Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

In re Marco Guldenaar Holding B.V.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

December 28, 2018, Decided



 [***1009]  [*1158]   Chen, Circuit Judge.

Marco Guldenaar Holding B.V. (Appellant) appeals the final decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) affirming the rejection of claims 1-3, 5, 7-14, 16-18, and 23-30 of U.S. Patent Application No. 13/078,196 (the '196 patent application) under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for claiming patent-ineligible subject matter. Because the claims are directed to the abstract idea of rules for playing a dice game and the only arguable inventive concept relates to  [*1159]  the dice markings, which constitute printed matter, we affirm.


Appellant filed the provisional application from which the '196 patent application claims priority [**2]  on April 2, 2010. The '196 patent application, entitled "Casino Game and a Set of Six-Face Cubic Colored Dice," relates to "dice games intended to be played in gambling casinos, in which a participant attempts to achieve a particular winning combination of subsets of the dice." Joint App. (J.A.) 140. Claim 1, which the Board treated as representative, recites:

1. A method of playing a dice game comprising:

providing a set of dice, the set of dice comprising a first die, a second die, and a third die, wherein only a single face of the first die has a first die marking, wherein only two faces of the second die have an identical second die marking, and wherein only three faces of the third die have an identical third die marking;

placing at least one wager on at least one of the following: that the first die marking on the first die will appear face up, that the second die marking on the second die will appear face up, that the third die marking  [***1010]  on the third die will appear face up, or any combination thereof;

rolling the set of dice; and paying a payout amount if the at least one wager occurs.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

911 F.3d 1157 *; 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 36645 **; 129 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1008 ***


Prior History:  [**1] Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 13/078,196.

Disposition: AFFIRMED.


patent, abstract idea, eligibility, marking, inventive, dice, subject matter, recited, wagering, dice game, conventional, playing, patent-eligible, steps, rejected claim, organizing, cards, question of law, prior art, specification, technological, human activity, printed matter, patent-ineligible, limitations, quotation, transform, faces, games

Patent Law, Jurisdiction & Review, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Subject Matter, Civil Procedure, Appeals, Appellate Briefs, Jurisdiction & Review