DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/13/2026 has been entered.
3. Claims 31-63 are currently pending and are rejected for the reasons set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
4. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
5. Claims 31-63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more.
6. Analysis:
Step 1: Statutory Category?: (is the claim(s) directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?) - YES: In the instant case, claims 48-63 are directed to a method (i.e., process), claims 31-47 are directed to an electronic trading system (i.e., machine).
Regarding independent claim 31:
Step 2A - Prong 1: Judicial Exception Recited?: (is the claim(s) recited a judicial exception (an abstract idea enumerated in the 2019 PEG, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon) – YES: Independent claim 31 recites the at least following limitations of “… transmit a message …, ... electronically disposed within the ordering path and configured to produce a sequence-marked version of the message, the sequence-marked version including a sequence identifier, … to receive the message and sequence-marked version of the message …, … to (i) commence a matching function activity for an electronic trade responsive to receipt of the message …, and (ii) responsive to receipt of the sequence-marked version of the message via the ordering path, use the sequence identifier of the sequence marked version to prioritize completion of the matching function activity toward servicing the electronic trade.” These recited limitations of the claim, as drafted, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas as they cover performance of the limitations in commercial interactions (including performing electronic trading by completing a matching function activity for an electronic trade response to a receipt of a message via an activation link). Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A - Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application?: (is the claim(s) recited additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception) - NO: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, independent claim 31 further to the abstract idea includes additional elements of “a gateway”, “a core compute node,” “an activation link”, “an ordering path”, “a sequencer”, and “the activation link including a single direct connection, the ordering path including multiple direct connections”. However, the additional elements recite generic computer components such as a computer, computing devices, a server, and/or software programing that are recited a high-level of generality that merely perform, conduct, carry out, implement, and/or narrow the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, the additional elements evaluated individually and in combination do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they comprise or include limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application such as adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea -- See MPEP 2106.05(f). The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Claim provides an Inventive Concept?: (is the claim(s) recited additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (aka “significantly more”) than the recited judicial exception) - NO: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of “a gateway”, “a core compute node,” “an activation link”, “an ordering path”, “a sequencer”, and “the activation link including a single direct connection, the ordering path including multiple direct connections” evaluated individually and in combination do not amount to more than a recitation of the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) or are not more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer, or are not more than merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more - See MPEP 2106.05(f)(2). None of the additional elements taken individually or when taken as an ordered combination amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claim is patent-ineligible.
Regarding independent claim 48:
Step 2A - Prong 1: Judicial Exception Recited?: (is the claim(s) recited a judicial exception (an abstract idea enumerated in the 2019 PEG, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon) – YES: Independent claim 48 recites the at least following limitations of “… transmitting, …, a message …, … electronically disposed within the ordering path; receiving, …, the message and a sequence-marked version of the message from the …, the sequence-marked version including a sequence identifier; and …, (i) commencing a matching function activity for an electronic trade responsive to receipt of the message …, and (ii) responsive to receipt of the sequence-marked version of the message…, using the sequence identifier to prioritize completion of the matching function activity toward servicing the electronic trade.” These recited limitations of the claim, as drafted, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas as they cover performance of the limitations in commercial interactions (including performing electronic trading by completing a matching function activity for an electronic trade response to a receipt of a message via an activation link). Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A - Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application?: (is the claim(s) recited additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception) - NO: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, independent claim 48 further to the abstract idea includes additional elements of “a gateway”, “a core compute node,” “an activation link”, “an ordering path”, “a sequencer”, and “the activation link including a single direct connection, the ordering path including multiple direct connections”. However, the additional elements recite generic computer components such as a computer, computing devices, a server, and/or software programing that are recited a high-level of generality that merely perform, conduct, carry out, implement, and/or narrow the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, the additional elements evaluated individually and in combination do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they comprise or include limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application such as adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea -- See MPEP 2106.05(f). The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Claim provides an Inventive Concept?: (is the claim(s) recited additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (aka “significantly more”) than the recited judicial exception) - NO: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of “a gateway”, “a core compute node,” “an activation link”, “an ordering path”, “a sequencer”, and “the activation link including a single direct connection, the ordering path including multiple direct connections” evaluated individually and in combination do not amount to more than a recitation of the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) or are not more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer, or are not more than merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more - See MPEP 2106.05(f)(2). None of the additional elements taken individually or when taken as an ordered combination amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claim is patent-ineligible.
