Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`REGIONS FINANCIAL CORPORATION, ADVANCE AMERICA,
`CASH ADVANCE CENTERS, INC., and CNU ONLINE HOLDINGS, LLC
`F/K/A CASH AMERICA NET HOLDINGS, LLC
`Petitioners
`v.
`
`RETIREMENT CAPITAL ACCESS MANAGEMENT COMPANY LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Issue Date: September 23, 2003
`Title: METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CONVERTING A DESIGNATED
`PORTION OF FUTURE SOCIAL SECURITY AND OTHER RETIREMENT
`PAYMENTS TO CURRENT BENEFITS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review No. CBM2014-00012
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CORRECTED PETITION FOR COVERED BUSINESS METHOD PATENT
`REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 321 AND 37 C.F.R. §42.300 et seq.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
`A. Filing Date Requirements for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`Petition as Set Forth in 77 Fed. Reg. 48612, 77 Fed. Reg. 48680, and 77
`Fed. Reg. 48734 ............................................................................................ 1
`1. Mandatory Notice – Real Parties in Interest .............................................. 1
`2. Mandatory Notice – Related Matters ........................................................... 1
`3.
`Eligibility Based on Infringement Suit ....................................................... 2
`4.
`Eligibility Based on Lack of Estoppel ......................................................... 2
`5.
`Eligibility Based on Time of Filing ............................................................. 3
`6.
`Patent is a Covered Business Method Patent ............................................. 3
`7.
`Specific Identification of Challenges .......................................................... 3
`8. A Legible Copy of Every Exhibit in the Exhibit List .............................. 3
`9.
`The Complete Covered Business Method Patent Petition Fee .............. 4
`10. Mandatory Notice – Lead and Back-Up Counsel ..................................... 4
`11. Powers of Attorney .......................................................................................... 5
`12. Mandatory Notice – Service Information ................................................... 5
`13. Certificate of Service on Patent Owner ....................................................... 6
`B. Overview of the ‘582 Patent .......................................................................... 6
`II. SUMMARY OF THE CHALLENGED PATENT CLAIMS AND THEIR
`CONSTRUCTIONS .......................................................................................... 10
`A. The Claims ................................................................................................... 10
`B. Claim Interpretation .................................................................................... 12
`III. The ‘582 Patent is a Covered Business Method Patent ..................................... 29
`A. The AIA Defines What Is a Covered Business Method ............................. 29
`B. The ‘582 Patent Is a CBM ........................................................................... 31
`C. The ‘582 Patent Is Not a Patent for a Technological Invention .................. 33
`IV. THE ASSERTED CLAIMS ARE INVALID UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 101 ......... 37
`A. Legal Standards ........................................................................................... 37
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`B. Claim 1 is Invalid Under § 101 ................................................................... 42
`C. Claims 13 and 14 are Invalid Under § 101 ................................................. 50
`D. Claims 18, 30, and 31 Are Invalid Under §101 .......................................... 51
`V. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 52
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`
`CASES
`Aristocrat Techs. Austl. Pty Ltd. v. Int’l Game Tech.,
`521 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2008) .......................................................................... 18
`
`Page(s)
`
`Bancorp Servs., L.L.C. v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Can.,
`687 F.3d 1266 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ...................................................................passim
`
`Benefit Funding Systems LLC, et al. v. Advance America, Cash Advance
`Centers, Inc. LLC,
`Case No. 1:12-cv-801-LPS (D. Del.) ................................................................ 1, 2
`
`Benefit Funding Systems LLC, et al. v. Regions Financial Corporation,
`Case No. 1:12-cv-802-LPS (D. Del.) .................................................................... 1
`
`Benefit Funding Systems LLC, et al. v. U.S. Bancorp,
`Case No. 1:12-cv-803-LPS (D. Del.) .............................................................. 2, 41
`
`Bilski v. Kappos,
`130 S. Ct. 3218 (2010) .................................................................................passim
`
`CLS Bank International, et al. v. Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd.,
`2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 9493 (Fed. Cir. 2013) ............................................passim
`
`CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc.,
`654 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2011) ...................................................................passim
`
`Dealertrack v. Huber,
`674 F.3d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2012) .............................................................. 35, 42, 48
`
`Fort Properties, Inc. v. American Master Lease LLC,
`671 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2012) .................................................................... 42, 48
`
`Interthinx, Inc. v. Corelogic Solutions, LLC, No. CBM2012-00007 (BJM)
`(P.T.A.B. Jan. 31, 2013) ..................................................................................... 36
`
`Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc.,
