Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 1 of 65
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IGT and IGT CANADA SOLUTIONS ULC,
`
`
`
`
`
`ZYNGA INC.,
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`C.A. No. 6:21-CV-00331-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiffs IGT (“IGT US”) and IGT Canada Solutions ULC (“IGT Canada”) (together,
`
`“IGT”), for their Second Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement against Defendant Zynga
`
`Inc. (“Zynga”), allege the following:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is an action for infringement of United States Patent Nos. 8,708,791;
`
`9,159,189; 7,168,089; 7,303,473; 8,795,064; and 8,266,212 (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”),
`
`arising under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United States Code, including
`
`§ 271 and §§ 281–285.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff IGT US is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State
`
`of Nevada, having a place of business located at 6355 South Buffalo Drive, Las Vegas, Nevada
`
`89113.
`
`3.
`
`Plaintiff IGT Canada is a Canadian unlimited liability company organized and
`
`existing under the laws of Nova Scotia, having a place of business located at 328 Urquhart Avenue,
`
`Moncton, New Brunswick E1H 2R6, Canada. IGT US and IGT Canada are subsidiaries of
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 2 of 65
`
`
`
`
`International Game Technology PLC, which is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the
`
`trading symbol “IGT.” IGT is a world leader in gaming entertainment and a leading supplier of
`
`casino and lottery machines.
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Zynga is a corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, having a place of business located at 12357-A,
`
`Riata Trace Pkwy #200, Austin, Texas 78727.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5.
`
`This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
`
`United States, Title 35 of the United States Code.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Zynga because Zynga has a place of
`
`business in this District, has committed acts within this District giving rise to this action, and has
`
`established minimum contacts with this forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over Zynga
`
`would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Zynga has committed and
`
`continues to commit acts of infringement in this District by, among other things, developing,
`
`making, testing, using, and providing instrumentalities that infringe one or more claims of the
`
`Asserted Patents.
`
`8.
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). For instance,
`
`Zynga has a regular and established place of business in at least Austin, Texas, and has committed
`
`acts of infringement in this District and Division.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`I.
`
`IGT and Remote Gaming
`
`9.
`
`With more than 12,000 employees worldwide, IGT (NYSE: IGT) enables players
`
`to experience their favorite games across various market channels and regulated segments, from
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 3 of 65
`
`
`
`
`gaming machines and lotteries to digital and social platforms. IGT’s gaming solutions anticipate
`
`and meet consumer demands—wherever they choose to play—by leveraging IGT’s portfolio of
`
`premium and proprietary content, substantial investments in innovation, in-depth customer
`
`intelligence, significant operational expertise, and novel, industry-leading technologies. IGT has
`
`a well-established presence locally and internationally, including relationships with governments
`
`and regulators in more than 100 countries around the world. For more than thirty years, IGT has
`
`created and driven value by adhering to the highest standards of service, integrity, and
`
`responsibility in the gaming industry.
`
`10.
`
`In addition to IGT’s established brick-and-mortar casino and lottery operations,
`
`IGT is a world leader and innovator in the markets for remote gaming and social casinos. IGT
`
`offers a complete portfolio of award-winning digital gaming products, platforms, and services.
`
`With substantial investments in research and development, IGT’s solutions are flexible, scalable,
`
`and backed by a market-leading technology investment program to ensure players will always
`
`catch the next wave of innovation. For example, IGT’s Remote Game Server (“RGS”) is home to
`
`over 100 themed games, including some of the industry’s most celebrated titles, such as
`
`Cleopatra®, Golden Goddess®, and Wheel of Fortune®. In fact, in May 2017, IGT announced
`
`that the RGS would also house the leading online gaming site PokerStars Casino. The RGS
`
`contains a vast library of new and proven games and features that ignite player excitement and
`
`engagement in markets around the world.
`
`11.
