Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 38-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 38, claim 38 is rejected as indefinite because claim 38 depends from claim 13 but claim 13 has been cancelled and as such it is not clear what dependency claim 38 is intended to have. For the purposes of analyzing the claim 38, Examiner is interpreting claim 38 as depending from claim 31, not 13.
Regarding claim 39, claim 39 is rejected under 112(b) due to its dependency from claim 38.
Regarding claim 40, claim 40 is rejected as indefinite because claim 40 recites “the looping routine”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Regarding claim 38, claim 38 is rejected under 112(d) because claim 38 depends from claim 13 but claim 13 has been cancelled. As such, claim 38 does not contain a reference to a claim previously set forth. As discussed above, Examiner is treating claim 38 as if it depends from claim 31, not 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 20-23, 26, 27, 30-34, 37 ,40-47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jing et al, US Pub. No. 2015/0317759, herein referred to as “Jing”, in view of Barnfield et al, US Pub. No. 2013/0212031, herein referred to as “Barnfield”.
Regarding claim 20, Jing teaches:
A planning system synthesized by a data processing system interrogating a database of data representing nodal objects in a data store (queries a database about career paths, e.g. Abstract and ¶[0014]; see also ¶[0004] explicitly discussing nodes),
A) each nodal object:(i) having informational content characterizing the nodal object, the informational content associated with one nodal object being related to a producer and distinguishable from informational content associated with another nodal object; (ii) having one or more links to other nodal objects; (iii) being linked to a predecessory nodal object or a successory nodal object; B) each link being representative of a pathway
the data processing system including: a memory comprising instructions; and one or more computer processors, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more computer processors, cause one or more computer processes, engines and interface to perform operations comprising (processor, memory and instructions, ¶¶[0072]-[0073]):
(a) initiating and deploying discrete instances of a plurality of searching strategy processes by a process management engine, each instance adopting a different searching strategy to the searching strategy of a preceding instance in response to input search data having a beginning specification of a nodal object that establishes a from' nodal object, and an end specification of a nodal object that establishes a 'to' nodal object, whereby the 'from' nodal object and the 'to' nodal object relatively constitute terminal nodes of a network of links between the nodal objects, each link representing a pathway that may be part of a producer path1);
(b) interrogating the database by a database interrogating process using a deployed instance of a searching strategy process commencing with an initial searching strategy process and if determined by the process management engine, progressing with one or more subsequent and different searching strategy processes and generating results from the interrogating (career path search engine searches database and provides results to user, ¶¶[0024]-[0025], and if no starting or ending career positions match the query, system provides a best match, ¶[0027]2);
controlling
to locate both:(i) 'from' nodal objects of the same or different producers that are linked to successor nodal objects by a plurality of links including one or more intermediary nodal objects (career path queries specify starting position of "bus boy" to ending position of "executive chef", ¶¶[0014], [0024] and Fig. 4);
and (ii) 'to' nodal objects of the same or different producers that are linked to predecessor nodal objects by a plurality of links including one or more intermediary nodal objects (career path queries specify starting position of "bus boy" to ending position of "executive chef", ¶¶[0014], [0024] and Fig. 4);
wherein the dual end search of the searching strategy process comprises: locating one or more producer paths
identifying any intermediary nodal objects in common (identify all career paths from the database with an initial position instance of “bus boy” and an ending or intermediate position instance of “executive chef”, ¶[0025] and Fig. 4).
However Jing does not teach but Barnfield does teach:
and creating a virtual path comprising nodal objects and links of different producers that include the common intermediary nodal object or objects having a link to a predecessory nodal object and a link to a successory nodal object of different producers (generates multiple career paths, (i.e. recommended next step, high performance path, and fast track path), ¶[0074] and Fig. 3; see also ¶[0043] discussing the different types of paths; and ¶[0064] and Fig. 2 showing career paths are generated based on aggregated data of multiple workers).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing with the creation of career paths based on aggregated data from multiple workers as taught by Barnfield because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that people planning a career might have different priorities that previous user (e.g. might wish to focus on a high-performance path or a fast track path) and accordingly would have enabled the user to select different career paths, e.g. as taught by Barnfield.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 20 and Jing further teaches:
wherein the user interface includes a filter to facilitate a user inputting data and initiating the subsequent searching strategy process or a plurality of subsequent searching strategy processes (includes search engine for user to submit career path query, ¶¶[0023]-[0024]. Please note, search engines are "filters" because search engines filter information from a database or datastore)
to select a pathway level to apply for extracting intermediary nodal objects from the output data for graphical presentation to the user, whereby the pathway level corresponds to the number of pathways linking the terminal nodes either directly without any intermediary nodal objects or indirectly with intermediary nodal objects (provides intermediary career position instances to user like 'engineer supervisor', e.g. ¶[0036] and Fig. 2; see also Figs. 3-5 showing various examples of career paths displayed to user).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 20 and Jing further teaches:
(i) receiving the beginning specification from the user interface to establish the 'from' nodal object (user inserts starting career position, ¶[0042] and Fig. 3);
(ii) providing the user interface with prescribed list information from which the end specification can be selected to establish the 'to' nodal object (provides career paths leading from the starting position, ¶¶[0043]-[0044] and Fig. 3);
