Appeal No. 2004-2085
Application 09/272,542
Harrington describes that the Issuer will "offer" to sell bonds
to underwriters who "bid" on the bonds to establish a yield
(Br15). It is argued that Harrington does not possess "orders"
because when the Issuer starts an auction by offering a bond, the
"offer" that starts the auction does not have any contra side
"offer" to buy (Br15). "That is, Harrington cannot use one of
the offers entered by an Issuer to match a contra-side offer of
that Issuer or another Issuer.... In Harrington, an auction of
one bond Issue cannot be matched off against that of another bond
issue on the contra (opposite) side of the market, since the
contra side of the offer does not exist." (Br15.)
The examiner states that appellants have not provided a
definition of "order" that would distinguish the limitation of
"entering an order" over Harrington (EA3). The examiner relies
on the dictionary definition of "order" as a "commission or
instruction to buy, sell or supply something," and concludes that
since Harrington is dedicated to selling financial products, the
auction defining process in Figs. 10 and 15 is an "entering an
order" step because it serves as a commission or instruction to
sell the financial product (EA3-4). The examiner finds that the
quantity, type of financial product, and exposure time are "all
parameters used by an auctioneer, issue, auction administrator...
etc. when preparing a financial product for sale" (EA4). The
examiner responds that appellants' argument that an "order" can
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007