Ex Parte 5983207 et al - Page 11

                Appeal No. 2006-2083                                                                                                   
                Reexamination Control No. 90/006,352                                                                                   
                electronic coins to less than or equal to the amount of the inventory of valuable commodity.  As                       
                discussed above, the patentee has not rebutted the prima facie case made out by the examiner                           
                that the Treasury had sufficient silver in its inventory to cover the silver certificates.                             
                        Moreover, claims terms before the United States Patent and Trademark Office are                                
                properly construed according to their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the                           
                specification.  In re Yamamoto, 740 F.2d 1569, 1571, 222 USPQ 934, 936 (Fed. Cir. 1984); In re                         
                Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983).  In this case, “payment risk”                          
                in the context of the patentee’s specification is not so broad as to cover potential government                        
                policy that prohibits redemption of gold and silver certificates or the private ownership of gold                      
                and silver.  Even the patentee’s disclosed invention does not eliminate that kind of payment risk.                     
                        The examiner regarded the silver certificate as commodity-based paper cash freely                              
                transferable from person to person.  We agree.  The differences between it and the invention of                        
                patentee’s claim 1 are, as the examiner put it (Answer at 4, lines 13-14), the paper certificate as                    
                cash does not have the electronic elements of electronic cash.  We agree.  Insofar as the                              
                examiner did not expressly so state, official notice is taken that in 1923 some non-electronic                         
                means of maintaining records of the amount of silver held by the U.S Treasury existed.  The                            
                examiner relied on Ohta for its disclosure of an electronic cash payment system, albeit the                            
                electronic cash of Ohta is not commodity-based, i.e., backed by an inventory of valuable                               
                commodity.  We find nothing inappropriate in that reliance for applying Ohta’s teachings about                         
                electronic processing and communication to the silver certificate which is commodity-based                             
                cash, because whether cash is commodity-based and linked to an inventory of valuable                                   
                commodity at a secure facility has little, if anything, to do with the electronic processing and                       
                communication aspects of a system working with an electronic representation of that cash.                              



                                                                  11                                                                   


Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007