Skip to main content

Full text of "USPTO Patents Application 09998152"

See other formats


Atty. Docket No. 010520 

Serial No. 09/998,152 

Response Dated March 15, 2007 

Reply to Office Action Dated January 10, 2007 

REMARKS 

Claims 2-7, 9-31, 33 and 35-37 are standing in this application. Claims 2, 6, 21, 25, 

30, 31, and 33 are amended. No new matter has been entered. Favorable reconsideration and 
allowance of the standing claims are respectfully requested. 

Interview Summary 
Applicant's representative conducted a telephonic interview with Examiner Robinson 
on Wednesday, March 14, 2007 to discuss a proposed draft amendment of the above- 
referenced application. No cited references were discussed. Pending claims 2, 6, 21, 25, 30, 

31, and 33 were discussed. Amendments to claims 6, 30, 33, and 36 were discussed and such 
amendments are reflected in the amended claims listing above. Agreement was reached as to 
allowability of al pending claims 2-7, 9-31, 33 and 35-37 in view of the amendments above. 

35 U.S.C. SI 12 Rejections 

At page 2, paragraph 4 of the Office Action, claims 2-7, 9-24, 31, 33, 35, and 36 are 
rejected under 35 U.S. C. § 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite. Applicant respectfully 
traverses the rejection. 

Applicant has amended the claims to overcome the § 112 rejection and not to 
overcome any of the cited references. Accordingly, these amendments should not be 
construed in a limiting manner. 

Regarding claims 2, 31, and 33 Applicant has amended the preamble of these claims 
to recite "computer implemented" method as recommended in the Office Action. 
Accordingly, withdrawal of the indefiniteness rejection with respect to claims 2, 31, and 33 is 
respectfully requested. 



19 



Atty. Docket No. 010520 

Serial No. 09/998,152 

Response Dated March 15, 2007 

Reply to Office Action Dated January 1 0, 2007 

Regarding claims 2, 21, and 33 Applicant has amended these claims to address the 
rejection based on antecedent basis. Accordingly, withdrawal of the indefiniteness rejection 
with respect to claims 2, 21, and 33 is respectfully requested. 

Applicant respectfully traverses the definition of the term "inventorying " suggested 
by the Office Action and that the term is used to mean "transmitting " and that the term is 
indefinite because the specification does clearly redefine the term. Rather, regarding claims 
2, 21, 31, 33, and 36 applicant respectfully submits that the term "inventorying " is definite 
both in the plain language accepted meaning and as it is used in the context of claims 2, 21, 
31, 33, and 36. Therefore, Applicant submits that the term need not be redefined in the 
specification. In support, Applicant submits the following definition for the term 
"inventorying": 

Inventorying : To include in an itemized report or record. 

inventorying, (n.d.). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 
Fourth Edition. Retrieved March 13, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: 
http://dictionarv'.reference.com/browse/inventorving : inventorying. Dictionary.com. The 
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin 
Company, 2004. http://dictionarv.reference.com/browse/inventorying (accessed: March 13, 
2007); inventorying." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth 
Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 13 Mar. 2007. <Dictionary.com 
http://dictionan , .reference.com/browse/inventors , ing> . 

Therefore, as recited in claims 2, 21, 31, 33, and 36, the expression "inventorying an 
asset document into the associated record in the database on a flow basis" means to include an 



20 



Atty. Docket No. 010520 

Serial No. 09/998,152 

Response Dated March 15, 2007 

Reply to Office Action Dated January 1 0, 2007 

asset document into the associated record in the database on a flow basis. This may be 
accomplished by storing the asset document in the associated record in the database on a flow 
basis. Accordingly, withdrawal of the indefiniteness rejection with respect to claims 2, 21, 
31, 33, and 36, is respectfully requested. 

At page 3, paragraph 5 of the Office Action, claims 2-7, 9-31, 33, and 35-37 are 
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 1 12, second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential 
elements. Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection. 

Applicant has amended the claims to overcome the § 112 rejection and not to 
overcome any of the cited references. Accordingly, these amendments should not be 
construed in a limiting manner. 

According to the Office Action, claims 2, 21, 25, 31, 33, 36, and 37 omit the 
operational procedures for aggregation and authentication. Applicant disagrees with the 
rejection. 

With respect to authentication, claim 2 recites: 

analyzing contents of the asset document to ensure compliance with at least 
one standard pursuant to securitization of multiple assets, wherein at least one 
of the multiple assets comprises a commercial mortgage loan. . .. 

Applicant respectfully submits that analyzing contents of the asset document to ensure 

compliance with at least one standard is at least one method of authenticating the asset 

document. 

With respect to aggregation, claims 2, as amended, recites: 

generating common information from a plurality of the records pursuant to 
securitization of the multiple assets; 



21 



Atty. Docket No. 010520 

Serial No. 09/998,152 

Response Dated March 15, 2007 

Reply to Office Action Dated January 1 0, 2007 

wherein generating comprises aggregating the common information contained 
in the plurality of records and compiling the aggregated common information 
in a datafile. 

Therefore, Applicant submits that claim 2, as amended, recites the elements of 
authentication and aggregation. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of 
the indefiniteness rejection with respect to claim 2, and claims 3-7 and 9-20 based on 
dependency. 

