DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 the Application
Claims 1-21 have been examined in the application. This communication is the first action on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 10, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 2, 9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
• Claim 2 recites the limitation "wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio" in paragraph 2. The claim lacks written description support because there is no written description of this limitation in the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.03(I). In fact, there is no teaching of the following limitations anywhere in the disclosure: "wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio".
• Claim 9 recites the limitation "wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio" in paragraph 2. The claim lacks written description support because there is no written description of this limitation in the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.03(I). In fact, there is no teaching of the following limitations anywhere in the disclosure: "wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio".
• Claim 16 recites the limitation "wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio" in paragraph 2. The claim lacks written description support because there is no written description of this limitation in the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.03(I). In fact, there is no teaching of the following limitations anywhere in the disclosure: "wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio".
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
In the following Claim Rejections, the Office has omitted to reiterate the Applicant's use of italics, subscripting, and superscripting; however, the Applicant’s original features nonetheless still persist in the pending claims. Similarly in the following Claim Rejections for convenience, the mathematical formulas in Claims 4, Claim 11, and Claim 18 are referred to as “Equation 4a”, “Equation 4B”, and “Equation 4C”; and the mathematical formula in Claim 7, Claim 14, and Claim 21 is referred to as "Equation 7". Citations to the prior claims containing those formulas below are summarized by coarse translations to text of those mathematical formulae which are disclosed in the prior claims within the prior claims as indicated below.
1-st Double Patenting Category: Claims 1, 3-8, 10-15, and 17-21 are rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as being anticipated by claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,847,702 B2 to Boberski; David Andrew et al., (hereinafter "BOBERSKI-Claims") since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent. The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other for the following reasons.
Claim 1, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 1 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 1 is an independent claim. BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 1 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 1, a method comprising: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[a] method comprising:" Claim 1)
• 1 ¶ 2 • performing, automatically by a computer system when the data size of data corresponding to a portfolio comprising a plurality of interest rate swaps, each being characterized by a risk value, exceeds a defined data storage capacity of a non-transitory memory device in which the data is stored: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "accessing, in a non-transitory memory device by a computer system, data corresponding to a portfolio comprising a plurality of interest rate swaps, each being characterized by a risk value; comparing, by the computer system, a data size of the portfolio to a defined data storage capacity of the non-transitory memory device; performing, automatically by the computer system when the data size of the portfolio exceeds the defined data storage capacity:" Claim 1)
• 1 ¶ 3 • calculating, by the computer system, one or more replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to a sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "calculating, by the computer system, a compressed swap having a risk value equivalent to a sum of the risk values of each of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio;" Claim 1)
• 1 ¶ 4 • forming, by the computer system, replacement data corresponding to a replacement portfolio comprising the one or more replacement swaps in place of the subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio; and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "storing, by the computer system, second data comprising a compressed portfolio comprising the compressed swap by replacing the data comprising the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device with the second data to minimize a data storage requirement of the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device" Claims 1, 8, 15)
• 1 ¶ 5 • replacing, by the computer system, the data comprising the portfolio with the replacement data in the non-transitory memory device to reduce a data storage requirement of the portfolio therein. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "storing, by the computer system, second data comprising a compressed portfolio comprising the compressed swap by replacing the data comprising the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device with the second data to minimize a data storage requirement of the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device" Claims 1, 8, 15)
Claim 3, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 3 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 3 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 1, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 1, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 3 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 3, the method of claim 1, further comprising: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he method of claim 1, further comprising:" Claims 2, 6)
• 3 ¶ 2 • determining, by the computer system, a performance bond requirement attributable to the plurality of interest rate swaps; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining, by the computer system, a performance bond requirement attributable to the plurality of interest rate swaps;" Claim 2)
• 3 ¶ 3 • comparing, by the computer system, the performance bond requirement to account data associated with a holder of the portfolio; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "comparing, by the computer system, the performance bond requirement to account data associated with a holder of the portfolio;" Claim 2)
• 3 ¶ 4 • performing, by the computer system, one or more additional actions based on the comparing comprising at least one of (i) storing data regarding satisfaction of the performance bond requirement, and (ii) transmitting a communication regarding the performance bond requirement. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses L*013)
Claim 4, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 4 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 4 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 1, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 1, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 4 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 4, the method of claim 1, wherein Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he method of claim 1, wherein" Claims 3, 5)
• 4 ¶ 2 • calculating, for each of the one or more replacement swaps, a replacement swap fixed rate value xB, a replacement swap notional value NB, and a replacement swap floating rate spread value c according to Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "calculating, for the compressed swap, a compressed swap fixed rate value x.sub.B, a compressed swap notional value N.sub.B, and a compressed swap floating rate spread value c according to" Claims 3, 10, 17)
• 4 ¶ 3 • Equation 4A Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[Equation 4A]" Claims 3, 10, 17)
• 4 ¶ 4 • Equation 4B Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[Equation 4B]" Claims 3, 10, 17)
• 4 ¶ 5 • Equation 4C Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[Equation 4C]" Claims 3, 10, 17)