Dependent claims 32-47 and 49-63 have been given the full two-part analysis, analyzing the additional limitations both individually and in combination. The dependent claims, when analyzed individually and in combination, are also held to be patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Dependent claims 32 and 49: simply provide further definition to “the sequence identifier” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein the sequence identifier indicates a deterministic position of the message among a plurality of messages communicated via the activation link and received by the sequencer via the ordering path amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the sequencer).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 33 and 50: simply provide further definition to “the message and sequence- marked version” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein the message and sequence- marked version include common metadata, and further wherein the core compute node is further configured to correlate the message with the sequence-marked version based on the common metadata responsive to receipt of the sequence-marked version via the ordering path amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the core compute node).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 34 and 51: simply provide further definition to “the message and sequence- marked version” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein the message and sequence- marked version include identical user data, the user data associated with an electronic trade request do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 35 and 52: simply provide further definition to “the activation link” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein the activation link is a first direct connection, wherein the ordering path includes a second direct connection and a third direct connection, wherein the gateway is further configured to transmit the message via the second direct connection to the sequencer which is configured to, in turn, transmit the sequence-marked version to the core compute node via the third direct connection, wherein the message is a gateway message transmitted by the gateway in response to receipt of an incoming message received by the gateway from a participant device, wherein the sequencer is further configured to, in turn, transmit the sequence-marked version via the second direct connection to the gateway, the sequence-marked version received, in turn, by the gateway, wherein the sequence-marked version is a first sequence-marked message, and wherein the core compute node is further configured to: transmit a core compute node message via the first direct connection to the gateway in response to receiving the gateway message; and transmit the core compute node message via the third direct connection to the sequencer which is further configured to, in turn, transmit a second sequence-marked message via the second direct connection to the gateway, the second sequence-marked message being a sequenced version of the core compute node message, the gateway further configured to: determine relative ordering of the second sequence-marked message and sequence-marked versions of other messages sent from the core compute node to the gateway; and transmit an outgoing message to the participant device, the outgoing message transmitted in accordance with the relative ordering determined, wherein the sequencer is further configured to, in turn, transmit the second sequence-marked message via the third direct connection to the core compute node amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the activation link).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 36 and 53: simply provide further definition to “the gateway” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein the gateway is a given gateway among a plurality of gateways, wherein the core compute node is a given core compute node among a plurality of core compute nodes, wherein the activation link is a first direct connection, wherein the ordering path includes a second direct connection and third direct connection, and wherein: each gateway of the plurality of gateways is coupled to each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes via respective first direct connections; the sequencer is coupled to each gateway of the plurality of gateways via respective second direct connections and coupled to each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes via respective third direct connections, the plurality of gateways, plurality of core compute nodes, sequencer, and respective direct connections forming at least a portion of a point-to-point mesh system within which: each gateway of the plurality of gateways is configured to transmit a respective compute-node-destined message transmitted therefrom to all compute nodes of the plurality of core compute nodes and to the sequencer; each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes is configured to transmit a respective gateway-destined message transmitted therefrom to all gateways of the plurality of gateways and to the sequencer; and the sequencer is further configured to transmit, to the plurality of gateways and plurality of core compute nodes, a respective sequence-marked version of the respective compute-node-destined message or a respective sequenced-marked version of the respective gateway-destined message in response to receipt of the respective compute- node-destined message or the respective gateway-destined message, respectively amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the gateway).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 37 and 54: simply provide further definition to “the sequence identifier” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein: the sequencer is a given sequencer of a plurality of sequencers in the point-to- point mesh system; each gateway of the plurality of gateways is coupled to each sequencer of the plurality of sequencers via respective second direct connections; each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes is coupled to each sequencer of the plurality of sequencers via respective third direct connections; the given sequencer is a currently active sequencer servicing the point-to-point mesh system and each other sequencer of the plurality of sequencers are standby sequencers waiting to take over as the currently active sequencer; each sequencer of the plurality of sequencers is coupled to each other sequencer of the plurality of sequencers via a respective fourth direct connection; each gateway of the plurality of gateways is further configured to transmit a respective compute-node-destined message to the given sequencer of the plurality of sequencers; each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes are further configured to transmit a respective gateway-destined message to the given sequencer of the plurality of sequencers; and the given sequencer is further configured to transmit the sequence-marked version via each respective fourth direct connection to each other sequencer of the plurality of sequencers to enable the standby sequencers to be able to take over as the currently active sequencer in an event the currently active sequencer fails amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the sequencer).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 38 and 55: simply provide further definition to “the respective compute-node- destined message transmitted by the given gateway” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein the respective compute-node- destined message transmitted by the given gateway is a same message received by the plurality of core compute nodes, wherein the plurality of core compute nodes are configured to generate response messages in response to receipt of the same message, the response messages received at the given gateway from among the plurality of core compute nodes, and wherein the given gateway is further configured to: take action based on a given response message of the response messages generated in response to receipt of the same message, the given response message being first to arrive at the given gateway relative to other response messages generated in response to receipt of the same message; and ignore the other response messages that arrive after the given response message amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the respective compute-node- destined message).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 39 and 56: simply provide further definition to “a plurality of compute-node- destined messages” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein a plurality of compute-node- destined messages representing a same message are received from among the plurality of gateways at the given compute node, and wherein the given compute node is further configured to: take action based on a given compute-node-destined message of the plurality of compute-node destined messages, the given compute-node-destined message being first to arrive at the given compute node relative to other compute-node-destined messages of the plurality of compute-node-messages representing the same message; and ignore the other compute-node-destined messages that arrive after the given compute-node-destined message amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., a plurality of compute-node- destined messages).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 40 and 57: simply provide further definition to “an order book accessible by the core compute node” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that an order book accessible by the core compute node and wherein the core compute node is further configured to: match trade orders related to the financial instrument using an electronic trading matching function; and maintain a residual position of the financial instrument on the order book, wherein an unmatched amount of the financial instrument results from performing the electronic trading matching function, and wherein the residual position includes the unmatched amount of the financial instrument amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the sequencer).