`
`IGT’s products and services include, for example, its PlayAnywhere, PlaySports,
`
`PlayLottery, PlayPlatform, and PlayService offerings, as advertised on its website:
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 4 of 65
`
`
`
`
`https://www.igt.com/products-and-services/playdigital (last visited May 3, 2021).
`
`12.
`
`IGT’s PlayAnywhere offerings further include, for example, PlayCasino,
`
`PlayPoker, PlayBingo, and PlayInstants:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`https://www.igt.com/products-and-services/playdigital/playanywhere (last visited May 3, 2021).
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 5 of 65
`
`
`
`
`13.
`
`To protect these and other valuable and proprietary technologies, IGT has heavily
`
`invested in acquiring and maintaining its intellectual property, including cultivating a portfolio of
`
`approximately 3,400 United States patents and pending applications, and hundreds more in
`
`Europe, Australia, and Asia.
`
`II.
`
`Zynga and the Accused Instrumentalities
`
`14.
`
`Zynga labels itself “a leading developer of the world’s most popular social games
`
`that are played by millions of people around the world each day.” https://www.zynga.com/ (last
`
`visited May 3, 2021). According to Zynga, “more than one billion people” have played its games
`
`“across the Web and mobile” to date. Id. Upon information and belief, Zynga has made, used,
`
`sold, or offered to sell in the United States, or imported into the United States, infringing
`
`instrumentalities, including servers and other hardware and software enabling players to play its
`
`various game offerings (“Accused Instrumentalities”), including, but not limited to, Zynga Poker,
`
`The Wizard of Oz, Game of Thrones, Mustang Money, Hit It Rich, other spin slot machine games,
`
`Words With Friends, Farmville, Loyalty Lounge, and other game offerings.
`
`III. The Asserted Patents
`A.
`
`The ’791 Patent Recites a Specific, Technological Improvement, and Recites
`Inventive Concepts That Were Not Well Understood, Routine, or
`Conventional at the Time.
`
`15.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,708,791 (“the ’791 Patent”) is entitled “Detecting and preventing
`
`bots and cheating in online gaming,” and is attached hereto as Exhibit A. ’791 Patent at [54]. IGT
`
`US is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’791 Patent, which issued on April 29, 2014.
`
`Id. at [73], [45]. The application that led to the ’791 Patent was filed on December 20, 2012, is a
`
`divisional of application No. 11/480,713, and claims priority back to at least July 3, 2006. Id. at
`
`[22], [62]. The ’791 Patent is not directed to an abstract idea, but rather claims a technical solution
`
`necessarily rooted in computer technology in order to overcome a problem specifically arising in
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 6 of 65
`
`
`
`
`the realm of prior electronic gaming systems. Moreover, the claim limitations involve more than
`
`the performance of well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the
`
`industry.
`
`16.
`
`The ’791 Patent claims are directed to patent-eligible, non-abstract subject matter.
`
`In particular, the ’791 Patent is directed to methods and devices for detecting and preventing
`
`cheating in online gaming resulting from technological problems attributable to the Internet. The
`
`Patent explains that one criticism of online gaming was the perception that it very often involves
`
`cheating. As described, prior art methods and devices were inadequate because some players could
`
`use “bots” or similar software that could apply perfect or nearly perfect strategies during game
`
`play and also allow for unfair collaboration between players. Players could also use multiple
`
`devices, such as a first personal computer for participation in online gaming, and a bot and remote
`
`control software may be running on a second computer, for cheating. The bot on the second
`
`computer could control games played on the first computer, such that a human will appear to be
`
`participating in the online gaming sessions and could even interact with other players or provide
`
`other human responses that would be difficult to automate. ’791 Patent at 1:25–51. As the Patent
`
`notes, there was a need to overcome these and other technological problems in the prior art such
`
`as those arising from bots, with new technical solutions for detecting and preventing cheating in
`
`wagering games conducted via the Internet. Id. at 1:55–58.
`
`17.
