Appeal No. 2006-1909 Page 6
Application No. 10/621,768
Moody’s claims do not recite allowing the player the option to use a second
pay table during a second round of play.
Gajor discloses providing a player in a video poker game with a
parlay option when a player is playing multiple hands of the game
simultaneously. The parlay option allows the player to obtain a larger
payoff by combining multiple winning hands. If a player draws winning
hands on more than one hand, he wins more than a player who selects to
receive a straight payoff option that pays a normal payoff for each winning
hand. This parlay option offers the player a second, higher pay table for
multiple winning hands during the first round of play. Gajor fails to teach or
suggest paying out the winnings on a first round of play using a first pay
table and then allowing the user to play another round using a second pay
table.
As such, we find that neither the Moody claims nor Gajor teach or
suggest allowing a player with a winning hand in a first round of play to
parlay a portion of the award to use in a second round of play using a second
pay table that is different than the first pay table used in the first round of
play. The examiner has failed to provide a clear articulation of why one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, with the knowledge of
the teachings of the Moody claims and Gajor, would have been led to the
invention recited in the pending claims. The only reasoning provided by the
examiner was that one would be motivated to include a parlay feature to
increase the potential payout. We note, however, that there are many ways
to include a parlay feature that differ from the parlay method claimed, as
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007