`132 S. Ct. 1289 (2012) .................................................................................passim
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`SAP Am., Inc. v. Versata Dev. Grp., Inc.,
`No. CBM2012-00001 (MPT) ......................................................................passim
`
`SiRF Tech., Inc. v. ITC,
`601 F.3d 1319 (Fed. Cir. 2010) .................................................................... 38, 46
`
`U.S. Bancorp v. Retirement Capital Access Management Company, CBM
`2013-00014 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 20, 2013) ................................................................... 2
`
`STATUTES
`
`35 U.S.C. § 101 .................................................................................................passim
`
`35 U.S.C. § 112 .................................................................................................. 17, 18
`
`35 U.S.C. §321(a)(1) .................................................................................................. 4
`
`LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS
`
`157 Cong. Rec. S5410-02 (daily ed. Sept. 8, 2011) ................................................ 32
`
`H.R. 1249, 112th Congress § 18(a)(1)(D) (2011) ................................................... 18
`
`H.R. 1249, 112th Congress, § 18(d)(1) (2011) .................................................. 30, 32
`
`CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
`
`77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48764 (Aug. 14, 2012) (to be codified at 37 C.F.R. pt.
`42) ................................................................................................................. 12, 31
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) .................................................................................................. 5
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.203(a) ................................................................................................. 4
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.205(a) ................................................................................................. 6
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.300(a) ................................................................................................. 4
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.300(b) .......................................................................................... 3, 12
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.301 ..................................................................................................... 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.301(a) ................................................................................... 30, 32-33
`
`
`
`iv
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`37 C.F.R. §42.301(b) ............................................................................................... 34
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.302 ..................................................................................................... 2
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.303 ..................................................................................................... 3
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.304 ....................................................................................... 3, 4, 5, 17
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e)(4)(iii) .......................................................................................... 6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1001:
`
`Powers of Attorney
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1002:
`
`Certificate of Service
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1003:
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,625,582 to Richman, et al.
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1004:
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1005:
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1006:
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1007:
`
`Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg.
`48756, 48764 (Aug. 14, 2012) (to be codified at 37
`C.F.R. pt. 42)
`
`December 26, 2001 Amendment in Response to
`Office Action dated October 31, 2001
`
`Joe Matal, A Guide to the Legislative History of
`the America Invents Act: Part II of II, 21 Fed. Cir.
`B.J. 539 (2012))
`
`Changes to Implement Inter Partes Review
`Proceedings, Post-Grant Review Proceedings, and
`Transitional Program for Covered Business
`Method Patents, 77 Fed. Reg. 48680, 48711 (Aug.
`14, 2012) (to be codified at 37 C.F.R. pt. 42)
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1008:
`
`157 Cong. Rec. S5410-02 (daily ed. Sept. 8, 2011)
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1009:
`
`Plaintiffs’ Complaint Against Petitioner Regions
`Financial Corporation
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1010:
`
`Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint Against
`Petitioners Advance America, Cash Advance
`Centers, Inc. and CNU Online Holdings, LLC
`F/K/A Cash America Net Holdings, LLC
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1011:
`
`“A Quick Guide to Regions Ready Advance”
`
`Petitioners Exhibit 1012:
`
`“Payday Loans from Advance America”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`A. Filing Date Requirements for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`Petition as Set Forth in 77 Fed. Reg. 48612, 77 Fed. Reg. 48680, and 77
`Fed. Reg. 48734
`1. Mandatory Notice – Real Parties in Interest
`
`
`
`The real-parties-in-interest for this Petition are Regions Financial
`
`Corporation (“Regions”), 1901 Sixth Avenue North, 18th Floor, Birmingham,
`
`Alabama 35203; Advance America, Cash Advance Centers, Inc., 135 N. Church
`
`Street, Spartanburg, SC 29306 (“AA”); and CNU Online Holdings, LLC F/K/A
`
`Cash America Net Holdings, LLC, 200 W. Jackson Boulevard, Suite 2400,
`
`Chicago, IL 60606 (“CNU”) (collectively, “Petitioners”).
