Appeal No. 2002-0105 2
Application No. 09/398,891
of claims 1, 5 and 12, the independent claims on appeal, which appear in the Appendix to
appellants’ main brief.
The sole reference relied upon by the examiner in the final rejection is:
Moody 6,007,066 Dec. 28, 1999
Claims 1-15 stand rejected “under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by or, in the
alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Moody (066)” (answer, page 3).
Reference is made to appellants’ main and reply briefs (Paper Nos. 9 and 13) and
to the examiner’s final rejection and answer (Paper Nos. 5 and 12) for the respective
positions of appellants and the examiner regarding the merits of this rejection.
Discussion
Independent claim 1 is directed to a method of playing a card game on an
electronic video gaming machine in which a single player plays against a pay table. The
method includes the step of dealing face up a first five card hand of poker in a first poker
format, and the step of dealing face up a second five card hand of poker in a second
poker format different from the first poker format. Independent claim 12 contains similar
limitations. Independent claim 5 includes the steps of dealing face up four (4) hands of
poker, each in a different format, the formats being Jacks or Better, Bonus Poker, Deuces
Wild, and Joker Poker. As stated by appellants’ (main brief, page 2) “[t]he idea is that the
player can play different poker format games at the same time.”
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007