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 41 and 58: simply provide further definition to “a clock” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that a clock and wherein the gateway, core compute node, and sequencer, are synchronized based on the clock amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the gateway, core compute node, and sequencer).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 42 and 59: simply provide further definition to “the gateway” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein the gateway is further configured to: serve at least one participant device; and transmit the message to the sequencer and core compute node in response to receipt of an incoming message at the gateway, the incoming message sourced by the at least one participant device, and wherein the sequencer is further configured to produce the sequence-marked version by marking the message with a unique sequence identifier or by creating a representation of the message received, marking the representation with the unique sequence identifier, and transmitting the representation marked, the representation marked being the sequence-marked version amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the gateway).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 43 and 60: simply provide further definition to “the activation link” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein the activation link is a first direct connection, wherein the ordering path includes a second direct connect and a third direct connection, and wherein the electronic trading system further comprises at least one respective redundant direct connection for the first direct connect, second direct connection, and third direct connection, or a subset thereof amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the activation link).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 44 and 61: simply provide further definition to “the gateway” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein: the gateway is a given gateway of a plurality of gateways communicatively coupled to each other via a shared gateway network; the core compute node is a given core compute node of a plurality of core compute nodes communicatively coupled to each other via a shared core compute node network; and the sequencer is a given sequencer of a plurality of sequencers communicatively coupled to each other via a shared sequencer network or via respective direct connections amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the gateway).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 45 and 62: simply provide further definition to “a system state log” recited in dependent claims 44 and 61. Simply stating that a system state log, wherein the given sequencer is configured to transmit the system state log via the shared sequencer network to at least one other sequencer of the plurality of sequencers or store the system state log in a data store, the data store accessible to the plurality of sequencers via the shared sequencer network amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., a system state log).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 46 and 63: simply provide further definition to “the electronic trading system” recited in dependent claims 44 and 61. Simply stating that wherein the electronic trading system is an active electronic trading system and wherein at least one sequencer of the plurality of sequencers is communicatively coupled to a disaster recovery site, the disaster recovery site including a standby electronic trading system, the standby electronic trading system being a replica of the active electronic trading system and configured to allow electronic trading to continue in an event the active electronic trading system fails amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the sequencer).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claims 32 and 49: simply provide further definition to “the sequence identifier” recited in independent claims 31 and 48. Simply stating that wherein the sequence identifier indicates a deterministic position of the message among a plurality of messages communicated via the activation link and received by the sequencer via the ordering path amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the sequencer).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 47: simply provide further definition to “the activation link” recited in independent claim 31. Simply stating that wherein the activation link is a first direct connection, wherein the ordering path includes a second direct connection and a third direct connection, and wherein: the gateway, core compute node, sequencer, and first, second, and third direct connections form a first point-to-point mesh system; the electronic trading system is a first electronic trading system communicatively coupled to a proxy node, the proxy node further communicatively coupled to at least one participant device and a second electronic trading system, the second electronic trading system including a second point-to-point mesh system; and the proxy node is configured to transmit a message to the first and second electronic trading systems in response to receipt of an incoming message from the at least one participant device, the first and second electronic trading systems configured to generate respective responses to the message transmitted by the proxy node, the proxy node further configured to send a response to the at least one participant device in response to receipt of a first arriving response of the respective responses generated and received from the first or second electronic trading systems amounts to no more than merely applying generic computer components and/or software programing to implement the abstract idea on a computer (i.e., the sequencer).Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., the activation link) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
8. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
9. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
10. Claims 31-63 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VACCARO et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0026170), hereinafter, “VACCARO”, in view of HAHN et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0059031), hereinafter, “HAHN”.
Claim 31 –
VACCARO disclose:
an electronic trading system, comprising (VACCARO [0051], “Exchange 100 may also communicate with post-trade system(s) 120, such as, for example, clearing and settlement trading systems”, see also Figure 1):
a sequencer electronically disposed within the ordering path and configured to produce a sequence-marked version of the message, the sequence-marked version including a sequence identifier, the core compute node configured to receive the message and sequence-marked version of the message from the gateway and sequencer, respectively (VACCARO [0109], “the matcher 110 generates and sends an orders matched electronic data message via the command bus to the sequencer 106 indicating that a match has been found. The message may include the price at which the orders matched, the quantity of the match, the order IDs of the orders involved in the match, a flag that indicates if this was a “self-match,” along with other information the sequencer needs in order to disseminate the trade details to downstream clients (e.g., order port module, outgoing data feed, etc.).”, see also Figure 1),
the core compute node further configured to (i) commence a matching function activity for an electronic trade responsive to receipt of the message via the activation link, and (ii) responsive to receipt of the sequence-marked version of the message via the ordering path, use the sequence identifier of the sequence marked version to prioritize completion of the matching function activity toward servicing the electronic trade (VACCARO [0130], “data processing for electronic data messages is handled by different nodes of a distributed computer system. The distributed nature of the system allows certain processing to be offloaded to a matcher node that includes different lists for electronic data messages. This allows for new types of electronic data message processing to occur without slowing down the speed of sequencer node in the distributed system”, see also Figures 1-4)
VACCARO do not explicitly disclose:
[[a gateway coupled to a core compute node via an activation link and an ordering path, the gateway configured to transmit a message to the core compute node via the activation link and the ordering path, the activation link being a single direct connection between the gateway and the core compute node, the ordering path including multiple direct connections]]
HAHN disclose [[a gateway coupled to a core compute node via an activation link and an ordering path, the gateway configured to transmit a message to the core compute node via the activation link and the ordering path, the activation link being a single direct connection between the gateway and the core compute node, the ordering path including multiple direct connections]] (See at least HAHN [0624], “The Control/User-Plane Branch Indication information included in the Link Activation Request message is an optional indicator specifying that the alternative eNB receives the corresponding MCS from the serving eNB and transmits it to the UE as occasion demands in the case that the gateways (GWs) of the serving eNB and the alternative eNB transmitting the Link Activation Response message are identical”, see also Figure 24). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of VACCARO to include the Link Activation Request message as taught by HAHN, in order for a gateway to transmit a message via an activation link (see HAHN Paragraphs [0624], Figure 24).
