Opinion ID: 209917
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: compare and

Text: The claims recite a data processing system adapted to compare certain of the information received from the applicant and certain of the information received from said at least one database relevant to the applicant's ability and willingness to comply with the account requirements to determine in real time and without human assistance if the applicant's requested account is approved. '007 patent col. 11 ll.7-13 (emphasis added). The district court construed the disputed comparison language to require that both sets of information being comparedi.e., (i) that received from applicant and (ii) that received from the database[be] relevant to the applicant's ability and willingness to comply with the account requirements. Claim Construction Order at 4. Decisioning argues that the district court's construction is erroneous because it is inconsistent with the plain language of the claims. Appellees urge us to affirm the district court's interpretation based upon their own parsing of the claim language. We conclude that the plain language of the claims requires only the information received from the database relevant to the applicant's ability and willingness to comply with the account requirements necessarily be relevant to the applicant's ability and willingness to comply with the account requirements. The modifying phrase, relevant to the applicant's ability and willingness to comply with the account requirements, is clearly linked to the at least one database recited in the claim. In the language of the disputed sentence, each reference to information is preceded by the phrase certain of the information, making distinct the types of information being compared. Thus, the data processing system compare[s][1] certain of the information received from the applicant and [2] certain of the information received from said at least one database relevant to the applicant's ability and willingness to comply with the account requirements to determine in real time and without human assistance if the applicant's requested account is approved. '007 patent col.11 ll.7-13 (emphases added). This sentence structure is also used elsewhere in claim 1 to distinguish between two types of information being compared. See id. col.11 ll.3-6 (verify the applicant's identity by comparing [1] certain of the information received from the applicant with [2] certain of the information received from said at least one database relevant to the applicant's identity. ) (emphases added). Moreover, the claims, when read as a whole, demonstrate that the relevant to modifier describes the type of database from which the information is being culled. This characteristic is highlighted by the description of the data processing system in claim 1: a data processing system with associated memory having establishment criteria bearing on the ability and willingness of the applicant to comply with account requirements for establishing and holding an account at a financial institution based on prescribed data obtained from the applicant and information about the applicant obtained from at least one database containing information about the applicant relevant to the ability and willingness of the applicant to comply with the account requirements. Id. col.10 ll.50-59 (emphasis added). This passage confirms that the disputed compare. . . and . . . language envisions the comparison of two types of data: that received from the applicant (e.g., name, telephone number, etc.) and that received about the applicant from a credit database (e.g., credit score). The specification is in accord. See id. col.3 ll.21-27 (Information about the applicant is also obtained via electronic transfer of data to the computer from one or more databases, including those that provide name and address based on a caller's telephone number, and from credit bureaus that provide credit reports on an applicant given an applicant's name, a social security number and an address.); id. col.6 ll.40-44 ([T]ransaction processor 10 initially needs only the applicant's name, address and social security number for identification. This information is used to obtain a credit report from a credit bureau.). For these reasons, only the information received from the at least one database is required to be relevant to the applicant's ability and willingness to comply with the account requirements.