Appeal No. 2005-2643
Reexamination Control No. 90/005,842
which appears in claim 9 requires such a relationship. The sole effect on claim 9 of the
above-discussed definition given at column 3, lines 11-14 is that the phrase “rate of
inflation” is being construed to mean “rate of prior actual inflation.”
Reading claim 9 onto inflation-adjusted accounts like those disclosed in
Mukherjee as implemented in view of Musmanno on a data processor, the steps of
“providing a deposit account by the institution for receiving said funds from said
depositor” and “paying said depositor a rate of return on funds relived [sic] based on a
rate of inflation” read on Mukherjee’s ‘A’ and ‘B’ deposit accounts as well as on the
initially proposed accounts.
The examiner reads the steps of “allocating at least a portion of said funds for
obtaining an asset whose rate of return adjusts with inflation” and “using said allocated
funds to obtain an asset . . . comprising a financial instrument having an obligated rate
of return indexed to a rate of inflation” on Mukherjee‘s discussion (at 61-62) of bonds
issued by mortgage banks and industry. Final Action at 10, ¶ 16. These bonds were
tied to the wholesale price index or its subindex or the export price index. Mukherjee at
61. Mukherjee explains that “[b]anks and cooperative credit societies needed the
income from index bonds to help pay compensation on indexed deposit accounts.” Id.
at 59, 1st full para. While Mukherjee does not state that the money used by a bank to
purchase the indexed bonds came from the bank’s indexed deposit accounts, such a
financing arrangement would have been obvious in view of the disclosed relationship
31
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007