Claim 32 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the sequence identifier indicates a deterministic position of the message among a plurality of messages communicated via the activation link and received by the sequencer via the ordering path (VACCARO [0063], “In response to receiving the message, the order port module 104 generates and transmits an acknowledgement message back to client system two 102 that indicates that the order submitted at 202 has been accepted by exchange 100. The acknowledgement message may also include other details of order Y (e.g., the order identifier assigned by the sequencer 110 at 208)”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 33 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the message and sequence- marked version include common metadata, and further wherein the core compute node is further configured to correlate the message with the sequence-marked version based on the common metadata responsive to receipt of the sequence-marked version via the ordering path (VACCARO [0063], “In response to receiving the message, the order port module 104 generates and transmits an acknowledgement message back to client system two 102 that indicates that the order submitted at 202 has been accepted by exchange 100. The acknowledgement message may also include other details of order Y (e.g., the order identifier assigned by the sequencer 110 at 208)”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 34 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the message and sequence- marked version include identical user data, the user data associated with an electronic trade request (VACCARO [0063], “In response to receiving the message, the order port module 104 generates and transmits an acknowledgement message back to client system two 102 that indicates that the order submitted at 202 has been accepted by exchange 100. The acknowledgement message may also include other details of order Y (e.g., the order identifier assigned by the sequencer 110 at 208)”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 35 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the activation link is a first direct connection, wherein the ordering path includes a second direct connection and a third direct connection, wherein the gateway is further configured to transmit the message via the second direct connection to the sequencer which is configured to, in turn, transmit the sequence-marked version to the core compute node via the third direct connection, wherein the message is a gateway message transmitted by the gateway in response to receipt of an incoming message received by the gateway from a participant device, wherein the sequencer is further configured to, in turn, transmit the sequence-marked version via the second direct connection to the gateway, the sequence-marked version received, in turn, by the gateway, wherein the sequence-marked version is a first sequence-marked message, and wherein the core compute node is further configured to: transmit a core compute node message via the first direct connection to the gateway in response to receiving the gateway message; and transmit the core compute node message via the third direct connection to the sequencer which is further configured to, in turn, transmit a second sequence-marked message via the second direct connection to the gateway, the second sequence-marked message being a sequenced version of the core compute node message, the gateway further configured to: determine relative ordering of the second sequence-marked message and sequence-marked versions of other messages sent from the core compute node to the gateway; and transmit an outgoing message to the participant device, the outgoing message transmitted in accordance with the relative ordering determined, wherein the sequencer is further configured to, in turn, transmit the second sequence-marked message via the third direct connection to the core compute node wherein the message and sequence- marked version include identical user data, the user data associated with an electronic trade request (VACCARO [0103], “the time aspect may be based on when the order was first activated on the pending list (e.g., when the timer was started) as opposed when the order was first accepted by the matcher 110. In other words, order A added to the pending list and marked as inactive will be placed behind (for purposes of priority in the matching process) order B, which was added to the pending list after order A, but as an active order”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 36 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the gateway is a given gateway among a plurality of gateways, wherein the core compute node is a given core compute node among a plurality of core compute nodes, wherein the activation link is a first direct connection, wherein the ordering path includes a second direct connection and third direct connection, and wherein: each gateway of the plurality of gateways is coupled to each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes via respective first direct connections; the sequencer is coupled to each gateway of the plurality of gateways via respective second direct connections and coupled to each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes via respective third direct connections, the plurality of gateways, plurality of core compute nodes, sequencer, and respective direct connections forming at least a portion of a point-to-point mesh system within which: each gateway of the plurality of gateways is configured to transmit a respective compute-node-destined message transmitted therefrom to all compute nodes of the plurality of core compute nodes and to the sequencer; each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes is configured to transmit a respective gateway-destined message transmitted therefrom to all gateways of the plurality of gateways and to the sequencer; and the sequencer is further configured to transmit, to the plurality of gateways and plurality of core compute nodes, a respective sequence-marked version of the respective compute-node-destined message or a respective sequenced-marked version of the respective gateway-destined message in response to receipt of the respective compute- node-destined message or the respective gateway-destined message, respectively (VACCARO [0103], “the time aspect may be based on when the order was first activated on the pending list (e.g., when the timer was started) as opposed when the order was first accepted by the matcher 110. In other words, order A added to the pending list and marked as inactive will be placed behind (for purposes of priority in the matching process) order B, which was added to the pending list after order A, but as an active order”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 37 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein: the sequencer is a given sequencer of a plurality of sequencers in the point-to- point mesh system; each gateway of the plurality of gateways is coupled to each sequencer of the plurality of sequencers via respective second direct connections; each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes is coupled to each sequencer of the plurality of sequencers via respective third direct connections; the given sequencer is a currently active sequencer servicing the point-to-point mesh system and each other sequencer of the plurality of sequencers are standby sequencers waiting to take over as the currently active sequencer; each sequencer of the plurality of sequencers is coupled to each other sequencer of the plurality of sequencers via a respective fourth direct connection; each gateway of the plurality of gateways is further configured to transmit a respective compute-node-destined message to the given sequencer of the plurality of sequencers; each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes are further configured to transmit a respective gateway-destined message to the given sequencer of the plurality of sequencers; and the given sequencer is further configured to transmit the sequence-marked version via each respective fourth direct connection to each other sequencer of the plurality of sequencers to enable the standby sequencers to be able to take over as the currently active sequencer in an event the currently active sequencer fails (VACCARO [0109], “the matcher 110 generates and sends an orders matched electronic data message via the command bus to the sequencer 106 indicating that a match has been found. The message may include the price at which the orders matched, the quantity of the match, the order IDs of the orders involved in the match, a flag that indicates if this was a “self-match,” along with other information the sequencer needs in order to disseminate the trade details to downstream clients (e.g., order port module, outgoing data feed, etc.).”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 38 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the respective compute-node- destined message transmitted by the given gateway is a same message received by the plurality of core compute nodes, wherein the plurality of core compute nodes are configured to generate response messages in response to receipt of the same message, the response messages received at the given gateway from among the plurality of core compute nodes, and wherein the given gateway is further configured to: take action based on a given response message of the response messages generated in response to receipt of the same message, the given response message being first to arrive at the given gateway relative to other response messages generated in response to receipt of the same message; and ignore the other response messages that arrive after the given response message (VACCARO [0130], “data processing for electronic data messages is handled by different nodes of a distributed computer system. The distributed nature of the system allows certain processing to be offloaded to a matcher node that includes different lists for electronic data messages. This allows for new types of electronic data message processing to occur without slowing down the speed of sequencer node in the distributed system”, see also Figures 1-4).
Claim 39 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein a plurality of compute-node- destined messages representing a same message are received from among the plurality of gateways at the given compute node, and wherein the given compute node is further configured to: take action based on a given compute-node-destined message of the plurality of compute-node destined messages, the given compute-node-destined message being first to arrive at the given compute node relative to other compute-node-destined messages of the plurality of compute-node-messages representing the same message; and ignore the other compute-node-destined messages that arrive after the given compute-node-destined message (VACCARO [0130], “data processing for electronic data messages is handled by different nodes of a distributed computer system. The distributed nature of the system allows certain processing to be offloaded to a matcher node that includes different lists for electronic data messages. This allows for new types of electronic data message processing to occur without slowing down the speed of sequencer node in the distributed system”, see also Figures 1-4).
