comprises an award modifier and wherein at least one of the potential awards comprises an award modifier.
In related prior art, Maya discloses that secondary awards may be selected from a variety of options including modifiers and multipliers (par 43 discloses points, free plays, multipliers, prizes, etc.). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the advantages of providing award multipliers to entice players through the chance of higher award values and thereby encourage them to make the secondary wagers.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of effective filing to have modified Kroupp in view of Maya to have provided multiplier awards in order to entice players through greater award values and thereby increase gaming revenue.
With respect to claims 10 and 20, Kroupp discloses claim 1 above, but does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the displayed potential awards may be won without requiring a qualifying hand at the location associated with the displayed potential award.
In related prior art, Maya discloses that any of a number of triggering events can be used to trigger a secondary event (par 64 including random determination by the central controller, random determination at a gaming system, independent of the play of the game, etc.). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the advantages of the chance of providing an award to players without a qualifying hand in the primary game in order to provide excitement to players that are not doing well in the primary game and thereby keep them playing and spending money.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of effective filing to have modified Kroupp in view of Maya to include at least one of the displayed potential awards may be won without requiring a qualifying hand at the location associated with the displayed potential award in order to encourage secondary wagering activity from players that are not winning at the primary game and thereby increase revenue.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2026/06/02 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the light ring of Kroupp do not teach or suggest text or graphics related to a respective potential award. First, content of a display is non-functional descriptive material, so even if, arguendo, the claims required any specific content, it would not amount to a patentable difference. Second, the claim uses broad language of “related to a respective award”. It is the examiner’s position that the lights that attract the player to make the side wager and the lights that inform the player about the status of their wager on this side game is, in fact, related to a respective award, namely the award given for the side wager. So, there is no content required by the claim, so colored lights are reasonably included in “graphics” and the colored lights provide information related to a potential award by informing the player of their status as wagering on the side award which makes them eligible for the award and may influence the value of the award.
Applicant argues the Kroupp’s bonus wheel is not on the top surface of the token sensor. As noted above, the token sensor display does not have to show a game. It only has to show information related to a game, which it does. Applicant’s claims do not require the functionality that applicant argues.
Examiner suggests considering limitations directed to the wager sensor structure found to be allowable in the co-pending application which the approved terminal disclaimer ties to this application as a means to allowance.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID DUFFY whose telephone number is (571)272-1574. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0830-1700 +/- 15.
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, Thomas Barrett can be reached at (571) 270-1935. 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.
/DAVID DUFFY/Quality Assurance Specialist, TC 3700
Prosecution Insights