`
`The claims of the ’791 Patent describe and claim narrowly-tailored and specific
`
`concepts that were not well-understood, routine, or conventional at the time of its filing for
`
`overcoming these and other technological problems. The claims address, among other things, such
`
`technical problems in prior gaming systems by providing specifically implemented technical
`
`solutions. For example, claim 1 recites:
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 7 of 65
`
`
`
`
`1. A gaming method in a gaming system having a plurality of host devices
`and at least one game server, the method comprising:
`
`providing, by plurality of host devices and the at least one game server, an
`online wagering game;
`
`presenting, by plurality of host deices, game data required for participation
`in the online wagering game in a format that requires a human
`interface or the use of pattern recognition methods;
`
`gathering, by the plurality of host devices, game play data while players are
`using the plurality of host devices to play Internet wagering games;
`
`analyzing, by the at least one game server, the game play data to determine
`individual players’ typical gaming styles and times of deviation
`from the typical gaming styles; and
`
`comparing, by the at least one game server, times of deviation from players’
`typical gaming styles to determine instances of probable collusion
`between players.
`
`Id. at 17:2–19. Claim 1 targets a method-based solution that uses a plurality of host devices and
`
`at least one game server for providing an online wagering game. Id. at 17:2–6. The method
`
`involves presenting “game data” required for participation by host devices in a format that requires
`
`a human interface or the use of pattern recognition methods, and gathering game play data while
`
`players are using the host devices to play Internet wagering games. Id. at 17:7–12. The game
`
`server then analyzes the game play data to determine players’ typical gaming styles and times of
`
`deviation from the typical gaming styles, and compares times of deviation from their typical
`
`gaming styles to determine instances of probable collusion between players. Id. at 17:13–19.
`
`18.
`
`The specification further demonstrates that the inventors developed a specific
`
`technological solution to solve technological problems in the prior art. Id. at 4:6–16:67. The
`
`specification describes, with reference to FIG. 1, for instance, game provider 105 that provides
`
`Internet wagering games via one or more game servers 110, 115, 120 and 125. Id. at 4:29–31.
`
`After a player’s eligibility is determined, gaming software may be provided, by downloading the
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 8 of 65
`
`
`
`
`software from a server of game provider 105 to a player’s host device. Id. at 9:11–14. As a first
`
`countermeasure against the use of bots, the gaming software may provide gaming information in
`
`formats that are difficult for a bot to interpret, including using pattern recognition software, but
`
`which preferably are easy for humans to interpret. Id. at 5:45–49. For example, some
`
`implementations present playing cards with distorted letters and numbers or that are rotated,
`
`misaligned, or randomly oriented; some provide GUIs whose layouts change depending on
`
`whether bot play is suspected. Id. at 5:50–7:37.
`
`19.
`
`After a game begins, players’ gaming data is collected by the host device and
`
`analyzed by the game server, including tracking and analyzing a player’s response time, win
`
`frequency, win amount, time spent playing, game play decisions, and wagering decisions, over a
`
`period of time. Some implementations involve calculating a player’s characteristic percentage of
`
`optimal decision-making, a player’s characteristic range of deviation from this characteristic
`
`percentage, a player’s characteristic range of deviation from perfect game play, or similar values.
`
`Id. at 9:18–44. If a player is suddenly playing at a level quite different from his or her historical
`
`range, this indicates possible use of a bot or collusion. Id. at 9:45–58. For example, consistently
`
`perfect or nearly-perfect game play suggests that a player is actually a bot (or is using a bot or
`
`similar software). If the player also has a consistently small response time and can play for long
`
`time periods without making an error, the player is even more likely to be a bot. Id. at 10:14–29.
`
`Likewise, the inventive system may determine whether more than one of the players has been in
`
`the same location during times that the player is winning, as one indicia of collusion. Id. at 15:6–
`
`13.
`
`20.