`
`2. Mandatory Notice – Related Matters
`
`Other than as noted below, Petitioners are not aware of any other judicial or
`
`administrative matter that could affect, or be affected by, a decision in the instant
`
`proceeding:
`
`On June 22, 2012, Benefit Funding Systems LLC (“Benefit Funding”) and
`
`Retirement Capital Access Company LLC (“Retirement Capital”) asserted U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582 (“the ‘582 patent”) against Regions, AA, and U.S. Bancorp
`
`in the litigations styled, Benefit Funding Systems LLC, et al. v. Regions Financial
`
`Corporation, Case No. 1:12-cv-802-LPS (D. Del.) (“the 802 Case”); Benefit
`
`Funding Systems LLC, et al. v. Advance America, Cash Advance Centers, Inc.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`LLC, Case No. 1:12-cv-801-LPS (D. Del.) (“the 801 Case”); and Benefit Funding
`
`Systems LLC, et al. v. U.S. Bancorp, Case No. 1:12-cv-803-LPS (D. Del.) (“the
`
`803 Case”) (collectively, “the Benefit Funding Cases”). On July 3, 2013, Benefit
`
`Funding and Retirement Capital amended their complaint in the 801 case to add
`
`CNU as a co-defendant.
`
`On March 29, 2000, U.S. Bancorp filed a petition for covered business
`
`method patent review of claims 1, 13, 14, 18, 30, and 31 of the ‘582 patent, now
`
`styled, U.S. Bancorp v. Retirement Capital Access Management Company, CBM
`
`2013-00014. On September 20, 2013, this Board granted U.S. Bancorp’s petition,
`
`finding that claims 1, 13, 14, 18, 30, and 31 of the ‘582 patent more likely than not
`
`cover subject matter that is patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
`
`3.
`
`Eligibility Based on Infringement Suit
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.302(a), Petitioners are eligible to file this Petition
`
`because Benefit Funding and Retirement Capital asserted the ‘582 patent against
`
`Regions, AA and CNU in the Benefit Funding Cases, as discussed above.
`
`4.
`
`Eligibility Based on Lack of Estoppel
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.302(b), Petitioners certify that estoppel does not
`
`prohibit this review.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`5.
`
`Eligibility Based on Time of Filing
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.303 and 35 U.S.C. § 321(c), this Petition is not
`
`filed in a period during which a post grant review petition could have been filed.
`
`6.
`
`Patent is a Covered Business Method Patent
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.301 and 42.304(a), the ‘582 patent meets the
`
`definition of a covered business method (“CBM”) patent and does not qualify as a
`
`patent for a technological invention, as explained in Section III.
`
`7.
`
`Specific Identification of Challenges
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.304(b)(1)-(2), (4)-(5) and 35 U.S.C. § 321(a)(3),
`
`Petitioners identify the challenged claims, the grounds on which the challenges to
`
`the claims are based, and the evidence that supports the grounds in Sections II(A)
`
`and IV. Consistent with 37 C.F.R. § 42.300(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.304(b)(3),
`
`Petitioners include the appropriate construction for the challenged claims in
`
`Section II(B).
`
`8.