• 4 ¶ 6 • xj is a fixed rate value for the jth interest rate swap, wherein m is the number of interest rate swaps in the plurality of interest rate swaps, N is a notional value of the j'h interest rate swap, G is the number of floating rate payment periods in the common tenor, fg is a floating rate value corresponding to the g'h floating rate payment period, dfg is a floating rate discount factor corresponding to the g'h floating rate payment period, and dtg is a duration of the g'h floating rate payment period. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "x.sub.j is a fixed rate value for the j.sup.th interest rate swap, wherein m is the number of interest rate swaps in the portfolio of interest rate swaps, N.sub.j is a notional value of the j.sup.th interest rate swap, G is the number of floating rate payment periods in the common tenor, f.sub.g is a floating rate value corresponding to the g.sup.th floating rate payment period, df.sub.g is a floating rate discount factor corresponding to the g.sup.th floating rate payment period, and dt.sub.g is a duration of the g.sup.th floating rate payment period" Claims 3, 10, 17)
Claim 5, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 5 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 5 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 1, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 1, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 5 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 5, the method of claim 1, wherein Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he method of claim 1, wherein" Claims 3, 5)
• 5 ¶ 2 • a DVO1 value for the one or more replacement swaps is the same as a sum of DVO1 values for the plurality of interest rate swaps, and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "a DV01 value for the compressed swap is the same as a sum of DV01 values for the interest rate swaps, and" Claims 5, 12, 19)
• 5 ¶ 3 • a CVO1 value for the one or more replacement swaps is the same as a sum of CVO1 values for the plurality of interest rate swaps. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "a CV01 value for the compressed swap is the same as a sum of CV01 values for the interest rate swaps" Claims 5, 12, 19)
Claim 6, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 6 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 6 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 1, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 1, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 6 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 6, the method of claim 1, further comprising: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he method of claim 1, further comprising:" Claims 2, 6)
• 6 ¶ 2 • determining a performance bond requirement of the plurality of interest rate swaps based on first and second disaggregated swaps, Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining a performance bond requirement of the plurality of interest rate swaps based on first and second disaggregated swaps," Claims 6, 13)
• 6 ¶ 3 • the first disaggregated swap comprises a replacement swap fixed rate value xB, a first disaggregated swap notional value NB1, and a first disaggregated swap spread value ci, and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "the first disaggregated swap comprises a compressed swap fixed rate value x.sub.B, a first disaggregated swap notional value N.sub.B1, and a first disaggregated swap spread value c.sub.1, and" Claims 6, 13, 20)
• 6 ¶ 4 • the second disaggregated swap comprises the replacement swap fixed rate value xB, a second disaggregated swap notional value NB2, and a second disaggregated swap spread value c2, and further comprising: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "the second disaggregated swap comprises the compressed swap fixed rate value x.sub.B, a second disaggregated swap notional value N.sub.B2, and a second disaggregated swap spread value c.sub.2, and further comprising:" Claim 6)
• 6 ¶ 5 • determining a required precision for the floating rate spread value c; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining a required precision for the floating rate spread value c;" Claims 6, 13)
• 6 ¶ 6 • determining the required precision is greater than an available precision; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining the required precision is greater than an available precision;" Claims 6, 13)
• 6 ¶ 7 • based on the determining that the required precision is greater than an available precision, selecting a cl value greater than the c value and a c2 value less than the c value; and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "based on the determining that the required precision is greater than an available precision, selecting a c.sub.1 value greater than the c value and a c.sub.2 value less than the c value; and" Claim 6)
• 6 ¶ 8 • determining NBl and NB2 values such NBl(x)cl + NB2(x)c2=NB(x)C and such that NBl + NB2=NB. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining N.sub.B1 and N.sub.B2 values such N.sub.B1*c.sub.1+N.sub.B2*c.sub.2=N.sub.B*c and such that N.sub.B1+N.sub.B2=N.sub.B" Claims 6, 13, 20)
Claim 7, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 7 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 7 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 6, which is also a dependent claim, and thus the instant claim indirectly depends upon claim 1, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claims 6 and 1, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 7 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 7, the method of claim 6, wherein: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he method of claim 6, wherein:" Claim 7)
• 7 ¶ 2 • determining the required precision comprises determining the required precision according to Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining the required precision comprises determining the required precision according to" Claims 7, 14, 21)
• 7 ¶ 3 • Equation 7 Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[Equation 7]" Claims 7, 14, 21)
• 7 ¶ 4 • D is the required precision, E is a constant chosen to limit a difference between a present value of the one or more replacement swaps and combined present values of the plurality of interest rate swaps, m is the number of interest rate swaps in the plurality of interest rate swaps, xj is a fixed rate value for the jth interest rate swap, N is a notional value of the jth interest rate swap, G is the number of floating rate payment periods in the common tenor, fg is a floating rate value corresponding to the g' floating rate payment period, dfg is a floating rate discount factor corresponding to the g' floating rate payment period, and dtg is a duration of the g' floating rate payment period. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[d] is the required precision, E is a constant chosen to limit a difference between a present value of the compressed swap and combined present values of the plurality of interest rate swaps, m is the number of interest rate swaps in the portfolio of interest rate swaps, x.sub.j is a fixed rate value for the j.sup.th interest rate swap, N.sub.j is a notional value of the j.sup.th interest rate swap, G is the number of floating rate payment periods in the common tenor, f.sub.g is a floating rate value corresponding to the g.sup.th floating rate payment period, df.sub.g is a floating rate discount factor corresponding to the g.sup.th floating rate payment period, and dt.sub.g is a duration of the g.sup.th floating rate payment period" Claims 7, 14, 21)
Claim 8, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 8 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 8 is an independent claim. BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 8 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 8, a non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer executable instructions that, when executed, cause a computer system to perform operations that include: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[a] non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer executable instructions that, when executed, cause a computer system to perform operations that include:" Claim 8)