Claim 40 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
further comprising an order book accessible by the core compute node and wherein the core compute node is further configured to: match trade orders related to the financial instrument using an electronic trading matching function; and maintain a residual position of the financial instrument on the order book, wherein an unmatched amount of the financial instrument results from performing the electronic trading matching function, and wherein the residual position includes the unmatched amount of the financial instrument (VACCARO [0066], “The comparison may include comparing a value, attribute, or property of the newly received order (e.g., the limit price) to a value, attribute, or other property (e.g., a best bid and/or offer value) that is associated with one or more other orders (e.g., resting orders) or an order book. The value, attribute, or property of the newly received order is generally a value that has been specified by the client, customer, or user that submitted the order”, see also Figures 1-4).
Claim 41 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
further comprising a clock and wherein the gateway, core compute node, and sequencer, are synchronized based on the clock (VACCARO [0069], “the matcher 110 may be configured to accept orders that do not include a limit price (e.g., the order will match at any midpoint price). In such instances, no comparison to the calculated midpoint (or other reference value) may be made. Instead, new orders without limit prices may be placed one the pending list and their associated timers started. Once their timers expire, then they will be added to the order book 112”, see also Figures 1-4).
Claim 42 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the gateway is further configured to: serve at least one participant device; and transmit the message to the sequencer and core compute node in response to receipt of an incoming message at the gateway, the incoming message sourced by the at least one participant device, and wherein the sequencer is further configured to produce the sequence-marked version by marking the message with a unique sequence identifier or by creating a representation of the message received, marking the representation with the unique sequence identifier, and transmitting the representation marked, the representation marked being the sequence-marked version (VACCARO [0103], “the time aspect may be based on when the order was first activated on the pending list (e.g., when the timer was started) as opposed when the order was first accepted by the matcher 110. In other words, order A added to the pending list and marked as inactive will be placed behind (for purposes of priority in the matching process) order B, which was added to the pending list after order A, but as an active order”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 43 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the activation link is a first direct connection, wherein the ordering path includes a second direct connect and a third direct connection, and wherein the electronic trading system further comprises at least one respective redundant direct connection for the first direct connect, second direct connection, and third direct connection, or a subset thereof (VACCARO [0103], “the time aspect may be based on when the order was first activated on the pending list (e.g., when the timer was started) as opposed when the order was first accepted by the matcher 110. In other words, order A added to the pending list and marked as inactive will be placed behind (for purposes of priority in the matching process) order B, which was added to the pending list after order A, but as an active order”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 44 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 31, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein: the gateway is a given gateway of a plurality of gateways communicatively coupled to each other via a shared gateway network; the core compute node is a given core compute node of a plurality of core compute nodes communicatively coupled to each other via a shared core compute node network; and the sequencer is a given sequencer of a plurality of sequencers communicatively coupled to each other via a shared sequencer network or via respective direct connections (VACCARO [0103], “the time aspect may be based on when the order was first activated on the pending list (e.g., when the timer was started) as opposed when the order was first accepted by the matcher 110. In other words, order A added to the pending list and marked as inactive will be placed behind (for purposes of priority in the matching process) order B, which was added to the pending list after order A, but as an active order”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 45 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 44, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
further comprising a system state log, wherein the given sequencer is configured to transmit the system state log via the shared sequencer network to at least one other sequencer of the plurality of sequencers or store the system state log in a data store, the data store accessible to the plurality of sequencers via the shared sequencer network (VACCARO [0069], “the matcher 110 may be configured to accept orders that do not include a limit price (e.g., the order will match at any midpoint price). In such instances, no comparison to the calculated midpoint (or other reference value) may be made. Instead, new orders without limit prices may be placed one the pending list and their associated timers started. Once their timers expire, then they will be added to the order book 112”, see also Figures 1-4).
Claim 46 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 44, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the electronic trading system is an active electronic trading system and wherein at least one sequencer of the plurality of sequencers is communicatively coupled to a disaster recovery site, the disaster recovery site including a standby electronic trading system, the standby electronic trading system being a replica of the active electronic trading system and configured to allow electronic trading to continue in an event the active electronic trading system fails (VACCARO [0109], “the matcher 110 generates and sends an orders matched electronic data message via the command bus to the sequencer 106 indicating that a match has been found. The message may include the price at which the orders matched, the quantity of the match, the order IDs of the orders involved in the match, a flag that indicates if this was a “self-match,” along with other information the sequencer needs in order to disseminate the trade details to downstream clients (e.g., order port module, outgoing data feed, etc.).”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 47 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the system of claim 44, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the activation link is a first direct connection, wherein the ordering path includes a second direct connection and a third direct connection, and wherein: the gateway, core compute node, sequencer, and first, second, and third direct connections form a first point-to-point mesh system; the electronic trading system is a first electronic trading system communicatively coupled to a proxy node, the proxy node further communicatively coupled to at least one participant device and a second electronic trading system, the second electronic trading system including a second point-to-point mesh system; and the proxy node is configured to transmit a message to the first and second electronic trading systems in response to receipt of an incoming message from the at least one participant device, the first and second electronic trading systems configured to generate respective responses to the message transmitted by the proxy node, the proxy node further configured to send a response to the at least one participant device in response to receipt of a first arriving response of the respective responses generated and received from the first or second electronic trading systems (VACCARO [0109], “the matcher 110 generates and sends an orders matched electronic data message via the command bus to the sequencer 106 indicating that a match has been found. The message may include the price at which the orders matched, the quantity of the match, the order IDs of the orders involved in the match, a flag that indicates if this was a “self-match,” along with other information the sequencer needs in order to disseminate the trade details to downstream clients (e.g., order port module, outgoing data feed, etc.).”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 48 –