and (iii) applying the beginning specification and the end specification to the initial searching strategy process and the subsequent searching strategy process respectively (user inserts starting career position and ending career position, ¶[0048] and Fig 4. Additionally, please note, the phrase "as required" may suggest this limitation, or a part of it, may not be required to occur in certain cases, and as such this limitation, or part of it, would not further limit the scope of the claim, see MPEP 2143.03).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 20 and Jing further teaches:
populating the database by a producer creation process (mines databases to provide the data, e.g. with web crawlers, ¶¶[0015], [0017]-[0019])
with discrete nodal objects associated with a producer (associates career positions with the person who held it, ¶[0017])
sequentially occurring at different chronological stages commencing with a beginning specification and finishing with an ending specification (determines career path by looking at date ranges, ¶¶[0019]-[0020]),
and including specifications for all intermediary nodal objects (obtains various information about positions, ¶¶[[0017], [0019])),
the producer creation process operable to: (i) receive specification data and producer data from the user interface for each nodal object created by the producer, along with other informational content characterizing the nodal object (mines databases to provide the data, e.g. with web crawlers, obtained from companies about their employees, to obtain the data, ¶¶[0015], [0017]-[0019]);
(ii) link successive nodal objects and relate them so that all of the nodal objects represent a pathway from the nodal object with the beginning specification to the nodal object with the ending specification (determines career path by looking at various information including date ranges, ¶¶[0019]-[0020]);
(iii) populate the database with data in respect of each of the related nodal objects in respect of which informational content is received (mines databases to provide the data, e.g. with web crawlers, ¶¶[0015], [0017]-[0019]);
and (iv) associate producer information with each of the related nodal objects populating the database (associates career positions with the person who held it, ¶[0017]).
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 20 and Jing further teaches:
(a) generating an input user interface layout to receive and configure the search data (user submits career path query, ¶[0024]; see also ¶[0033] discussing user inputs and ¶[0074] discussing input devices):
and (b) generating an output user interface to receive and configure the output data in the form of the graphical presentation to the user (displays graphical representations of results, ¶¶[0028], [0030]-[0032] and Figs. 2-5);
wherein: A) the input user interface layout has a field configuring the search data into beginning specification search data and end specification search data (user submits career path query based on starting and ending positions, ¶¶[0024], [0027]; see also ¶[0033] discussing user inputs and ¶[0074] discussing input devices; see also Fig. 4 showing search inputs);
and B) the output user interface has a pane displaying the output data in respect of nodal objects sourced from the database as a result of processing by the data processing system diagrammatically as nodes, and directly related nodal objects that are linked by a lineal representation interconnecting the nodes (displays graphical representations of results, ¶¶[0028], [0030]-[0032] and Figs. 2-5);
whereby the nodes are displayed sequentially from one end of the pane to the other end of the pane, so that the node displayed at one end of the pane is a nodal object associated with the beginning specification of the beginning specification search data to establish a 'from' node and the node displayed at the other end of the pane is a nodal object associated with the ending specification of the ending specification search data to establish a 'to' node, so that the nodes collectively form one or more actual pathways between the 'from' node and the 'to' node (career paths are shown from beginning to end, e.g. from CPNA to CPN E, ¶[0049] and Figs. 2-5).
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 26 and Jing further teaches:
wherein the user interface is able to display multiple branches from one node to other intermediary nodes between the 'from' node and the 'to' node (shows multiple branches from CPN A to CPN E, with CPN B as one intermediary node and CPN D as another intermediary node, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 30, Jing teaches:
A) each nodal object:(i) having informational content characterizing the nodal object, the informational content associated with one nodal object being related to a producer and distinguishable from informational content associated with another nodal object; (ii) having one or more links to other related nodal objects; (iii) being linked to a predecessory nodal object or a successory nodal object; B) each link being representative of a pathway traversed by producer between the two nodes; and C) a plurality of sequential links to or from a nodal object being representative of a producer path of the same or different producers (data structure includes nodes where each position instance represents a position held and references to the positions held immediately before and after by the person associated with the position instance, ¶¶[0017], [0063]; see also Figs. 2-5);
the method including: (a) initiating and deploying discrete instances of a plurality of searching strategies, each instance adopting a different searching strategy to the searching strategy of the preceding instance in response to input search data having a beginning specification of a nodal object that establishes a 'from' nodal object, and an end specification of a nodal object that establishes a 'to' nodal object as determined by a user specification, whereby the 'from' nodal object and the 'to' nodal object relatively constitute terminal nodes of a network of links between the nodal objects, each link representing a pathway that may be part of a producer path¶[0026], and if no starting or ending career positions match the query, system provides a best match, ¶[0027]3);
(b) interrogating the database using a deployed instance of a searching strategy commencing with an initial searching strategy and 4);
(c) controlling the interrogating of the database according to the determination of the user specification
by deploying (i) the searching strategy using the input search data in a dual ended search of the database(career path search engine searches database and provides results to user, ¶¶[0024]-[0025]):
to locate both:(A) 'from' nodal objects of the same or different producers that are linked to successory nodal objects by a plurality of
and (B) 'to' nodal objects of the same or different producers that are linked to
and wherein the dual ended search of the searching strategy comprises:(i) locating one or more producer paths from one terminal nodal object and one or more producer paths from the other terminal nodal object (identifies all career paths from the database with an initial position instance of “bus boy” and an ending or intermediate position instance of “executive chef”, ¶[0025] and Fig. 4);
(i) identifying any intermediary nodal objects in common (identify all career paths from the database with an initial position instance of “bus boy” and an ending or intermediate position instance of “executive chef”, ¶[0025] and Fig. 4).