• 8 ¶ 2 • performing, automatically by a computer system when the data size of data corresponding to a portfolio comprising a plurality of interest rate swaps, each being characterized by a risk value, exceeds a defined data storage capacity of a non-transitory memory device in which the data is stored: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "accessing, in a non-transitory memory device by a computer system, data corresponding to a portfolio comprising a plurality of interest rate swaps, each being characterized by a risk value; comparing, by the computer system, a data size of the portfolio to a defined data storage capacity of the non-transitory memory device; performing, automatically by the computer system when the data size of the portfolio exceeds the defined data storage capacity:" Claim 1)
• 8 ¶ 3 • calculating, by the computer system, one or more replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to a sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "calculating, by the computer system, a compressed swap having a risk value equivalent to a sum of the risk values of each of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio;" Claim 1)
• 8 ¶ 4 • forming, by the computer system, replacement data corresponding to a replacement portfolio comprising the one or more replacement swaps in place of the subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio; and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "storing, by the computer system, second data comprising a compressed portfolio comprising the compressed swap by replacing the data comprising the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device with the second data to minimize a data storage requirement of the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device" Claims 1, 8, 15)
• 8 ¶ 5 • replacing, by the computer system, the data comprising the portfolio with the replacement data in the non-transitory memory device to reduce a data storage requirement of the portfolio therein. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "storing, by the computer system, second data comprising a compressed portfolio comprising the compressed swap by replacing the data comprising the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device with the second data to minimize a data storage requirement of the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device" Claims 1, 8, 15)
Claim 10, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 10 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 10 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 8, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 8, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 10 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 10, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein the computer executable instructions are further executable to cause the computer system to perform operations that include: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein the computer executable instructions are further executable to cause the computer system to perform operations that include:" Claims 9-10, 13)
• 10 ¶ 2 • determining, based at least in part on the combined risk value of the one or more replacement swaps, a performance bond requirement attributable to the plurality of interest rate swaps; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining, based at least in part on the compressed swap parameters, a performance bond requirement attributable to the interest rate swaps;" Claims 9, 16)
• 10 ¶ 3 • comparing the performance bond requirement to account data associated with a holder of the portfolio; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "comparing the performance bond requirement to account data associated with a holder of the portfolio;" Claims 9, 16)
• 10 ¶ 4 • performing one or more additional actions based on the comparing comprising at least one of (i) storing data regarding satisfaction of the performance bond requirement, and (ii) transmitting a communication regarding the performance bond requirement. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "performing one or more additional actions based on the comparing comprising at least one of (i) storing data regarding satisfaction of the performance bond requirement, and (ii) transmitting a communication regarding the performance bond requirement" Claims 9, 16)
Claim 11, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 11 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 11 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 8, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 8, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 11 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 11, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein the computer executable instructions are further executable to cause the computer system to perform operations that include: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein the computer executable instructions are further executable to cause the computer system to perform operations that include:" Claims 9-10, 13)
• 11 ¶ 2 • calculating, for each of the one or more replacement swaps, a replacement swap fixed rate value xB, a replacement swap notional value NB, and a replacement swap floating rate spread value c according to Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 4 Par. 2)
• 11 ¶ 3 • Equation 4A Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 4 Par. 3)
• 11 ¶ 4 • Equation 4B Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[Equation 4B]" Claims 3, 10, 17)
• 11 ¶ 5 • Equation 4C Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[Equation 4C]" Claims 3, 10, 17)
• 11 ¶ 6 • xj is a fixed rate value for the jth interest rate swap, wherein m is the number of interest rate swaps in the plurality of interest rate swaps, N is a notional value of the j'h interest rate swap, G is the number of floating rate payment periods in the common tenor, fg is a floating rate value corresponding to the g' floating rate payment period, dfg is a floating rate discount factor corresponding to the g' floating rate payment period, and dtg is a duration of the g' floating rate payment period. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 4 Par. 6)
Claim 12, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 12 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 12 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 8, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 8, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 12 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 12, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein" Claims 9-10, 12-13)
• 12 ¶ 2 • a DVO1 value for the one or more replacement swaps is the same as a sum of DVO1 values for the plurality interest rate swaps, and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 5 Par. 2)
• 12 ¶ 3 • a CVO1 value for the one or more replacement swaps is the same as a sum of CVO1 values for the plurality of interest rate swaps. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 5 Par. 3)
Claim 13, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 13 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 13 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 8, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 8, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 13 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 13, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein the computer executable instructions are further executable to cause the computer system to perform operations that include: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein the computer executable instructions are further executable to cause the computer system to perform operations that include:" Claims 9-10, 13)
• 13 ¶ 2 • determining a performance bond requirement of the plurality of interest rate swaps based on first and second disaggregated swaps, Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 6 Par. 2)
• 13 ¶ 3 • the first disaggregated swap comprises a replacement swap fixed rate value xB, a first disaggregated swap notional value NB1, and a first disaggregated swap spread value ci, and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 6 Par. 3)
