In re: Steed, No. 14-1458 (Fed. Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseThe 600 Application, entitled “Web-Integrated OnLine Financial Database System and Method for Debt Recovery,” was filed in 2004, with priority claimed to a provisional application filed on November 13, 2003. The invention is a web-integrated debt records and collection system that can be accessed and operated across the Internet by various users in various roles. The Examiner rejected claims as obvious in view of the Evans publication, entitled “System and Method for Debt Presentment and Resolution.” After unsuccessfully attempting to distinguish the Evans Rejections on the merits, the applicants undertook to remove Evans as a reference by “swearing back” or “swearing behind” under 37 C.F.R. 1.131; the Applicant establishes that it was in possession of the claimed subject matter before the effective date of the reference. The Evans effective date was December 2002. The applicants submitted a Rule 131 Declaration with exhibits and statements to show “diligence continuing to the constructive reduction to practice.” The Examiner found the Declaration and the exhibits insufficient, as showing “only a broad overview of the idea.” The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trial and Appeal Board and the Federal Circuit affirmed the rejection on grounds of obviousness, 35 U.S.C. 103.1.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.