Appeal No. 2005-0983
Application 09/923,675
The examiner finds that it would have been obvious to
incorporate Falciglia’s teachings into the Holmes/Schneider
combination in order “to correct the improbable payouts
associated with Holmes . . . in view of Schneider . . . thus
motivating a skilled artisan to incorporate such a feature”
(answer-page 7).
We have reviewed the references, as well as the arguments by
appellants and the examiner, and we conclude that the applied
references are not combinable, within the meaning of 35 U.S.C.
§ 103, to achieve the instant claimed subject matter.
Claim 1 requires that a player be able to play video poker
in a conventional manner and that play continues until all of the
predetermined arrangement of cards has been matched, if the
player wishes to play that long. Each card of the predetermined
arrangement of cards is matched, or not, during play.
Both appellants and the examiner agree that the matching in
Schneider occurs after a winning hand and that once the player in
Schneider qualifies for the bonus round, the player continues to
attempt a match until a match, and a bonus award, is actually
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007