`
`As a game progresses, the inventive system and method involves determining, by
`
`a central computing device or a player’s host device, whether indicia of cheating have been
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 9 of 65
`
`
`
`
`detected. If no indicia of cheating have been detected, play may continue as before. However, if
`
`an indicium of cheating has been detected, cheating countermeasures may be invoked. For
`
`example, a display may be used that is believed to be more difficult for bots to interpret, the display
`
`type may be changed more frequently; a player may be prevented from further play, assessed a
`
`monetary penalty, or blacklisted; or a player may be required to respond correctly to a spoken
`
`question or command. Id. at 11:15–39.
`
`21.
`
`The improvements recited by the claims have no pre-electronic gaming analog.
`
`Indeed, the technical problems experienced by prior art systems did not exist prior to electronic
`
`gaming. E.g., ’791 Patent at 1:31–51 (describing the cheating specific to online wagering games
`
`including the use of “bots” combined with unfair collaboration and the use of multiple online
`
`devices by one person). Moreover, the claimed technologies of the ’791 Patent cannot be
`
`performed as mental steps by a human, nor by a human using a pen and paper. E.g., id. at 14:64–
`
`15:13, 8:51–55 (describing the collection and analysis of “opponent gaming data” including host
`
`device location data and game play data coinciding in time); id. at 17:2–19 (claiming host device
`
`and gaming server).
`
`22.
`
`As addressed above, the ’791 Patent claims are directed to inventive concepts that
`
`recite significantly more than any patent-ineligible, abstract idea. Nor does the claimed invention
`
`represent the mere application of a generic computer to any well-known method of organizing
`
`human behavior. Online gaming introduces unique challenges such as, for example, opportunities
`
`for collusion among players through the use of automated bots and and/or multiple user devices.
`
`The claimed invention of the ’791 Patent provides a unique technical solution for detecting such
`
`behavior.
`
`23.
`
`The dependent claims further recite unconventional technological advancements
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 10 of 65
`
`
`
`
`over the prior art. For example, claims 2–4 and 6, 7, and 9 recite specific types of game data (e.g.,
`
`playing card data) and formats of game data (e.g., varying positions of playing card symbols on
`
`the cards) that further a goal of, for example, providing countermeasures against prior-art bots that
`
`could be used for cheating. Id. at 17:20–29; id. at 18:1–8; id. at 13–15. As another example,
`
`dependent claim 11, which depends from claim 1, further recites the unconventional step of
`
`providing wagering data for participation in the online wagering game as “images of wager
`
`tokens,” as another countermeasure. Id. at 18:20–22. Dependent claim 13, which depends from
`
`claim 1, recites that the gaming method also involves the game server determining locations of
`
`host devices and whether some of the instances of probably collusion involve multiple host devices
`
`at one location,” which furthers a goal of detecting indicia of possible collusion for investigation.
`
`Id. at 18:25–30.
`
`B.
`
`The ’189 Patent Recites a Specific, Technological Improvement, and Recites
`Inventive Concepts That Were Not Well Understood, Routine, or
`Conventional at the Time.
`
`24.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,159,189 (“the ’189 Patent”) is entitled “Mobile gaming device
`
`carrying out uninterrupted game despite communications link disruption,” and is attached hereto
`
`as Exhibit B. ’189 Patent at [54]. IGT Canada is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the
`
`’189 Patent, which issued on October 13, 2015. Id. at [45]. The ’189 Patent was filed on April
`
`11, 2013, and is a continuation-in-part of two patent applications, all three applications claiming
`
`priority to a provisional application filed on January 13, 2012. Id. at [63], [60]. The ’189 Patent
`
`is not directed to an abstract idea, but rather, claims a technical solution necessarily rooted in
`
`computer technology in order to overcome a problem specifically arising in the realm of prior
`
`electronic gaming systems. Moreover, the claim limitations involve more than the performance
`
`of well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the industry.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 11 of 65
`
`
`
`
`25.
