Appeal 2007-0394
Application 09/769,036
2) Whether Appellants have shown that the Examiner erred in rejecting
claims 8, 12, and 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Wagner,
Hawkins, and Harada.
3) Whether Appellants have shown that the Examiner erred in rejecting
claims 21, 22, 24, and 25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Hawkins
and Harada.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The relevant facts are:
1. Electronically transmitting proceeds, as is customarily understood in
the financial arts, refers to any one of a number of methods of transferring funds
from one entity to another where no cash or check is involved, for example, wire
transfers, and electronic funds transfers (EFTs). Generally, the process involves
the sending bank transmitting a secure message via a secure system, such as
SWIFT or Fedwire, to the receiving institution requesting that they effect payment
in accordance with the instructions given. The institutions involved generally must
either hold reciprocal accounts with each other, or utilize intermediary institutions
which hold such accounts. See for example, Comptroller of the Currency, Payment
Systems and Funds Transfer Activities, Narrative and Procedures, Comptroller’s
Handbook, pp. 1-4, March 19902.
2 http://www.occ.treas.gov/handbook/paymentsys1.pdf
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013