VACCARO disclose:
a method for performing electronic trading, the method comprising (VACCARO [0051], “Exchange 100 may also communicate with post-trade system(s) 120, such as, for example, clearing and settlement trading systems”, see also Figure 1):
receiving, at the core compute node, the message and a sequence-marked version of the message from the gateway and sequencer, respectively, the sequence-marked version including a sequence identifier (VACCARO [0109], “the matcher 110 generates and sends an orders matched electronic data message via the command bus to the sequencer 106 indicating that a match has been found. The message may include the price at which the orders matched, the quantity of the match, the order IDs of the orders involved in the match, a flag that indicates if this was a “self-match,” along with other information the sequencer needs in order to disseminate the trade details to downstream clients (e.g., order port module, outgoing data feed, etc.).”, see also Figure 1); and
at the core compute node, (i) commencing a matching function activity for an electronic trade responsive to receipt of the message via the activation link, and (ii) responsive to receipt of the sequence-marked version of the message via the ordering path, using the sequence identifier to prioritize completion of the matching function activity toward servicing the electronic trade (VACCARO [0130], “data processing for electronic data messages is handled by different nodes of a distributed computer system. The distributed nature of the system allows certain processing to be offloaded to a matcher node that includes different lists for electronic data messages. This allows for new types of electronic data message processing to occur without slowing down the speed of sequencer node in the distributed system”, see also Figures 1-4)
VACCARO do not explicitly disclose:
[[transmitting, from a gateway, a message to a core compute node via an activation link and an ordering path, a sequencer electronically disposed within the ordering path, the activation link being a single direct connection between the gateway and the core compute node, the ordering path including multiple direct]]
HAHN disclose [[transmitting, from a gateway, a message to a core compute node via an activation link and an ordering path, a sequencer electronically disposed within the ordering path, the activation link being a single direct connection between the gateway and the core compute node, the ordering path including multiple direct]] (See at least HAHN [0624], “The Control/User-Plane Branch Indication information included in the Link Activation Request message is an optional indicator specifying that the alternative eNB receives the corresponding MCS from the serving eNB and transmits it to the UE as occasion demands in the case that the gateways (GWs) of the serving eNB and the alternative eNB transmitting the Link Activation Response message are identical”, see also Figure 24). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of VACCARO to include the Link Activation Request message as taught by HAHN, in order for a gateway to transmit a message via an activation link (see HAHN Paragraphs [0624], Figure 24).
Claim 49 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the sequence identifier indicates a deterministic position of the message among a plurality of messages communicated via the activation link and received by the sequencer via the ordering path (VACCARO [0063], “In response to receiving the message, the order port module 104 generates and transmits an acknowledgement message back to client system two 102 that indicates that the order submitted at 202 has been accepted by exchange 100. The acknowledgement message may also include other details of order Y (e.g., the order identifier assigned by the sequencer 110 at 208)”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 50 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the message and sequence-marked version include common metadata and wherein the method further comprises correlating, at the core compute node, the message with the sequence-marked version based on the common metadata responsive to receipt of the sequence-marked version via the ordering path (VACCARO [0063], “In response to receiving the message, the order port module 104 generates and transmits an acknowledgement message back to client system two 102 that indicates that the order submitted at 202 has been accepted by exchange 100. The acknowledgement message may also include other details of order Y (e.g., the order identifier assigned by the sequencer 110 at 208)”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 51 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the message and the sequence-marked message include identical user data, the user data associated with an electronic trade request (VACCARO [0063], “In response to receiving the message, the order port module 104 generates and transmits an acknowledgement message back to client system two 102 that indicates that the order submitted at 202 has been accepted by exchange 100. The acknowledgement message may also include other details of order Y (e.g., the order identifier assigned by the sequencer 110 at 208)”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 52 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the message is a gateway message, wherein the method further comprises receiving an incoming message from a participant device at the gateway, wherein transmitting the gateway message includes transmitting the gateway message by the gateway in response to receipt of the incoming message by the gateway from the participant device, wherein the sequence-marked version is a first sequence- marked message, wherein the activation link is a first direction connection, wherein the ordering path includes a second direct connection and a third direct connection, and wherein the method further comprises: transmitting the first sequence-marked message via the second direct connection from the sequencer to the gateway, the first sequence-marked message received, in turn, by the gateway; transmitting a core compute node message via the first direct connection from the core compute node to the gateway in response to receipt of the message; transmitting the core compute node message via the third direct connection to the sequencer and, in turn, transmitting a second sequence-marked message via the second direct connection from the sequencer to the gateway, the second sequence-marked message being a sequenced version of the core compute node message; determining, at the gateway, relative ordering of the second sequence-marked message and sequence-marked versions of other messages sent from the core compute node to the gateway; transmitting an outgoing message to the participant device, the outgoing message transmitted in accordance with the relative ordering determined; and transmitting the second sequence-marked message via the third direct connection from the sequencer to the core compute node (VACCARO [0103], “the time aspect may be based on when the order was first activated on the pending list (e.g., when the timer was started) as opposed when the order was first accepted by the matcher 110. In other words, order A added to the pending list and marked as inactive will be placed behind (for purposes of priority in the matching process) order B, which was added to the pending list after order A, but as an active order”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 53 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the gateway is a given gateway of a plurality of gateways, wherein the core compute node is a given core compute node of a plurality of core compute nodes, and wherein the method further comprises: transmitting a respective compute-node-destined message transmitted from each gateway of the plurality of gateways to all core compute nodes of the plurality of core compute nodes and to the sequencer; transmitting a respective gateway-destined message transmitted from each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes to all gateways of the plurality of gateways and to the sequencer; and transmitting, from the sequencer to the plurality of gateways and plurality of core compute nodes, a respective sequence-marked version of the respective compute-node- destined message or a respective sequence marked version of the gateway-destined message in response to receipt of the respective compute-node-destined message or gateway-destined message, respectively (VACCARO [0103], “the time aspect may be based on when the order was first activated on the pending list (e.g., when the timer was started) as opposed when the order was first accepted by the matcher 