`
`The ’189 Patent claims are directed to patent-eligible, non-abstract subject matter.
`
`In particular, at the time of the claimed invention, game participants could use a wireless hand-
`
`held device to remotely play an otherwise conventional gaming machine in a casino. The gaming
`
`machine would perform all of the processing during gameplay. ’189 patent at 1:25–36. Since the
`
`player may walk around with the tablet, however, various issues arise, such as what actions to be
`
`taken if the communications link is broken during a game or if a maximum time between games
`
`is exceeded. In those cases, and as described in the prior art, the game would typically be
`
`terminated, which could prevent players from receiving game outcomes and cause them to become
`
`“confused and agitated.” Id. at 1:47–2:15 (discussing U.S. Patent No. 6,846,238 to Wells). Thus,
`
`for example, “an improved technique for dealing with a communications link being broken in the
`
`middle of a game” was needed. The disclosed invention overcame this and other technological
`
`problems. Specifically, if a communications link is broken during a game, a mobile gaming device
`
`may extend the game animation (such as a spinning reel) beyond a typical time for the game until
`
`the link is reestablished, rather than terminating or stopping the display of the game. Id. at 4:47–
`
`5:4.
`
`26.
`
`The claims of the ’189 Patent describe and claim narrowly-tailored and specific
`
`concepts that were not well-understood, routine, or conventional at the time of its filing for
`
`overcoming the technological problems of the prior. The claims address, among other things, such
`
`technical problems in prior gaming systems by providing specifically implemented technical
`
`solutions. For example, claim 1 recites:
`
`1. A remote gaming method comprising:
`
`establishing a wireless communications link between a mobile gaming
`device, operated by a player, and a stationary gaming terminal that
`carries out a gaming program;
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 12 of 65
`
`
`
`
`receiving player control signals by the gaming terminal from the mobile
`gaming device to initiate a game;
`
`displaying game animation on the mobile gaming device for the game
`conveying to the player that the game is presently occurring;
`
`carrying out the game by the gaming terminal, including determining a final
`outcome of the game and any award for the outcome;
`
`transmitting signals from the gaming terminal to the mobile gaming device
`identifying the final outcome of the game and the award;
`
`stopping the game animation for the game and displaying, by the mobile
`gaming device, the final outcome of the game and the award;
`
`in the event of a communications link failure between the mobile gaming
`device and the gaming terminal during the game, prior to receiving
`the signals by the mobile gaming device identifying the final
`outcome of the game and the award but after the game animation for
`the game has begun, performing the method comprising:
`
`extending the game animation for the game by the mobile gaming
`device during the communications link failure beyond a
`typical time for the game until the communications link has
`been re-established; and
`
`once the communication link has been re-established, transmitting
`the signals to the mobile gaming device identifying the final
`outcome of the game and the award, stopping the game
`animation for the game, and displaying, by the mobile
`gaming device, the final outcome of the game and the award,
`such that the game perceived by the player is not interrupted
`during the communications link failure.
`
`Id. at 23:23–59. Claim 1 targets a method-based solution that extends the game animation for the
`
`game by the mobile gaming device during the communications link failure beyond a typical time
`
`for the game until the communications link has been re-established. Id. at 23:48–51. More
`
`specifically, the claims improve user experience with remote games that rely on communications
`
`link to operate by extending game animations during communications link failures to present an
`
`uninterrupted gaming experience. See, e.g., id. at 4:44–46 (“Therefore, the un-interrupted display
`
`of the reels spinning and stopping is very important to the player.”); see also id. at 1:63–2:2.
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 13 of 65
`
`
`
`
`27.