• 13 ¶ 4 • the second disaggregated swap comprises the replacement swap fixed rate value xB, a second disaggregated swap notional value NB2, and a second disaggregated swap spread value c2, and further comprising stored computer executable instructions that, when executed, cause the computer system to perform operations that include: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "the second disaggregated swap comprises the compressed swap fixed rate value x.sub.B, a second disaggregated swap notional value N.sub.B2, and a second disaggregated swap spread value c.sub.2, and further comprising stored computer executable instructions that, when executed, cause the computer system to perform operations that include:" Claim 13)
• 13 ¶ 5 • determining a required precision for the floating rate spread value c; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 6 Par. 5)
• 13 ¶ 6 • determining the required precision is greater than an available precision; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 6 Par. 6)
• 13 ¶ 7 • based on the determining that the required precision is greater than an available precision, selecting a cl value greater than the c value and a c2 value less than the c value; and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 6 Par. 7)
• 13 ¶ 8 • determining NB1 and NB2 values such NB1(x)c1 + NB2(x)c2=NB(x)C and such that NB1 + NB2=NB. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining N.sub.B1 and N.sub.B2 values such N.sub.B1*c.sub.1+N.sub.B2*c.sub.2=N.sub.B*c and such that N.sub.B1+N.sub.B2=N.sub.B" Claims 6, 13, 20)
Claim 14, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 14 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 14 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 13, which is also a dependent claim, and thus the instant claim indirectly depends upon claim 8, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claims 13 and 8, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 14 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 14, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 13, wherein: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 13, wherein:" Claim 14)
• 14 ¶ 2 • determining the required precision comprises determining the required precision according to Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining the required precision comprises determining the required precision according to" Claims 7, 14, 21)
• 14 ¶ 3 • Equation 7 Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[Equation 7]" Claims 7, 14, 21)
• 14 ¶ 4 • D is the required precision, E is a constant chosen to limit a difference between a present value of the one or more replacement swaps and combined present values of the plurality of interest rate swaps, m is the number of interest rate swaps in the plurality of interest rate swaps, xj is a fixed rate value for the jth interest rate swap, N is a notional value of the jth interest rate swap, G is the number of floating rate payment periods in the common tenor, fg is a floating rate value corresponding to the g' floating rate payment period, dfg is a floating rate discount factor corresponding to the g' floating rate payment period, and dtg is a duration of the g' floating rate payment period. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 7 Par. 4)
Claim 15, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 15 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 15 is an independent claim. BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 15 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 15, a computer system comprising: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[a] computer system comprising:" Claim 15)
• 15 ¶ 2 • a memory device having a defined storage capacity; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "a memory device having a defined storage capacity;" Claim 15)
• 15 ¶ 3 • at least one processor coupled with the memory device; and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "at least one processor coupled with the memory device;" Claim 15)
• 15 ¶ 4 • at least one non-transitory memory coupled with the processor, wherein the at least one non-transitory memory stores instructions that, when executed, cause the processor to: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "at least one non-transitory memory coupled with the processor, wherein the at least one non-transitory memory stores instructions that, when executed, cause the processor to" Claim 15)
• 15 ¶ 5 • perform, automatically when the data size of data corresponding to a portfolio comprising a plurality of interest rate swaps, each being characterized by a risk value, exceeds a defined data storage capacity of a non-transitory memory device in which the data is stored: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "perform operations that include: accessing stored data in the non-transitory memory device corresponding to a portfolio comprising a plurality of interest rate swaps, each being characterized by a risk value; comparing, by the computer system, a data size of the portfolio to the defined data storage capacity and when the size of the portfolio exceeds the defined data storage capacity, performing, automatically by the computer system:" Claim 15)
• 15 ¶ 6 • calculate one or more replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to a sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "calculating a compressed swap having a risk value equivalent to a sum of the risk values of each of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio;" Claims 8, 15)
• 15 ¶ 7 • form replacement data corresponding to a replacement portfolio comprising the one or more replacement swaps in place of the subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio; and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "storing, by the computer system, second data comprising a compressed portfolio comprising the compressed swap by replacing the data comprising the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device with the second data to minimize a data storage requirement of the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device" Claims 1, 8, 15)
• 15 ¶ 8 • replace the data comprising the portfolio with the replacement data in the non-transitory memory device to reduce a data storage requirement of the portfolio therein. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "storing, by the computer system, second data comprising a compressed portfolio comprising the compressed swap by replacing the data comprising the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device with the second data to minimize a data storage requirement of the portfolio in the non-transitory memory device" Claims 1, 8, 15)
Claim 17, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 17 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 17 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 15, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 15, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 17 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 17, the computer system of claim 15, wherein the instructions are further executable to cause the processor to: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he computer system of claim 15, wherein the instructions are further executable to cause the processor to" Claims 16-17, 20)
• 17 ¶ 2 • determine, based at least in part on the combined risk value of the one or more replacement swaps, a performance bond requirement attributable to the plurality of interest rate swaps; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining, based at least in part on the compressed swap parameters, a performance bond requirement attributable to the interest rate swaps;" Claims 9, 16)
• 17 ¶ 3 • compare the performance bond requirement to account data associated with a holder of the portfolio; Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "comparing the performance bond requirement to account data associated with a holder of the portfolio;" Claims 9, 16)
• 17 ¶ 4 • performing one or more additional actions based on the comparing comprising at least one of (i) storing data regarding satisfaction of the performance bond requirement, and (ii) transmitting a communication regarding the performance bond requirement. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 10 Par. 4)