110. In other words, order A added to the pending list and marked as inactive will be placed behind (for purposes of priority in the matching process) order B, which was added to the pending list after order A, but as an active order”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 54 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the sequencer is a given sequencer among a plurality of sequencers and wherein the method further comprises: transmitting a respective compute-node-destined message transmitted from each gateway of the plurality of gateways to the given sequencer; transmitting the respective gateway-destined message transmitted from each core compute node of the plurality of core compute nodes to the given sequencer; and transmitting the sequence-marked version from the given sequencer to each other sequencer of the plurality of sequencers (VACCARO [0109], “the matcher 110 generates and sends an orders matched electronic data message via the command bus to the sequencer 106 indicating that a match has been found. The message may include the price at which the orders matched, the quantity of the match, the order IDs of the orders involved in the match, a flag that indicates if this was a “self-match,” along with other information the sequencer needs in order to disseminate the trade details to downstream clients (e.g., order port module, outgoing data feed, etc.).”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 55 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
further comprising: receiving a same message at the plurality of core compute nodes, the same message being the respective compute-node-destined message transmitted by the given gateway; generating response messages at the plurality of core compute nodes in response to receipt of the same message; receiving the response messages, at the given gateway, from among the plurality of core compute nodes; performing an action at the given gateway based on a given response message of the response messages generated in response to receipt of the same message, the given response message being first to arrive at the given gateway relative to other response messages of the response messages generated in response to receipt of the same message; and ignoring the other response messages that arrive at the given gateway after the given response message (VACCARO [0130], “data processing for electronic data messages is handled by different nodes of a distributed computer system. The distributed nature of the system allows certain processing to be offloaded to a matcher node that includes different lists for electronic data messages. This allows for new types of electronic data message processing to occur without slowing down the speed of sequencer node in the distributed system”, see also Figures 1-4).
Claim 56 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
further comprising: receiving a plurality of compute-node-destined messages, at the given compute node, from among the plurality of gateways, the plurality of compute-node-messages representing a same message; performing an action at the given compute node based on a given compute-node- destined message of the plurality of compute-node-destined messages, the given compute-node-destined message being first to arrive at the given compute node relative to other compute-node-destined messages of the plurality of compute-node-destined message representing the same message; and ignoring the other compute-node-destined messages that arrive at the given compute node after the given compute-node-destined message (VACCARO [0130], “data processing for electronic data messages is handled by different nodes of a distributed computer system. The distributed nature of the system allows certain processing to be offloaded to a matcher node that includes different lists for electronic data messages. This allows for new types of electronic data message processing to occur without slowing down the speed of sequencer node in the distributed system”, see also Figures 1-4).
Claim 57 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the matching function activity includes performing an electronic trading matching function and wherein the method further comprises: matching trade orders related to a financial instrument at the core compute node based on the electronic trading matching function performed; and maintaining a residual position of the financial instrument on an order book, the residual position being an unmatched amount of the financial instrument resulting from the electronic trading matching function performed (VACCARO [0066], “The comparison may include comparing a value, attribute, or property of the newly received order (e.g., the limit price) to a value, attribute, or other property (e.g., a best bid and/or offer value) that is associated with one or more other orders (e.g., resting orders) or an order book. The value, attribute, or property of the newly received order is generally a value that has been specified by the client, customer, or user that submitted the order”, see also Figures 1-4).
Claim 58 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
further comprising synchronizing the gateway, core compute node, and sequencer, based on a clock (VACCARO [0069], “the matcher 110 may be configured to accept orders that do not include a limit price (e.g., the order will match at any midpoint price). In such instances, no comparison to the calculated midpoint (or other reference value) may be made. Instead, new orders without limit prices may be placed one the pending list and their associated timers started. Once their timers expire, then they will be added to the order book 112”, see also Figures 1-4).
Claim 59 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the message is a gateway message and wherein the method further comprises: serving at least one participant device at the gateway; receiving an incoming message at the gateway; transmitting the gateway message to the sequencer and core compute node from the gateway in response to receipt of the incoming message at the gateway, the incoming message sourced by the at least one participant device; and producing the sequence-marked version by marking the message, or representation thereof, with a unique sequence identifier (VACCARO [0103], “the time aspect may be based on when the order was first activated on the pending list (e.g., when the timer was started) as opposed when the order was first accepted by the matcher 110. In other words, order A added to the pending list and marked as inactive will be placed behind (for purposes of priority in the matching process) order B, which was added to the pending list after order A, but as an active order”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 60 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the activation link is a first direct connection, wherein the ordering path includes a second direct connection and third direct connection, and wherein the method further comprises protecting the first direct connection, second direct connection, and third direct connection, or a subset thereof, via at least one respective redundant direct connection (VACCARO [0103], “the time aspect may be based on when the order was first activated on the pending list (e.g., when the timer was started) as opposed when the order was first accepted by the matcher 110. In other words, order A added to the pending list and marked as inactive will be placed behind (for purposes of priority in the matching process) order B, which was added to the pending list after order A, but as an active order”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 61 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 48, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the gateway is a given gateway of a plurality of gateways, wherein the core compute node is a given core compute node of a plurality of core compute nodes, wherein the sequencer is a given sequencer of a plurality of sequencers, and wherein the method further comprises: enabling the plurality of gateways to communicate via a shared gateway network; enabling the plurality of core compute nodes to communicate via a shared core compute node network; and enabling the plurality of sequencers to communicate via a shared sequencer network or via respective direct connections (VACCARO [0103], “the time aspect may be based on when the order was first activated on the pending list (e.g., when the timer was started) as opposed when the order was first accepted by the matcher 110. In other words, order A added to the pending list and marked as inactive will be placed behind (for purposes of priority in the matching process) order B, which was added to the pending list after order A, but as an active order”, see also Figure 1).