`
`The specification further demonstrates that the inventors developed a specific
`
`technological solution to solve the technological problems. See ’189 Patent at 3:31–22:67. It
`
`describes the inventive devices used in the invention with reference to FIG. 3, including specially
`
`programmed reel spin routine files 69 and communications link detector 82. See also id. at 9:8–
`
`39. It also describes the inventive method with reference to FIG. 4, for instance. The gaming
`
`machine continually senses whether the communications link is still up by, for example, receiving
`
`periodic signals from the tablet or receiving acknowledgements from the tablet that a command
`
`has been received. Id. at 10:56–60. The communications link may be broken by the player moving
`
`out of the allowable range, interference, or other cause, which may prevent the user from receiving
`
`the game’s outcome. Id. at 10:60–62; see also id. at 5:1–4. To overcome this drawback,
`
`specialized programming causes the animated reels to keep spinning, so the player believes the
`
`game is still occurring. Id. at 11:17–24. The gaming machine re-transmits the final outcome and
`
`award and, assuming the player has re-entered the allowable range within the allowable “reconnect
`
`timeout” period, the tablet receives the final result and stops the reels at their final positions. Id.
`
`at 11:27–31. Thus, the player perceives the continuous spinning of the reels as just an extended
`
`game rather than an interruption in the game. Id. at 11:31–33.
`
`28.
`
`The improvements recited by the claims have no pre-electronic gaming analog.
`
`Indeed, the technical problems experienced by the prior art did not exist prior to electronic gaming.
`
`See, e.g., id. at 1:25–27 (describing the prior art as using a “wireless hand-held device, such as a
`
`tablet, to remotely play an otherwise conventional gaming machine in a casino”) (emphasis added);
`
`see also id. at 1:48–55 (describing issues particular to remote electronic gaming as compared to
`
`conventional casino gaming). Moreover, the claimed technological advance claimed in the ’189
`
`Patent cannot be performed as mental steps by a human, nor by a human using a pen and paper.
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 14 of 65
`
`
`
`
`See, e.g., id. at 11:27–33 (describing an embodiment that requires the animated reels to continue
`
`spinning so that the player is unaware of the interruption in the communications link); see also id.
`
`at 4:63–67.
`
`29.
`
`As addressed above, the ’189 Patent claims are directed to inventive concepts that
`
`recite significantly more than any patent-ineligible, abstract idea. The claimed invention also
`
`represents more than the mere application of a generic computer to any well-known method of
`
`organizing human behavior. Remote electronic gaming introduces unique challenges, such as, for
`
`example, the possibility of a communications link failure between a gaming terminal and mobile
`
`gaming device, when such a communications link was unnecessary with conventional, non-remote
`
`casino games. The ’189 Patent provides a novel technical solution for a remote electronic game
`
`to appear as if no communications link failure occurred.
`
`C.
`
`The ’089 Patent Recites a Specific, Technological Improvement, and Recites
`Inventive Concepts That Were Not Well Understood, Routine, or
`Conventional at the Time.
`
`30.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,168,089 (“the ’089 Patent”) is entitled “Secured Virtual Network
`
`In A Gaming Environment,” and is attached hereto as Exhibit C. ’089 Patent at [54]. IGT US is
`
`the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’089 Patent, which issued on January 23, 2007. Id.
`
`at [73], [45]. The ’089 Patent was filed on April 3, 2002, and is a continuation-in-part from an
`
`application that was filed on December 7, 2000. Id. at [22], [63]. The ’089 Patent is not directed
`
`to an abstract idea, but rather, claims a technical solution necessarily rooted in computer
`
`technology in order to overcome a problem specifically arising in the realm of prior electronic
`
`gaming systems. Moreover, the claim limitations involve more than the performance of well-
`
`understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the industry.
`
`31.
`
`The ’089 Patent claims are directed to patent-eligible, non-abstract subject matter.