`
`A Legible Copy of Every Exhibit in the Exhibit List
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.63, a copy of every piece of evidence relied upon
`
`or referred to is provided as an Exhibit (Petitioners Exhibits 1001-1012), prepared
`
`according to the requirements of 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.63(c) and 42.63(d). Because all
`
`exhibits are written in English, no translations are required. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`§ 42.63(e), an Exhibit List including a brief description of each exhibit is filed
`
`herewith.
`
`9.
`
`The Complete Covered Business Method Patent Petition Fee
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §321(a)(1) and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.300(a), 42.304,
`
`42.203(a), 42.8(a)(1), 42.8(b)(4), and 42.15(b), Petitioners are submitting a fee of
`
`$30,000. To the extent that any additional fees are required to complete this
`
`Petition, the Patent Office is hereby authorized by the undersigned to charge
`
`Deposit Account No. 19-4293 for such fees.
`
`10. Mandatory Notice – Lead and Back-Up Counsel
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.304, 42.8(a)(1), and 42.8(b)(3), Petitioners state
`
`that the lead counsel is John Caracappa (Reg. No. 43,532) of Steptoe & Johnson
`
`LLP, and back-up counsel are Harold Fox (Reg. No. 41,498) (of Steptoe &
`
`Johnson LLP), Gretchen Miller (Reg. No. 65,091) (of Steptoe & Johnson LLP),
`
`William Barrow (Reg. No. 62,813) (of Steptoe & Johnson LLP), Christopher J.
`
`Chan (Reg. No. 44,070) (of Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP), Mia K. Fiedler
`
`(Reg. No. 64,885) (of Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP), Mark T. Deming (Reg.
`
`No. 69,263) (of Polsinelli PC), and Robyn Ast-Gmoser (Reg. No. 60,029) (of
`
`Polsinelli PC).
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`11. Powers of Attorney
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b), powers of attorney (Petitioners Ex. 1001)
`
`are attached.
`
`12. Mandatory Notice – Service Information
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.304, 42.8(a)(1), and 42.8(b)(4), service
`
`information is provided as follows:
`
`John M. Caracappa
`STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP
`1330 Connecticut Ave, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`Phone: 202-429-6267
`Fax: 202-429-3902
`jcaracappa@steptoe.com
`
`Christopher J. Chan
`SUTHERLAND ASBILL & BRENNAN LLP
`999 Peachtree Street, NE, Suite 2300
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`Phone: 404-853-8049
`chris.chan@sutherland.com
`
`Mark Deming
`POLSINELLI PC
`161 N. Clark Street
`Suite 4200
`Chicago, IL 60601
`Phone: 312-873-3625
`Fax: 312-602-3936
`mdeming@polsinelli.com
`
`Please direct all correspondence regarding this proceeding to lead counsel at
`
`jcaracappa@steptoe.com, with courtesy copies sent to 582CBM@steptoe.com,
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`ann.fort@sutherland.com, chris.chan@sutherland.com,
`
`mia.fiedler@sutherland.com, jleja@polsinelli.com, mdeming@polsinelli.com,
`
`gday@polsinelli.com, and rast@polsinelli.com.
`
`
`
`
`
`13. Certificate of Service on Patent Owner
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.205(a), Petitioners attach a Certificate of Service
`
`(Petitioners Ex. 1002) certifying that a copy of the petition and supporting
`
`evidence is being served in its entirety on the patent owner at the correspondence
`
`address of record for the subject patent, and indicating, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.6(e)(4)(iii), the date and manner of service and the name and address of every
`
`person served.