Claim 18, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 18 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 18 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 15, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 15, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 18 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 18, the computer system of claim 15, wherein the instructions are further executable to cause the processor to perform operations that include: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he computer system of claim 15, wherein the instructions are further executable to cause the processor to perform operations that include:" Claims 16-17, 20)
• 18 ¶ 2 • calculating, for each of the one or more replacement swaps, a replacement swap fixed rate value xB, a replacement swap notional value NB, and a replacement swap floating rate spread value c according to Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 4 Par. 2)
• 18 ¶ 3 • Equation 4A Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 4 Par. 3)
• 18 ¶ 4 • Equation 4B Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[Equation 4B]" Claims 3, 10, 17)
• 18 ¶ 5 • Equation 4C Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[Equation 4C]" Claims 3, 10, 17)
• 18 ¶ 6 • xj is a fixed rate value for the jth interest rate swap, wherein N is a notional value of the jth interest rate swap, wherein m is the number of interest rate swaps in the plurality of interest rate swaps, G is the number of floating rate payment periods in the common tenor, fg is a floating rate value corresponding to the g' floating rate payment period, dfg is a floating rate discount factor corresponding to the g' floating rate payment period, and dtg is a duration of the g' floating rate payment period. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 4 Par. 6)
Claim 19, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 19 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 19 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 15, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 15, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 19 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 19, the computer system of claim 15, wherein Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he computer system of claim 15, wherein" Claims 16-17, 19-20)
• 19 ¶ 2 • a DVO1 value for the one or more replacement swaps is the same as a sum of DVO1 values for the plurality of interest rate swaps, and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 5 Par. 2)
• 19 ¶ 3 • a CVO1 value for the one or more replacement swaps is the same as a sum of CVO1 values for the plurality of interest rate swaps. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 5 Par. 3)
Claim 20, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 20 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 20 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 15, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 15, BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 20 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 20, the computer system of claim 15, wherein the instructions are further executable to cause the processor to perform operations that include: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he computer system of claim 15, wherein the instructions are further executable to cause the processor to perform operations that include:" Claims 16-17, 20)
• 20 ¶ 2 • determining a performance bond requirement attributable to the plurality of interest rate swaps based on first and second disaggregated swaps, Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining a performance bond requirement attributable to the plurality of interest rate swaps based on first and second disaggregated swaps," Claim 20)
• 20 ¶ 3 • the first disaggregated swap comprises a replacement swap fixed rate value xB, a first disaggregated swap notional value NB1, and a first disaggregated swap spread value ci, and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 6 Par. 3)
• 20 ¶ 4 • the second disaggregated swap comprises the replacement swap fixed rate value xB, a second disaggregated swap notional value NB2, and a second disaggregated swap spread value c2, and wherein the at least one non-transitory memory stores instructions that, when executed, cause the computer system to perform operations that include Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "the second disaggregated swap comprises the compressed swap fixed rate value x.sub.B, a second disaggregated swap notional value N.sub.B2, and a second disaggregated swap spread value c.sub.2, and wherein the at least one non-transitory memory stores instructions that, when executed, cause the computer system to perform operations that include" Claim 20)
• 20 ¶ 5 • determining a required precision for the floating rate spread value c, Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 6 Par. 5)
• 20 ¶ 6 • determining the required precision is greater than an available precision, Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 6 Par. 6)
• 20 ¶ 7 • based on the determining that the required precision is greater than an available precision, selecting a cl value greater than the c value and a c2 value less than the c value, and Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 6 Par. 7)
• 20 ¶ 8 • determining NBl and NB2 values such NBl(x)cl + NB2(x)c2=NB(x)C and such that NBl + NB2=NB. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: See Prior Comment at Claim 6 Par. 8)
Claim 21, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 21 is rejected as being anticipated by BOBERSKI-Claims. Claim 21 is an independent claim. BOBERSKI-Claims discloses the claimed subject matter of claim 21 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 21, the computer system of claim 20, wherein the instructions are further executable to cause the processor to perform operations that include: Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he computer system of claim 15, wherein the instructions are further executable to cause the processor to perform operations that include:" Claims 16-17, 20)
• 21 ¶ 2 • determining the required precision comprises determining the required precision according to Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "determining the required precision comprises determining the required precision according to" Claims 7, 14, 21)
• 21 ¶ 3 • Equation 7 Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[Equation 7]" Claims 7, 14, 21)
• 21 ¶ 4 • D is the required precision, E is a constant chosen to limit a difference between a present value of the one or more replacement swaps and combined present values of the plurality of interest rate swaps, m is the number of interest rate swaps in the plurality of interest rate swaps, xj is a fixed rate value for the jth interest rate swap, Nj is a notional value of the jth interest rate swap, G is the number of floating rate payment periods in the common tenor, fg is a floating rate value corresponding to the g' floating rate payment period, dfg is a floating rate discount factor corresponding to the g' floating rate payment period, and dtg is a duration of the g' floating rate payment period. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[d] is the required precision, E is a constant chosen to limit a difference between a present value of the compressed swap and combined present values of the plurality of interest rate swaps, m is the number of interest rate swaps in the portfolio of interest rate swaps, x.sub.j is a fixed rate value for the j.sup.th interest rate swap, N.sub.j is a notional value of the j.sup.th interest rate swap, G is the number of floating rate payment periods in the common tenor, f.sub.g is a floating rate value corresponding to the g.sup.th floating rate payment period, df.sub.g is a floating rate discount factor corresponding to the g.sup.th floating rate payment period, and dt.sub.g is a duration of the g.sup.th floating rate payment period" Claims 7, 14, 21)
2-nd Double Patenting Category: Claims 2, 9, and 16 are rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over BOBERSKI-Claims in view of U.S. Patent No. US 11,847,702 B2 to Boberski; David Andrew et al., (hereinafter "BOBERSKI-A") since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent. The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other for the following reasons.