`
`In particular, at the time of the claimed invention, the remote-gaming environment faced a
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 15 of 65
`
`
`
`
`technological challenge of ensuring security and providing monitoring of gaming software sent to
`
`and loaded onto remote gaming devices. This technological problem results from the Internet and
`
`its ability to offer dispersed game-play capability in a computer-distributed environment. For
`
`example, in brick-and-mortar gaming establishments, the patent explains, gaming machines were
`
`largely standalone. ’089 Patent at 1:21–49. The patent further explains that, “[a]s technology in
`
`the gaming industry progresses, more and more gaming services are being provided to gaming
`
`machines via communication networks that link groups of gaming machines to a remote computer
`
`that provides one or more gaming services.” Id. at 1:49–53. These groups of gaming machines
`
`were “linked to a dedicated communication network … not accessible to the public.” Id. at 1:50–
`
`66. As technology progressed and the gaming industry grew, it became possible to have “gaming
`
`machines under the control of a particular entity … distributed in many different types of
`
`establishments. Casinos, convenience stores, supermarkets, bars and boats are a few examples of
`
`establishments where gaming machines may be placed.” Id. at 2:21–28. These gaming machines,
`
`however, continued to communicate with “one or more database servers via one or more dedicated
`
`networks,” if connected to such a network. Id. at 2:45–3:5. But in instances such as a gaming
`
`machine placed at a store, “the cost of a dedicated communication network [was] not usually
`
`justified.” Id. at 3:16–19. Where the cost could not be justified, the gaming device was left “in a
`
`‘stand alone’ mode” thus requiring manual maintenance and manual extraction of information for
`
`the gaming establishment, resulting in a “large route” for the operator that was “both time
`
`consuming and costly.” Id. at 3:20–31.
`
`32.
`
`Additionally, for example, the patent further explains that, “for security reasons,”
`
`gaming machines were not generally allowed to communicate outside of the gaming establishment
`
`absent a dedicated network and that such a dedicated network “was not cost effective.” Id. at 3:40–
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 16 of 65
`
`
`
`
`67. Such impediments to developing a “dedicated network” prevented “the gaming industry
`
`[from] download[ing] gaming software from one or more remote locations to a gaming machine.”
`
`Id. at 4:1–3. The ability to download gaming software, however, was “desirable because it may
`
`enable gaming machines to be quickly reconfigured to account for changes in popularity of various
`
`games played on the gaming machines and it may simplify software maintenance issues on the
`
`gaming machine such as gaming software updates.” Id. at 4:3–14. But typically such software
`
`downloads were only manually made outside of the dedicated network “for security reasons,” for
`
`example, “to prevent the source code from being obtained by individuals which might use the
`
`source code to try to find ways of cheating the gaming machine.” Id. at 4:11–18.
`
`33.
`
`The claims address, among other things, such technical problems in prior gaming
`
`systems by providing specifically implemented technical solutions. For example, claim 84 recites
`
`a specific method to solve the described technological problems:
`
`84. In a first gaming device, a method of transferring gaming software to a
`second gaming device, said method comprising:
`
`receiving a gaming software transaction request from the second gaming
`device;
`
`sending the gaming software transaction request to a gaming software
`authorization agent that approves or rejects the transfer of gaming
`software;
`
`receiving an authorization message from the gaming software authorization
`agent wherein the authorization message includes information
`indicating whether the first gaming device is authorized to transfer
`the gaming software to the second gamma device; and
`
`transferring the gaming software to the second gaming device;
`
`wherein the gaming software is for at least one of a) a game of chance
`played on a gaming machine, b) a bonus game of chance played on
`a gaming machine, c) a device driver for a for a device installed on
`a gaming machine, d) a player tracking service on a gaming machine
`and e) an operating system installed on a gaming machine.
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00331-ADA Document 70 Filed 04/26/22 Page 17 of 65
`
`
`
`
`’089 Patent at 47:53–48:7. More specifically, the claims improve system security over prior
`
`electronic systems by reciting “transferring gaming software” from a first gaming device to a
`
`second device, including steps such as receiving a “gaming software transaction request” from the
`
`second device that is sent to a “gaming software author