`
`
`
` Paper No. ____
` Filed: May 1, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`__________________
`
`IBG LLC; INTERACTIVE BROKERS LLC;
`TRADESTATION GROUP, INC.; TRADESTATION SECURITIES, INC.;
`TRADESTATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; and
`IBFX, INC.
`
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
` TRADING TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
`
`Patent Owner
`_________________
`
`Case CBM2015-001721
`U.S. Patent 7,783,556
`_________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S REQUEST FOR REHEARING
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 CBM2016-00040 has been joined with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CBM2015-00172
`U.S. Patent 7,783,556
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Patent Owner respectfully requests rehearing because the Board
`
`misapprehended that the Federal Circuit’s analysis in Trading Techs. Int'l, Inc. v.
`
`CQG, Inc., No. 2016-1616, 2017 WL 192716 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 18, 2017) (“CQG”)
`
`squarely applies here. While the Board declined to apply the rationale from CQG
`
`because of its belief that the case was on the line, the sole basis for this assertion is
`
`dicta that does not address the claims in that case. When applying the CQG
`
`analysis to the claims here, the claims are properly viewed as being directed to
`
`patent eligible subject matter.
`
`II. THE ‘556 PATENT CLAIMS PATENT-ELIGIBLE SUBJECT
`MATTER
`
`The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in CQG supports the eligibility of the
`
`claims of the ‘556 patent, as TT raised in supplemental briefing authorized by this
`
`Board and filed on January 30, 2017. Paper 80, at 2-5.
`
`Nonetheless, the PTAB found that the claims of the ‘556 patent are directed
`
`to an abstract idea, misapprehending that the Federal Circuit has already detailed
`
`exactly how the Alice framework applies to claims like those in the ‘556 patent.
`
`In TT v. CQG, the Federal Circuit found eligible under both steps of Alice,
`
`patents that claimed “a specific, structured graphical user interface paired with a
`
`prescribed functionality directly related to the graphical user interface’s structure
`
`that is addressed to and resolves a specifically identified problem in the prior state
`
`1
`
`
`
`CBM2015-00172
`U.S. Patent 7,783,556
`
`of the art.” CQG at *3. Further, the Federal Circuit stated that “specific
`
`technologic modifications to solve a problem or improve the functioning of a
`
`known system generally produce patent-eligible subject matter.” Id.
`
`The PTAB misapprehended the Federal Circuit’s opinion in TT v. CQG. For
`
`instance, the Decision stated that with respect to TT v. CQG, “the Federal Circuit
`
`referred to even those narrower claims [of the ‘132 and ‘304 patents] as on the line
`
`between patent eligibility and ineligibility.” Decision at 34. Yet this ignores that
`
`TT v. CQG was a unanimous decision, held that the ‘132 and ‘304 patents were
`
`patent eligible under either step of Alice, and decided promptly after oral
`
`argument. There was nothing close about that decision.
`
`Like the ‘304 and ‘132 patents, the ‘556 patent is not directed to an abstract
`
`idea because it claims a specific, structured graphical user interfaces that solves
`
`problems with visualization and usability in prior graphical user interface tools.
`
`The ‘556 patent provides a new application that is “not simply the generalized use
`
`of a computer as a tool to conduct a known and obvious process, but instead is an
`
`improvement to the capability of the system as a whole.” CQG at *3.
`
`III. CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Patent Owner respectfully requests that this Board
`
`reconsider its Decision and find that the ‘556 patent is directed to patent-eligible
`
`subject matter.
`
`2
`
`
`
`CBM2015-00172
`U.S. Patent 7,783,556
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: May 1, 2017
`
`MCDONNELL BOEHNEN HULBERT &
`BERGHOFF LLP
`
`/Michael D. Gannon/
`
`Michael D. Gannon,
`Back-Up Counsel, Reg. No. 36,807
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`300 South Wacker Drive
`Chicago, Illinois 60606
`(312) 913-0001
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`CBM2015-00172
`U.S. Patent 7,783,556
`
`Pursuant to 37 CFR §§ 42.6(s)(4) and 42.205(b), the undersigned certified
`
`that on March 24, 2017, a complete and entire copy or this PATENT OWNER’S
`
`REQUEST FOR REHEARING was provided via email to the Petitioners by
`
`serving correspondence address of record as follows
`
`John C. Phillips
`phillips@fr.com
`
`Kevin Su
`CBM41919-0002CP1@fr.com
`
`Michael T. Rosato
`mrosato@wsgr.com
`
`Matthew A. Argenti
`margenti@wsgr.com
`
`Robert E. Sokohl
`rsokohl@skgf.comt
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Cole B. Richter/
`Cole B. Richter,
`Counsel for Patent Owner,
`Reg. No. 65,398
`
`
`
`Dated: May 1, 2017
`
`By:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