Claim 2, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 2 is rejected as being unpatentable over BOBERSKI-Claims and BOBERSKI-A. Claim 2 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 1, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 1, the combined disclosures and teachings of BOBERSKI-Claims and BOBERSKI-A taken together render obvious the claimed subject matter of claim 2 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 2, the method of claim 1, Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he method of claim 1," Claims 2-3, 5-6)
• 2 ¶ 2 • wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: doesn't expressly and explicitly recite wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio --- however BOBERSKI-A: should clearly disclose, teach, and/or suggests the feature -- "[t]he foregoing description is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit embodiments to the precise form explicitly described or mentioned herein[; m]odifications and variations are possible in light of the above teachings or may be acquired from practice of various embodiments[; t]he embodiments discussed herein were chosen and described in order to explain the principles and the nature of various embodiments and their practical application to enable one skilled in the art to make and use these and other embodiments with various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated[; a]ny and all permutations of features from above-described embodiments are the within the scope of the invention" col. 19, ln. 66 - col. 19 ln. 13); [See Remarks Below];
With respect to above-noted claimed element the above "wherein the one or more..." line limitation which is disclosed by BOBERSKI-A: the teachings and/or suggestions within the disclosure of BOBERSKI-Claims thus far relied upon omits to mention within its writings an explicit and express recital of the above "wherein the one or more..." line limitation as required by the instant claim. At the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the relied upon teachings of BOBERSKI-Claims by adding or substituting the feature the above "wherein the one or more..." line limitation as taught and/or suggested by BOBERSKI-A, with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. The addition or substitution of this known feature by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date would have yielded predictable results that were plainly discernable to that ordinarily skilled one person in the art at that time. At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of BOBERSKI-Claims with these previously described teachings of the above "wherein the one or more..." line limitation sufficiently taught, suggested, and/or disclosed in BOBERSKI-A because that skilled one artisan having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention would have had a motivation of "[f]or various reasons, it would be desirable to condense multiple swaps in a portfolio into a single hypothetical swap that has characteristics similar to the portfolio swaps". (BOBERSKI-A: col. 1 lns. 43 - 46).
Claim 9, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 9 is rejected as being unpatentable over BOBERSKI-Claims and BOBERSKI-A. Claim 9 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 8, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 8, BOBERSKI-Claims and BOBERSKI-A disclose and render obvious as previously combined the claimed subject matter of claim 9 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 9, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses "[t]he one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8," Claims 9-10, 12-13)
• 9 ¶ 2 • wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: doesn't expressly and explicitly recite wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio --- however BOBERSKI-A: should clearly disclose, teach, and/or suggest the feature -- See Prior Comment at Claim 2 Par. 2), [See Remarks after Claim 2 Par. 2 herein for previously explained rationale or reasoned explanation supporting the finding of obviousness regarding the above-identified combination];
Claim 16, EXAMINER's Analysis: Claim 16 is rejected as being unpatentable over BOBERSKI-Claims and BOBERSKI-A. Claim 16 is a dependent claim that directly depends upon parent claim 15, which is an independent claim. Further to and in conjunction with the disclosures and teachings of the prior art recited in the parent as applied to the limitations of claim 15, BOBERSKI-Claims and BOBERSKI-A disclose and render obvious as previously combined the claimed subject matter of claim 16 as follows and as explained below.
Regarding and as per CLAIM 16, the computer system of claim 15, Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: discloses L*088)
• 16 ¶ 2 • wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio. Line Comment: (BOBERSKI-Claims: doesn't expressly and explicitly recite wherein the one or more replacement swaps comprise at least two replacement swaps when the computer system determines that a data value precision of the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio exceeds a data value precision of at least one component of the computer system which prevents the computer system from calculating less than the at least two replacement swaps having a combined risk value equivalent to the sum of the risk values of each of at least a subset of the plurality of interest rate swaps of the portfolio --- however BOBERSKI-A: should clearly disclose, teach, and/or suggest the feature -- See Prior Comment at Claim 2 Par. 2), [See Remarks after Claim 2 Par. 2 herein for previously explained rationale or reasoned explanation supporting the finding of obviousness regarding the above-identified combination];
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
USPGPub No. US 20130132301 A1 by Abreu; Christopher Blair discloses SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROCESSING DATA RELATING TO PROVIDING RISK MANAGEMENT FOR INVESTMENT ACCOUNTS.
USPGPub No. US 20080249958 A1 by Anguish; Keith Alan et al. discloses FACTORIZATION OF INTEREST RATE SWAP VARIATION.
USPGPub No. US 20070055599 A1 by Arnott; Robert D. discloses Method and apparatus for managing a virtual portfolio of investment objects.
USPGPub No. US 20100063942 A1 by Arnott; Robert D. et al. discloses SYSTEM, METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR MANAGING A VIRTUAL PORTFOLIO OF FINANCIAL OBJECTS.
