Appeal No. 2004-0094
Application No. 09/181,658
make reference to the appeal brief3 and the examiner’s answer for the respective
details thereof.
Opinion
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on appeal the
examiner’s rejection and the arguments of the appellants and the examiner, for the
reasons stated infra we will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 4 through
6, 9 through 57 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
We first consider the examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 4, 9 through 16, 19
through 22, 32 through 35, 38 through 41 and 50 through 57. The examiner sets forth
this rejection on pages 4 through 14 of the examiner’s answer. The examiner states on
pages 13 and 14 of the answer:
Saville does not explicitly disclose acquiring ownership of receivables
represented by the account data by the service provider under contractual
arrangements with the plurality of billers upon receipt of the account data.
Official Notice is taken that it is old and well known within the financial services
industry wherein a financial institution buys debts, such as bills, from other
organizations. This is common in the mortgage market between the first and
secondary markets. This is also used by companies who need cash and sell
their account receivables (debts) to a financial institution or collection agency.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at
the time the invention was made to acquire ownership of receivables. One
would be motivated to acquire ownership of receivables in order to increase the
flexibility of the financial solutions and to integrate all the steps of the billing
process with the reception and control of the customer payments.
3 This decision is based upon the appeal brief filed by appellants on April 4, 2003.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007