Appeal No. 98-1017
Application 08/585,472
the game each player arranges his pieces at will, in his area” (translation, page 24).
Dozorsky discloses a military-type board game which is described in the following terms:
a game between opposing players having sets of 30 pieces, each set consisting of one
capital, two generals, eleven ambients, nine regulars and seven patrols. Each set
arranged in identical starting formation on a rectangular game board of 126 checkered
square[s]. Each of the sets has one capital which occupies the central square of the end
row of 9 squares, and which can be captured by any opposing-set piece that
approaches within unobstructed capturing range, and which once captured cannot be
retaken, and which cannot itself move or capture any piece but must be protected by
the pieces of its own set. All of the other pieces can optionally move, capture
opposing-set pieces, or be captured. Each such piece has its allowable range of
movement and range of ability to capture other pieces, depending on its type. A piece
moves by traveling from one square to another. A capturing piece always displaces the
captured piece from its square, and the captured piece is excluded from the field of
play. The objective in winning the game is to be the first to capture the capital of the
opposing set, while successfully preventing the capture of the capital of one’s own set.
The players use single alternate moves to proceed with the game [Abstract].
In combining Andre and Dozorsky to reject claim 1, the examiner submits that
[i]n view of [Dozorsky’s] teaching, it would have been obvious to modify Andre’s
game rules by requiring the players to initially position their playing pieces in a
predetermined mirror image on the playing board. This modification would have
eliminated any strategic advantage a player may have at the start of Andre’s game, and
thus giv[es] each player, at the start of Andre’s game, an equal or fair chance at winning
Andre’s game [answer, pages 4 and 5].
We agree with the appellant, however, that the collective teachings of Andre and Dozorsky
would not have suggested this modification.
The game disclosed by Andre is much more realistic in terms of simulating military action than
the game disclosed by Dozorsky. This is perhaps best demonstrated by the more sophisticated game
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007