USPGPub No. US 20140244469 A1 by Aron; Ross P. discloses TRIGGERED BOND OR DEBT STRUCTURE SWAP.
USPGPub No. US 20140244468 A1 by Aron; Ross P. discloses TRIGGERED BOND OR DEBT STRUCTURE SWAP.
USPGPub No. US 20080249952 A1 by BENTELER; Henry discloses COMPUTERIZED SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING FINANCIAL INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS.
USPGPub No. US 20140297504 A1 by BERGENUDD; Johan et al. discloses METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROCESSING ELECTRONIC DATA TRANSACTION MESSAGES.
USPAT No. US 10810671 B2 to Boberski; David Andrew et al. discloses Interest rate swap compression.
USPGPub No. US 20130006891 A1 by Brazdzionis; Paul L. et al. discloses SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ACCESSING AND DISPLAYING DATA RELATING TO FINANCIAL SECURITIES.
USPGPub No. US 20080249956 A1 by Connors; Clive discloses INTEREST RATE SWAP INDEX.
USPGPub No. US 20130132163 A1 by Eder; Jeff Scott discloses Automated risk transfer system.
USPGPub No. US 20070203855 A1 by Fisher; Mark Bradley discloses Index and financial product and method and system for managing said index and financial product.
USPGPub No. US 20040225593 A1 by Frankel, Oliver L. et al. discloses Method and apparatus for creating and administering a publicly traded interest in a commodity pool.
USPGPub No. US 20080183613 A1 by Frankel; Oliver L. discloses METHOD FOR LISTING A FUTURES CONTRACT THAT PHYSICALLY SETTLES INTO A SWAP.
USPAT No. US 8510207 B2 to Frankel; Oliver L. discloses Method and apparatus for listing and trading a futures contract that physically settles into a swap.
USPAT No. US 7739186 B1 to GERBER N D discloses Computerized commodity pool operating system, has processor allowing commodity pool to perform hedging based upon comparison of net asset value to current spot price of oil to enable net asset value to track spot price of oil.
USPGPub No. US 20080249954 A1 by GLEYZER B et al. discloses World uranium mining index for business application, is calculated using formula including scaling factor, total number of mining companies, total number of investable shares, price of share of stock in mining company and multipliers.
USPAT No. US 7739186 B1 to Gerber; Nicholas D. discloses Systems and methods for establishing and running an exchange traded fund that tracks the performance of a commodity.
USPGPub No. US 20140136446 A1 by Golan; Ronen et al. discloses METHOD AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM FOR MANAGING INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS.
USPGPub No. US 20110153521 A1 by Green; Thomas et al. discloses SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SWAP CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT WITH A DISCOUNT CURVE FEEDBACK LOOP.
USPGPub No. US 20050234795 A1 by HODES J C et al. discloses Investment transaction method involves granting transferable right to substitute individual securities in swap portfolio to either parties by swap contract, in which only one of party has right to substitute at any one time.
USPGPub No. US 20090157561 A1 by Hadi; Muhammed et al. discloses CONVERSION AND LIQUIDATION OF DEFAULTED POSITIONS.
USPGPub No. US 20090171826 A1 by Hadi; Muhammed et al. discloses CONVERSION OF OVER-THE-COUNTER SWAPS TO STANDARDIZED FORWARD SWAPS.
USPGPub No. US 20120047063 A1 by Hadi; Muhammed et al. discloses CONVERSION OF OVER-THE-COUNTER SWAPS TO STANDARDIZED FORWARD SWAPS.
USPGPub No. US 20130226706 A1 by Haggerty; Kathleen et al. discloses SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIPS.
USPGPub No. US 20130226778 A1 by Haggerty; Kathleen et al. discloses SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIPS.
USPGPub No. US 20130226779 A1 by Haggerty; Kathleen et al. discloses SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIPS.
USPGPub No. US 20130226780 A1 by Haggerty; Kathleen et al. discloses SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIPS.
USPGPub No. US 20130226781 A1 by Haggerty; Kathleen et al. discloses SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIPS.
USPGPub No. US 20130226782 A1 by Haggerty; Kathleen et al. discloses SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIPS.
USPGPub No. US 20130226783 A1 by Haggerty; Kathleen et al. discloses SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIPS.
USPGPub No. US 20020107774 A1 by Henninger, Mark A. et al. discloses Compensatory ratio hedging.
USPGPub No. US 20140289164 A1 by Hirani; Sunil discloses Trading Platform for Invoice Spread Products.
USPGPub No. US 20070288351 A1 by Huntley; Russell Guy discloses Method, system, and computer program for an electronically traded synthetic exchange traded coupon.
USPGPub No. US 20100106633 A1 by Iyer; Suneel et al. discloses VALUATION OF DERIVATIVE PRODUCTS.
USPGPub No. US 20110161244 A1 by Iyer; Suneel et al. discloses Clearing System That Determines Margin Requirements for Financial Portfolios.
USPAT No. US 8332301 B2 to Iyer; Suneel et al. discloses Clearing system that determines margin requirements for financial portfolios.
USPGPub No. US 20100145841 A1 by Iyer; Suneel et al. discloses EVALUATION AND ADJUSTMENT OF SETTLEMENT VALUE CURVES.
USPGPub No. US 20120041860 A1 by Iyer; Suneel et al. discloses EVALUATION AND ADJUSTMENT OF SETTLEMENT VALUE CURVES.