With respect to authentication and aggregation, claim 21 recites: 

analyzing the contents of the asset document to promote compliance with a 
standard. . . and 

generating common information from the database pursuant to securitization 
of the multiple assets; 

wherein generating comprises aggregating the common information contained 
in the plurality of records and compiling the common information in a 
datafile. 

Therefore, Applicant submits that claim 21, as amended, recites the elements of 
authentication and aggregation. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of 
the indefiniteness rejection with respect to claim 21, and claims 22-24 based on dependency. 

With respect to authentication and aggregation, claim 25 recites: 

generating comparison data wherein the comparison data comprises compared 
common data fields of the stored first information from a plurality of the asset 
documents within the record, retrieving the comparison data and providing the 
comparison data to a user pursuant to securitization of multiple assets, wherein 
at least one of the multiple assets comprises a commercial mortgage loan . . . 
and 

a data output device for generating first output information from the processor 
pursuant to securitization of the multiple assets, wherein generating comprises 
aggregating the first output information contained in the plurality of records 
and compiling the first output in a datafile. 



22 



Atty. Docket No. 010520 

Serial No. 09/998,152 

Response Dated March 1 5, 2007 

Reply to Office Action Dated January 10, 2007 

Therefore, Applicant submits that claim 25, as amended, recites the elements of 
authentication and aggregation. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of 
the indefiniteness rejection with respect to claim 25, and claims 26-29 based on dependency. 

With respect to authentication and aggregation, claim 3 1 recites: 

analyzing contents of the asset document to ensure compliance with 
customary standards for loan securitization; . . . and 

generating common information from a plurality of the records where the 
common information is generated for the purpose of securitizing the asset into 
a trust and providing common information to potential investors in the trust; 

wherein generating comprises aggregating the common information contained 
in the plurality of records and compiling the aggregated common information 
in a datafile. 

Therefore, Applicant submits that claim 3 1 , as amended, recites the elements of 
authentication and aggregation. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of 
the indefiniteness rejection with respect to claim 31. 

With respect to authentication and aggregation, claim 33 recites: 

analyzing contents of the asset document to ensure compliance with at least 
one standard pursuant to securitization of multiple assets. . . and 

generating common information from a plurality of the records pursuant to 
securitization of the multiple assets, wherein at least one of the multiple assets 
includes a commercial mortgage loan, wherein the generating step 
comprises: . . . 

aggregating the common information contained in the plurality of records. ... 

Therefore, Applicant submits that claim 33 recites the elements of authentication and 
aggregation. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the indefiniteness 
rejection with respect to claim 33, and claim 35 based on dependency. 

With respect to authentication and aggregation, claim 36 recites: 



23 



Atty. Docket No. 010520 

Serial No. 09/998,152 

Response Dated March 15, 2007 

Reply to Office Action Dated January 10, 2007 

analyzing contents of the asset document to ensure compliance with at least 
one standard pursuant to securitization of multiple assets, wherein at least one 
of the multiple assets comprises a commercial mortgage loan. . . and 

generating common information from a plurality of the records pursuant to 
securitization of the multiple assets, wherein the generating step comprises:. . . 

aggregating the common information contained in the plurality of records. ... 

Therefore, Applicant submits that claim 36 recites the elements of authentication and 
aggregation. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the indefiniteness 
rejection with respect to claim 36. 

With respect to authentication and aggregation, claim 37 recites: 

generating comparison data wherein the comparison data comprises compared 
common data fields of the stored first information from a plurality of the asset 
documents within the record, retrieving the comparison data and providing the 
comparison data to a user pursuant to securitization of multiple assets, wherein 
at least one of the multiple assets comprises a commercial mortgage loan . . . 
and 

aggregating information from the multiple asset documents to create an asset 
aggregation output for use in securitizing the multiple assets into a financial 
instrument.... 

Therefore, Applicant submits that claim 37 recites the elements of authentication and 
aggregation. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the indefiniteness 
rejection with respect to claim 37. 

With respect to claim 30, Applicant has amended claim 30 in accordance with the 
Examiner's request. Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the 
indefiniteness rejection with respect to claim 30. 

At page 4, paragraph 6 of the Office Action, claims 2-7, 9-31, 33, and 35-37 would be 
allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 1 12, second 
paragraph. In view of the above amendments and remarks, Applicant respectfully submits 



24 



Atty. Docket No. 010520 

Serial No. 09/998,152 

Response Dated March 1 5, 2007 

Reply to Office Action Dated January 10, 2007 

that claims 2-7, 9-31, 33, and 35-37 are now in condition for allowance. Accordingly, 
Applicant respectfully requests that this amendment after final office action be entered and 
that the Office issue a timely notice of allowance. 

The Examiner is invited to contact the undersigned representative by telephone to 
discuss any outstanding issues with this application. 

The Office is hereby authorized to charge any underpayment of fees, or credit any 
overpayments, to Deposit Account No. 11-1110. 




Reg. No. 46,599 
Attorney for Applicant 

KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART PRESTON GATES ELLIS LLP 

Henry W. Oliver Building 

535 Smithfield Street 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-2312 

Telephone: (412) 355-6423 
Fax: (412) 355-6501 

E-Mail: roberto.capriotti@klgates.com 

Customer No. 26285 



25