DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/30/2025 has been entered.
Acknowledgment
The Applicant’s arguments and remarks dated 06/30/2025 are acknowledged.
Status of Claims
Claims 2-5, 7-10, 14-15 5-6, 10 and 14-17 are amended.
Claim 1 is cancelled.
Claims 2-18 are presented to be examined upon their merits.
Examiner’s Comments
Non-Functional Descriptive Material
MPEP 2111.05 I-III
Claim 1 recites, “receiving, …a first message indicating a first order that defines a first side of a proposed trade for a financial instrument…; receiving,…a plurality of second messages indicating second orders in which each of the plurality of second orders defines, at least in part a second side of the proposed trade for the financial instrument…”
“where a claim limitation is directed to conveying a message or meaning to a human reader independent of intended computer system, and/or the non-transitory computer readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. Therefore, as above limitations are directed to further describing stored data (e.g., conveying meaning to a human reader) and do not create a functional relationship between the data and the memory on which it is stored, the limitations will not differentiate the claims from the prior art.” See In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ 2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments with respect to claim(s) 2-18 have been considered. The rejections are maintained. Waelbroeck recites, a method of receiving, via a communication network,(item# 30) a first message indicating a first order, that defines a first side of a proposed trade (order/message) for a first instrument. (column 3, lines 27-30),(see column 8, lines 38-40), (column 12, lines 18-31), (FIG. 17)(Item# 1710), receiving, via the communication network, from one or more second originators a plurality of separate trading systems, second messages indicating second orders (contra-orders) in which each of the plurality of second orders defines, at least in part, a second side of the proposed trade for the financial instrument (Fig. 14)(item# 1440, 1460)(column 10, lines 43-49, column 39, lines 51-65), (Fig. 17)(Item# 1730), prioritizing the plurality of second orders (contra-orders) according to a prioritization scheme, (Fig.14)(item#145) (see column 39, lines 57-65), based, at least in part, on the prioritizing, selecting (order routed) one or more of the plurality of second orders to match the first order (FIG. 14)(item# 1460), and
executing the proposed trade for the financial instrument between the first order and the selected one or more of the plurality of second orders. (column 22, lines 31-41). It is specifically noted that Waelbroek discloses ranking or prioritizing secondary orders or contra-orders based upon certain criteria and/or conditions (see column 39, lines 51-65). It is also noted that Marynowski suggests prioritization of orders based upon various criteria (see Maryknowski, column 12, lines 31-52). It is maintained that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for Waelbroek to have implemented prioritization and/or ranking of orders, as employed and/or suggested in Maryknowski. The motivation would be to satisfy order and contra-order conditions of market participants (Fig. 8)(item#840)(column 26, lines 42-52), (column 30, lines 53-65), (Fig. 15)(item# 1540)(item#1550)(see Waelbroek, column 39, lines 51-65). Thus the rejection similarly is maintained below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2-18 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Waelbroeck et al (US 7,908,206) in view of Marynowski et al (US 9,846,910)
Waelbroeck recites, a method comprising:
receiving, via a communication network,(item# 30) a first message indicating a first order, that defines a first side of a proposed trade (order/message) for a first instrument. (column 3, lines 27-30),(see column 8, lines 38-40), (column 12, lines 18-31), (FIG. 17)(Item# 1710)
receiving, via the communication network, from one or more second originators a plurality of separate trading systems, second messages indicating second orders (contra-orders) in which each of the plurality of second orders defines, at least in part, a second side of the proposed trade for the financial instrument (Fig. 14)(item# 1440, 1460)(column 10, lines 43-49, column 39, lines 51-65), (Fig. 17)(Item# 1730)
prioritizing the plurality of second orders (contra-orders) according to a prioritization scheme, (Fig.14)(item#145) (see column 39, lines 57-65)
based, at least in part, on the prioritizing, selecting (order routed) one or more of the plurality of second orders to match the first order (FIG. 14)(item# 1460)
executing the proposed trade for the financial instrument between the first order and the selected one or more of the plurality of second orders. (column 22, lines 31-41).
Waelbroek discloses ranking or prioritizing secondary orders or contra-orders based upon certain criteria and/or conditions (see column 39, lines 51-65)
Waelbroek fails to disclose, “where the prioritization scheme gives a high priority to an element selected from: an older second originator, a longer-term second originator, a more active second originator, a larger second order, a smaller second order, a second order closer in size to the first order, a loyalty of a second originator, firm second orders, second orders found by querying a second originator, a newest second order, a highest ranked second originator, a second originator willing to pay a fee, or a premium second originator”.
Marynowski suggests prioritization of orders based upon various criteria (see Maryknowski, column 12, lines 31-52).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for Waelbroek to have integrated and implemented prioritization and/or ranking of orders, as employed and/or suggested in Maryknowski (see Maryknowski, column 12, lines 31-52) . The motivation would be to satisfy order and contra-order conditions of market participants (Fig. 8)(item#840)(column 26, lines 42-52), (column 30, lines 53-65), (Fig. 15)(item# 1540)(item#1550)(see Waelbroek, column 39, lines 51-65)
9. Claims 3-18 are also rejected as further defining electronic trading.
Conclusion
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL S FELTEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6742. The examiner can normally be reached Flex.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Calvin L Hewitt can be reached on 5712726709. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
DANIEL S. FELTEN
Examiner
Art Unit 3692
/DANIEL S FELTEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3692