USPGPub No. US 20080243721 A1 by Joao; Raymond Anthony discloses Apparatus and method for providing financial information and/or investment information.
USPGPub No. US 20130218804 A1 by KALOTAY; Andrew J. discloses Method and System for Determining Option-Adjusted True Interest Cost of Municipal Debt Instruments.
USPGPub No. US 20050108128 A1 by Kastel, Peter et al. discloses Resource amount determination technique.
USPAT No. US 8001022 B2 to Kastel; Peter et al. discloses Construct separation for resource amount determination.
USPGPub No. US 20080288297 A1 by Koo; Samson discloses Hedged financial product having a guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefit and method of generating the same.
USPGPub No. US 20100131306 A1 by Koo; Samson et al. discloses SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CALCULATING AND PROVIDING A PREDETERMINED PAYMENT OBLIGATION.
USPGPub No. US 20100332370 A1 by LINDBLOM; Albert Samuel et al. discloses COMPUTER SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CALCULATING MARGIN.
USPGPub No. US 20020099640 A1 by Lange, Jeffrey discloses Digital options having demand-based, adjustable returns, and trading exchange therefor.
USPGPub No. US 20140229351 A1 by Lutnick; Howard W. et al. discloses METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR LISTING AND TRADING A FUTURES CONTRACT WITH VARIABLE DELIVERY AND/OR EXPIRY DATES.
USPGPub No. US 20100094746 A1 by MacGregor; Paul et al. discloses SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AGGREGATION OF IMPLIED SHORT TERM INTEREST RATE DERIVATIVES BIDS AND OFFERS.
USPGPub No. US 20120072370 A1 by Marcus; Matthew et al. discloses Financial instrument.
USPGPub No. US 20120221487 A1 by Michalowski; Philip W. et al. discloses SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROCESSING DATA RELATING TO ANNUITIES.
USPGPub No. US 20110137686 A1 by Mott; Antony R. discloses SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TRANSFERRING LONGEVITY RISK.
USPGPub No. US 20130041799 A1 by Nyhoff; John et al. discloses Pricing a Forward Rate Agreement Financial Product Using a Non-Par Value.
USPGPub No. US 20130041843 A1 by Nyhoff; John et al. discloses Pricing a Swap Financial Product Using a Non-Par Value.
USPGPub No. US 20140032443 A1 by Ossanna; Marco et al. discloses Guaranty Fund Apportionment in Default Auctions.
USPGPub No. US 20110004568 A1 by Phillips; Lee Stephen et al. discloses METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR PROVIDING SWAP INDICES.
USPGPub No. US 20130138580 A1 by Phillips; Lee Stephen et al. discloses METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR PROVIDING SWAP INDICES.
USPGPub No. US 20060224492 A1 by Pinkava; Pavel discloses Trading and settling enhancements to the standard electronic futures exchange market model leading to novel derivatives including on exchange ISDA type interest rate derivatives and second generation bond like futures based in part or entirely on them.
USPGPub No. US 20120296798 A1 by Riddle, JR.; Michael A. et al. discloses Flexible-rate, financial option and method of trading.
USPGPub No. US 20080183615 A1 by Rio; Stephane et al. discloses Standardization and Management of Over-the-Counter Financial Instruments.
USPGPub No. US 20130191268 A1 by SKYRM; Scott E.D. discloses SYSTEM, METHOD, AND REPO DERIVATIVE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT AND MARKET FOR CONDUCTING REPO SWAP/CFD TRANSACTIONS.
USPGPub No. US 20120296843 A1 by Saccone; Massimiliano discloses METHOD FOR CALCULATION OF TIME WEIGHTED RETURNS FOR PRIVATE EQUITY.
USPAT No. US 8639606 B1 to Shakarchi; Rami et al. discloses Methods and systems for providing interest rate indices and notes.
USPGPub No. US 20030154153 A1 by Steidlmayer, J. Peter et al. discloses Composite commodity financial product.
USPGPub No. US 20140279369 A1 by Turner; Walter Anthony discloses METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIA FOR AUTOMATING TRADING AND REVERSING OF FINANCIAL TRADES.
USPGPub No. US 20140279370 A1 by Turner; Walter Anthony discloses METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIA FOR PRODUCING A FIDUCIARY SCORE TO PROVIDE AN INVESTMENT OUTLOOK MODEL.
USPGPub No. US 20080167981 A1 by WHITEHURST; Philip H. et al. discloses METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR COMMODITIZING INTEREST RATE SWAP RISK TRANSFERS.
USPGPub No. US 20100138362 A1 by Whitehurst; Philip H. discloses Methods and Systems For Commoditizing Interest Rate Swap Transfers.
USPGPub No. US 20070055609 A1 by Whitehurst; Philip Howard et al. discloses Methods and systems for commoditizing interest rate swap risk transfers.
USPGPub No. US 20120296793 A1 by Wilson, JR.; Donald R. et al. discloses Rate-negotiated, standardized-coupon financial instrument and method of trading.
USPGPub No. US 20120047058 A1 by Wilson, JR.; Donald R. et al. discloses Non-biased, centrally-cleared financial instrument and method of clearing and settling.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SLADE E. SMITH whose telephone number is 571- 272-8645. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday from 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM.
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, Matthew S. 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 Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Sincerely,
/SLADE E SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3696 10/21/2025
Prosecution Insights