Appeal No. 2004-2085
Application 09/272,542
obvious to apply features of Harrington to these prior art
auction types (EA9).
Appellants argue (Br21) that Harrington does not disclose
"pre-defined relative indications specifying a quantity and being
undisclosed to participants in the market until and unless
matched with an order." It is argued that the predefined
relative indications are indications of a willingness to trade
that resides in the system and remains dormant and unseen by
other participants and which is anonymous as to price, size
existence, and identity (Br21). When activated, a predefined
relative indication is priced relative to a standard reference
quote, e.g., the National Best Bid/Offer (NBBO). Appellants
argue that the "silent real-time" auctions, the "sealed-bid"
auction where bidders can make one secret bid, and the "silent
and blind" auction do not suggest a predefined relative
indication having the features that it resides in the system and
remains dormant and unseen by other participants, but when
activated, becomes a response that is priced relative to a
standard reference quote (Br22).
The examiner finds that appellants are trying to read the
limitation of "dormant" into the claim (EA20). The examiner
finds that the "bids" in Harrington correspond to the predefined
relative indications "as each bid is constructed relative to the
product to [sic] up for bid and competing bids" (EA20). The
- 20 -
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007