Claim 62 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 61, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
further comprising: transmitting a system log via the shared sequencer network from the given sequencer to at least one other sequencer of the plurality of sequencers or storing, by the given sequencer, the system state log in a data store, the data store accessible to the plurality of sequencers via the shared sequencer network (VACCARO [0069], “the matcher 110 may be configured to accept orders that do not include a limit price (e.g., the order will match at any midpoint price). In such instances, no comparison to the calculated midpoint (or other reference value) may be made. Instead, new orders without limit prices may be placed one the pending list and their associated timers started. Once their timers expire, then they will be added to the order book 112”, see also Figures 1-4).
Claim 63 –
VACCARO/HAHN disclose the method of claim 61, as shown above.
VACCARO further discloses:
wherein the electronic trading system is an active electronic trading system and wherein the method further comprises: enabling at least one sequencer of the plurality of sequencers to communicate with a disaster recovery site, the disaster recovery site including a standby electronic trading system, the standby electronic trading system being a replica of the active electronic trading system and configured to allow electronic trading to continue in an event the active electronic trading system fails (VACCARO [0109], “the matcher 110 generates and sends an orders matched electronic data message via the command bus to the sequencer 106 indicating that a match has been found. The message may include the price at which the orders matched, the quantity of the match, the order IDs of the orders involved in the match, a flag that indicates if this was a “self-match,” along with other information the sequencer needs in order to disseminate the trade details to downstream clients (e.g., order port module, outgoing data feed, etc.).”, see also Figure 1).
Response to Applicant’s Arguments
11. 35 U.S.C. §101 Rejections: Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims 31-63 that are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been considered but they are not persuasive because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Applicant’s Argument: From Applicant Arguments/Remarks, Applicants submit that claims 31-63 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being said to be directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more. Applicant respectfully disagrees. In McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games America Inc., the Federal Circuit found that claims are not directed to an abstract idea if they pertain to a specific method that improves an existing technological process (McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games America Inc., 837 F.3d 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2016), at *23, *24 and *25). Therefore, a claim is not directed to an abstract idea when it recites specific rules that, when incorporated into a technological process, improve that technological process … Applicant's independent Claim 31, as currently amended, recites a specific set of rules that improves a technological process (i.e., high-speed electronic trading). Without limitation, such set of rules advantageously reduces latency. In a latency sensitive application, such as electronic trading, a difference in latency of even microseconds is highly significant. Applicant's latency improvements allow some embodiments of an electronic trading system to respond reliably in accordance with a desired response time latency of 5.0 to 7.0 microseconds … Applicant's claimed approach advantageously provides for such improved latency and requires: a gateway coupled to a core compute node via an activation link and an ordering path, the gateway configured to transmit a message to the core compute node via the activation link and the ordering path, … Applicant's independent Claim 31, as currently amended, recites specific rules that improve a technological process and, as a result, are not directed to an abstract idea. At least in light of the above, Applicant's independent Claim 31, as currently amended, is directed to statutory subject matter. Applicant's independent Claim 48, as currently amended, includes similar elements as independent Claim 31, as currently amended, and is directed to statutory subject matter for at least the same reasons submitted above with regard to independent Claim 31, as currently amended. Claims 32-47 and Claims 49-63 depend from independent Claims 1 and 48, respectively, include the same elements as the claim(s) from which they depend, and are directed to statutory subject matter for similar reasons as set forth above with regard to Applicant's independent Claims 1 and 48, as currently amended. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests the rejections of Claims 31-63 under 35 U.S.C. 101 be withdrawn (See Applicant Arguments/Remarks Pages 2-3).
In response to Applicant’s arguments, Examiner respectfully submits that unlike the claims in McRO, amended independent claims 31 and 48 at issue further to the abstract idea include additional elements of “a gateway”, “a core compute node,” “an activation link”, “an ordering path”, “a sequencer”, and “the activation link including a single direct connection, the ordering path including multiple direct connections”. However, the additional elements recite generic computer components such as a computer, computing devices, a server, and/or software programing that are recited a high-level of generality that merely perform, conduct, carry out, implement, and/or narrow the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, the additional elements evaluated individually and in combination do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they comprise or include limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application such as adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea -- See MPEP 2106.05(f). Claims 32-47 and Claims 49-63 depend from independent Claims 1 and 48, respectively, include the same elements as the claim(s) from which they depend, and are not rejected under 35 101 rejections for similar reasons as set forth above with regard to independent claims 1 and 48. See details of Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 in the section above.
12. 35 U.S.C. §102 Rejections: Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims 31-63 that are rejected 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by VACCARO et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0026170), hereinafter, “VACCARO”, have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection (See Applicant Arguments/Remarks Pages 4-8).
Examiner notes that the new prior art HAHN teach the amended claim limitations of independent claims 31 and 48 “a gateway coupled to a core compute node via an activation link and an ordering path, the gateway configured to transmit a message to the core compute node via the activation link and the ordering path, the activation link being a single direct connection between the gateway and the core compute node, the ordering path including multiple direct connections as in (See at least HAHN [0624], “The Control/User-Plane Branch Indication information included in the Link Activation Request message is an optional indicator specifying that the alternative eNB receives the corresponding MCS from the serving eNB and transmits it to the UE as occasion demands in the case that the gateways (GWs) of the serving eNB and the alternative eNB transmitting the Link Activation Response message are identical”, see also Figure 24). See details of Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 of claims 31-63 in the section above
Relevant Prior Art
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Rashid et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0096732) teach systems and methods for measuring and reducing latency of radio link flows.
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Liz Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-5414. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 8:00 A.M to 5:00 P.M.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Gart, can be reached on (571) 272-3955. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Center system (visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (USA or CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/LIZ P NGUYEN/
Examiner, Art Unit 3696
/MATTHEW S GART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3696
Prosecution Insights