`
`B. Overview of the ‘582 Patent
`The ‘582 patent is entitled “Method And System For Converting A
`
`
`
`Designated Portion of Future Social Security And Other Retirement Payments To
`
`Current Benefits” and was filed on May 12, 1999. The specification states that
`
`“[t]he present invention relates generally to a system and method which provides a
`
`mechanism for a [beneficiary] of Social Security payments, or of other retirement
`
`payments, to access present value of a designated portion of its future retirement
`
`payments . . . . [W]ithout encumbering the beneficiary’s rights to its future
`
`retirement benefits.” See Petitioners Ex.1003 (‘582 patent), Col. 1:10-22.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`The ‘582 patent explains that “retirement age individuals” are finding
`
`
`
`
`
`retirement benefits or the anticipated timing of those benefits “to be somewhat
`
`inadequate to meet their present and future financial needs, expectations, and
`
`objectives.” See Petitioners Ex.1003, Col. 1: 23-29. The ‘582 patent further states
`
`that such retirement benefits “have not generally been seen as an adequate source
`
`of current capital, particularly to support financing based upon future receipts” due
`
`to “the current legislated proscriptions . . . against assigning or otherwise alienating
`
`future retirement benefits.” Petitioners Ex.1003, Col. 1:35-43. Therefore, the ‘582
`
`patent purports to provide a financial program that allows a beneficiary to access
`
`the present value of future retirement payments while complying with U.S. laws
`
`restricting alienation of future retirement benefits. Petitioners Ex.1003, Col. 1:43-
`
`49. Curiously though, the ‘582 specification does not explain – and its claims do
`
`not recite any limitations regarding – how the patented financial scheme complies
`
`with U.S. laws. Instead, each independent claim merely includes the limitation
`
`that monetary benefits are provided “without violating legislated proscriptions in
`
`the United States against alienation of future retirement funds.” See, e.g.,
`
`Petitioners Ex.1003, Col. 9:8-9 (claim 1).
`
`
`
`Figures 2 and 3 of the ‘582 patent are flow charts depicting the operation of
`
`the two disclosed embodiments of the claimed financial program. Figure 2
`
`“depict[s] the steps for enabling a beneficiary . . . to access present value of a
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Noo. 6,625,5822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition ffor Covered Business MMethod Patentt Review
`
`
`
`designaated portionn of retiremment beneffits in the fform of currrent capitaal.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitionners Ex. 1003, Col. 5::29-32. Fi
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`gure 3 “deepict[s] thee steps for eenabling a
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`beneficiiary . . . to access preesent valuee of a desiggnated porttion of its ffuture
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`retiremeent benefitts in the forrm of an assset or servvice.” Id. aat 6:50-53
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`.
`
`
`
`the
`
`
`
`NNotably, noone of the ssteps requiires the usee of a compputer, and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`specificcation makes clear thaat all of thee steps cann be perforrmed by a hhuman alonne,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`withoutt the assistaance of a ccomputer. Specificallly, to perfoorm the dissclosed
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`financiaal scheme, a beneficiaary of retirrement bennefits electts to particiipate in thee
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`programm and seleccts a financcial instituttion to act
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`as a depossitory and ddisbursemeent
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`agent for the beneficiary’s retirement payments. See Petitioners Ex.1003, Col. 5:4-
`
`39. A direct deposit account is then set up at the financial institution, and a
`
`funding source or asset or service provider is selected to provide current capital,
`
`assets, or services to the beneficiary. Id. at 5:39-46. The beneficiary authorizes
`
`the financial institution to periodically disburse a designated portion of the
`
`beneficiary’s retirement payments to the funding source or asset or service
`
`provider in exchange for the current capital provided by the funding source or the
`
`assets or services provided to the beneficiary. Id. at 5:46-52. The value of current
`
`capital paid, or assets or services provided, to the beneficiary is based on the
`
`present value of a designated portion of the beneficiary’s future retirement
`
`payments. Id. at 5:53-56.
`
`The ‘582 patent admits “techniques for determining present value of a future
`
`income stream are well known to those of ordinary skill in the art” (id. at 5:56-59)
`
`and present value is “determined upon actuarial and other information and utilizing
`
`known techniques for calculating present value of a future asset.” Id. at 3:43-46.
`
`If the beneficiary revokes participation in the program, or the participation is
`
`otherwise prematurely terminated, “the beneficiary may become obligated to
`
`reimburse the funding source for any advance, and if so only from resources other
`
`than the future retirement benefits.” Id. at 5:66-6:11.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`SUMMARY OF THE CHALLENGED PATENT CLAIMS AND
`THEIR CONSTRUCTIONS
`A. The Claims
`The Petitioner respectfully requests that claims 1, 13, 14, 18, 30 and 31 of
`
`
`
`II.
