begin i like to say i'm hearing impaired and even though i'm doing my hearing aids up to eleven i would like it if you could yell at me as if i made a mistake across a bridge table consist consider contain new i'm sorry page eighteen would consider new and original set of playing cards as a stablish in hadn't exceptions under pattern eligibility when claim has been found the cover an abstract idea the exception being whether it's a new and unique c in re smith or where it contributes a new function by immaterial component used in the method you know you have a quote from francis bacon on it page forty five out that words have meanings and the words must be understood in context and the concept of pattern eligibility as originally built on one hundred the present examination as found that the broadest claims to the method using the reciting set of playing cards is novel and i'm obvious and then you have in  by not citing and maintaining any rejection on prior where in the record did the president's emanation find that the broadest claims to the method using the reciting set of playing cards is novel and an  and the prosecution process that if no rejection is made on this i mean a some court authority i cannot do that but the fact of the matter is it has not been rejected or thirty five u s c one of them not yelling at you by the  the problem with respect to the person application is i'm not concerned about the circus of a specific single playing card rather i'm talking about a random outcome generator the set of cards which when used in specific physical steps produces a random outcome the matter the printed matter identified the claims accepted by the examiner as being sufficient of playing cards to solve a long standing the then the art to create a rapid easily determine high bonus of ben and playing card games and sed the math in the case institute traditional deck a kind cards the only maximum vent you could get would be pretty specific cards in sequence of the same suit and that was limited to suits not just one be different one suit there being no impact on the functionality of the probability of advance coming out it had to be multiple decks and by having three consecutive cards or four consecutive and by that outcome is increased by a factor of five hundred percent in any other field of technology if i introduced a limitation to a claim that increased the function of the underlying article the random event generators the multiple set of cards by five hundred percent i would be receiving accolades not a rejection when you filed this application or you anticipating a one hundred and one fight absolutely i wrote the case and designed a case to address that issue based on the alteration in the functionality of the article being use the random abend generator it's not a single card that you see this as a some kind of a test case yes absolutely i have no plans or interest to commercialise his case but what is critical is to get a ruling that when the random event generators of the playing cards and dishes one them which end their function ins had meaning they have meaning even if in my humble opinion they have been somewhat overbearingly applied to such a simple ban as a playing card game or an electronic gaming she of then they have meaning those words have meaning they have good intentions but those are good intentions i've firmly your poor playing cards are exposed and at least three cards consisting of the two random physically cards have been provided with a bonus indicator stent from standard rank in suit one standard playing cards in addition to rank in suit on the cards is a concept physically embodied in the claims having a function in the claims and not merely some concept in which it alters the performance of the event in real life  i was a very specific and limiting it to exactly three cards exactly four cards and the fact that at least two of the cards had to have the special marking on a benefit markers on them if you were to win but additionally i would like to point out that i'm involved in mentoring students of the universe in about a and their gaming entrepreneurship program and with some of the patents i previously issued i've been able this should be patentable if the function of the article used in the math that is so dramatically and impacting on the outcome of the use of that  material in a specific environment if you lose this case wouldn't you also have a wonderful clarification that that's not true i am planning to write and journal article with a bit more pejorative than it than my presentation has been here today but i'm hoping i will not have to do that and i think i'm reserving the rest of my time  that i think ultimately there honors this case is easily decided underdog in our i think that both the beginning and the end of go that are summarize the law that claims directed to the abstract idea of the rules for playing a game where the that was one of the best arguments we've ever had numbers to do's that case should have never gotten up there because that subject matter was not even novel based on a game called america published in two thousand and seven again what is happening is not the surface not a single element but the device my random outcome generator of the multiple sets of playing cards the function has been altered by orders of magnitude and times i assert that golden hour even if correct does not apply here because i'm not talking about how the function of a single car is implemented by the printed matter on or rather of the random outcome generators of the multiple sets based on the unique combination of printing one of those cards with changes and alters the outcome function provided by those cards i mentioned earlier that i tried to relate to patents i mentioned in my brief were on bots chain systems both of those cases are generic to block chains a ten minute search on a gaming a ban using an electronic device having a game processor that patent was not even novel but they allowed it citing entish as improving the function of the walking into a patent attorneys office back in the old days and he's holding a box and the caption attorney says i worked on it and i worked on it and i worked on it and i couldn't get it to work but then it occurred to me there might be a market for an automatic card shuffler that doesn't work on i wrote many of the patents for john breeding was the inventor of the purse commercial card shuffler for shuffle master gaming and then