Appeal No. 2005-2643
Reexamination Control No. 90/005,842
Claims 15 and 25-287 stand rejected under § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Mukherjee in view of Musmanno and further in view of Weiner.
H. The Mukherjee and Musmanno references
Mukherjee describes the Finnish experience from 1950-69 with inflation-indexing
of bank deposit accounts (at 50-56), government- and industry-issued bonds (at 57-63),
social security, pensions, and insurance (at 63-66), bank loans (at 67-69), and
commercial and property contracts (at 70-73).
The Finnish banking system was divided into three groups: (a) commercial
savings; (b) cooperative; and (c) Post Office. Mukherjee at 50, 1st para. “As the
rapid inflation of 1950-1 was being checked by the stabilisation programme begun in
October 1951, the banks took the decision, in principle, to adjust both their loans and
deposits for inflation, on the basis of quarterly inspections of the cost-of-living index.”
Id. at 50, second para. While “[t]he initial idea had been to apply an extra charge to all
loans equal to half the rise in the index, and then to use the funds to compensate all
7 The rejected claims are incorrectly identified as “claims 15 and 25-25" in the
statement of the rejection given at page 20, ¶ 32, of the Final Action and as “claims 15
and 25-27" in the statement of the rejection given at page 18, ¶ 27 of the Answer.
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007