`
`
`
`the ‘582 patent be canceled because claims 1, 13, 14, 18, 30 and 31 claim abstract
`
`ideas that are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Four of the six claims at issue
`
`(claims 1, 13, 18, and 30) are independent claims. The other two claims, claims 14
`
`and 31, are dependent claims. The full text of claim 1 is reproduced below:
`
`A computerized method for creating a source of
`
`funds based on present value of future retirement
`payments, comprising the steps of:
`
`a. designating an account in a depository for a
`beneficiary to receive future retirement payments payable
`to said beneficiary from a source of said retirement
`payments for a preselected period of time;
`
`b. designating a benefit provider for providing a
`monetary benefit to said beneficiary;
`
`c. authorizing said depository to periodically
`disburse a predetermined portion of said retirement
`payments deposited in said account to said benefit
`provider during said preselected period of time;
`
`d. providing said monetary benefit to said
`beneficiary from said benefit provider based at least in
`part on present value of a designated portion of said
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`future retirement payments without encumbering said
`beneficiary's right to said future retirement payments and
`without violating legislated proscriptions in the United
`States against alienation of future retirement benefits;
`
`e. causing said future retirement payments to be
`deposited into said account throughout said preselected
`period of time;
`
`f. causing said depository to transfer a portion of
`said retirement payments deposited into said account to
`said benefit provider during said preselected period of
`time; and
`
`g. reimbursing said benefit provider from
`resources other than said future retirement payments if
`said transfer of a portion of said retirement payments
`from said depository to said benefit provider are curtailed
`prior to said end of said preselected period of time, and
`making said retirement payments available for the
`exclusive use of said beneficiary.
`Importantly, none of the claim steps is limited to performance on, or by, any
`
`specific device or computer. Indeed, no device or computer is needed at all, as all
`
`of the steps can be performed by a human alone, without the assistance of a
`
`computer.
`
`
`
`Claim 13 is a system claim that corresponds to the method of claim 1.
`
`Claims 18 and 30 recite method and system claims, respectively, that are nearly
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`identical to claim 1, but specify that the future retirement payments are Social
`
`Security payments. Dependent claims 14 and 31 specify that the benefit provider
`
`is a source of capital.
`
`B. Claim Interpretation
`In covered business method patent reviews, patent claim terms “are to be
`
`
`
`given their broadest reasonable interpretation, as understood by one of ordinary
`
`skill in the art and consistent with the disclosure.” See Petitioners Ex. 1004 (Office
`
`Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48764 (Aug. 14, 2012) (to be
`
`codified at 37 C.F.R. pt. 42)); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.300(b). Petitioners provide
`
`proposed constructions for certain claim terms below, giving each term its broadest
`
`reasonable construction:
`
`
`
`“Future Retirement Payments” – The term “future retirement payments”
`
`should be construed to mean retirement payments that the beneficiary has not yet
`
`received. This construction is consistent with the plain meaning of the term
`
`“future,” and the prosecution history confirms this construction. In response to the
`
`Examiner’s prior art rejection over U.S. Patent No. 5,933,815 to Golden
`
`(“Golden”), the inventors explained that Golden differs from the alleged invention
`
`because Golden “does not teach or suggest a method or system for converting
`
`future retirement payments into current value as affirmatively recited in
`
`independent claims 1 and 11,” but instead “provid[es] clients with an annuity
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`having a liquidity feature using a contribution of a current asset.” See Petitioners
`
`Ex. 1005 (December 26, 2001 Amendment) at 9-10. (emphasis in original). The
`
`inventors further argued that “[t]he claimed benefit in Applicants’ present
`
`application is based on the present value of future retirement benefits. As
`
`discussed above, Golden is not at all concerned with creating a benefit based on
`
`future retirement benefits.” Petitioners Ex. 1005 at 11 (emphasis in original).
