Appeal No. 2005-1664
Application 09/878,111
inherent function of a player tracking card that it may be used
on multiple machines which is monitoring a level of play on
multiple machines" (EA7). With respect to the limitations of
issuing a computer message based on monitored level which causes
a change to a configuration parameter on the selected machine,
the examiner finds that the game machine generates a computer
message showing the player eligibility status and the controller
changes the status indicators on the game machine (EA8).
Appellant responds that the claimed "monitoring the level of
play of a player on multiple gaming machines" is quite different
from monitoring the level of play as a maximum bet (RBr2). It is
argued that Olsen teaches that eligibility is lost when the
player tracking card is removed and "[i]f a player loses
eligibility when he removes his card from one machine to initiate
play on another, his play is not monitored on multiple gaming
machines" (RBr2). Furthermore, it is argued that Olsen teaches
that if a player walks away from an eligible gaming machine
another player could sit down at the eligible machine and
continue play in the bonus time mode, which teaches that Olsen is
basing eligibility on the status of a single machine rather than
a player's play on multiple machines (RBr2). It is argued that
the data transmitted in Olsen is gaming machine eligibility, not
data related to the level of play of a player on multiple gaming
machines (RBr2). It is argued that since Olsen does not teach
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007