`
`Accordingly, Petitioners’ proposed construction is consistent with the
`
`interpretation argued by the inventors to the Patent Office.
`
`
`
`“Designating” – The term “designating” should be construed to mean
`
`“identifying or selecting.” This proposed construction is consistent with the plain
`
`and ordinary meaning of the term, and nothing in the intrinsic record suggests an
`
`alternative construction. This term should not be construed to require that a
`
`machine (let alone a specific machine) perform the claimed “designating” steps, as
`
`the claims and specification provide no basis for including such a limitation.
`
`
`
`“Authorizing” – The term “authorizing” should be construed to mean
`
`“granting authority to or permitting.” This claim term also should not be limited to
`
`being performed by a machine. This proposed construction is consistent with the
`
`plain and ordinary meaning of the term and the intrinsic record. Notably, the ‘582
`
`patent specification states that the “authorizing” step is performed by a human
`
`being, stating that “the beneficiary 18 authorizes the financial institution to permit
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`fund transfers from the beneficiary’s deposit account 14 to the funding source over
`
`the designated program term (step 32).” Petitioners Ex.1003, Col. 5:49-52.
`
`
`
`“Benefit Provider” – The term “benefit provider” should be construed to
`
`mean “funding source or asset or service provider.” The ‘582 patent specification
`
`does not use the term “benefit provider,” but instead refers to “funding source 20”
`
`as performing the role of the “benefit provider” in the claims. The specification
`
`broadly describes that the funding source may be “[a] bank, insurance company, or
`
`other source of capital.” Petitioners Ex.1003, Col. 5:43-44. Alternatively, if the
`
`beneficiary has elected to receive an asset or service, the benefit provider may be
`
`“[a] life or health insurance company, a trust company, a brokerage and securities
`
`company, or other asset provider 22 or service provider 23.” Id. at 6:64-67.
`
`
`
`“Periodically” – The term “periodically” should be construed to mean “at a
`
`regular interval.” This construction is consistent with the plain meaning of the
`
`term and the intrinsic record. For example, the ‘582 patent specification describes
`
`that the funding source provides capital “in exchange for the periodic payment to
`
`the funding source of a predetermined portion of the beneficiary’s retirement
`
`payments.” Petitioners Ex.1003, Col. 5:45-48.
`
`
`
`“Predetermined Portion” – The term “predetermined portion” should be
`
`construed to mean “percentage or ratio agreed upon by the benefit provider and the
`
`beneficiary to satisfy the monetary benefit provided by the benefit provider.” This
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent No. 6,625,582
`Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review
`
`
`
`
`
`construction is consistent with the ‘582 patent specification, which explains that
`
`“the beneficiary is required to direct the deposit account to disburse to the funding
`
`source or asset or service provider a portion of the beneficiary’s retirement
`
`payments (as they are received over the program term) predetermined to satisfy the
`
`terms of the advance.” Petitioners Ex. 1003, Col. 2:5-9.
`
`
`
`“Present Value” – The term “present value” should be construed to mean
`
`“a value of a future income stream discounted to present.” Petitioners’ proposed
`
`construction is consistent with the plain and ordinary meaning of the term and the
`
`intrinsic record. For example, the ‘582 patent specification explains that the
`
`present value is “determined upon actuarial and other information and utilizing
`
`known techniques for calculating present value of a future asset” and that
`
`“techniques for determining present value of a future income stream are well
`
`known to those of ordinary skill in the art.” Petitioners Ex. 1003, Col. 3:43-46,
`
`Col. 5:56-59.
`
`
`
`“Causing” – The term “causing” should be construed to mean “making
`
`(something) happen”, consistent with its plain and ordinary meaning. This term
`
`should also not be restricted to “causing” performed by a machine. The ‘582
`
`patent specification is silent with respect to what causes the future retirement
`
`payments to be deposited into the beneficiary’s account, or what causes the
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`Patent