However Jing does not teach but Barnfield does teach:
and (ii) creating a virtual path comprising nodal objects and links of different producers that include the common intermediary nodal object or objects having a link to a predecessory nodal object and a link to a successory nodal object of different producers (generates multiple career paths, (i.e. recommended next step, high performance path, and fast track path), ¶[0074] and Fig. 3; see also ¶[0043] discussing the different types of paths; and ¶[0064] and Fig. 2 showing career paths are generated based on aggregated data of multiple workers).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing with the creation of career paths based on aggregated data from multiple workers as taught by Barnfield because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that people planning a career might have different priorities that previous user (e.g. might wish to focus on a high-performance path or a fast track path) and accordingly would have enabled the user to select different career paths, e.g. as taught by Barnfield.
Regarding claim 31 the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 30 and Jing further teaches:
generating an input user interface layout configuring input search data (user submits career path query, ¶[0024]; see also ¶[0033] discussing user inputs and ¶[0074] discussing input devices)
and an output user interface configuring output data in the form of a graphical presentation (displays graphical representations of results, ¶¶[0028], [0030]-[0032] and Figs. 2-5);
providing fields on the input user interface layout configuring the search data into beginning specification search data and end specification search data on the input user interface layout (user submits career path query based on starting and ending positions, ¶¶[0024], [0027]; see also ¶[0033] discussing user inputs and ¶[0074] discussing input devices; see also Fig. 4 showing search inputs);
presenting a pane on the output user interface displaying the output data in respect of nodal objects sourced from the database diagrammatically as nodes, and linking directly related nodal objects by a lineal representation interconnecting the nodes as a result of processing (displays graphical representations of results, ¶¶[0028], [0030]-[0032] and Figs. 2-5);
and displaying the nodes sequentially from one end of the pane to the other end of the pane, so that the node displayed at one end of the pane is a nodal object associated with the beginning specification of the beginning specification search data to establish a 'from' node and the node displayed at the other end of the pane is a nodal object associated with the ending specification of the ending specification search data to establish a 'to' node, so that the nodes collectively form one or more actual pathways between the 'from' node and the 'to' node (career paths are shown from beginning to end, e.g. from CPNA to CPN E, ¶[0049] and Figs. 2-5).
Regarding claim 32 the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 30 and Jing further teaches:
filtering user input data and initiating the subsequent searching strategy (includes search engine for user to submit career path query, ¶¶[0023]-[0024]. Please note, search engines are "filters" because search engines filter information from a database or datastore)
by selecting a pathway level to apply for extracting intermediary nodal objects from the output data for graphical presentation to the user, whereby the pathway level corresponds to the number of pathways linking the terminal nodes either directly without any intermediary nodal objects or indirectly with intermediary nodal objects (provides intermediary career position instances to user like 'engineer supervisor', e.g. ¶[0036] and Fig. 2; see also Figs. 3-5 showing various examples of career paths displayed to user).
Regarding claim 33 the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 30 and Jing further teaches:
(i) receiving the beginning specification from input search data to establish the 'from' nodal object (user inserts starting career position, ¶[0042] and Fig. 3);
(ii) receiving prescribed list information from which the end specification can be selected to establish the 'to' nodal object (provides career paths leading from the starting position, ¶¶[0043]-[0044] and Fig. 3);
and (iii) applying the beginning specification and the end specification to the initial searching strategy and the subsequent searching strategy respectively (user inserts starting career position and ending career position, ¶[0048] and Fig 4).
Regarding claim 34, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 30 and Jing further teaches:
populating the database (mines databases to provide the data, e.g. with web crawlers, ¶¶[0015], [0017]-[0019])
with discrete nodal objects associated with a producer (associates career positions with the person who held it, ¶[0017])
sequentially occurring at different chronological stages commencing with a beginning specification and finishing with an ending specification (determines career path by looking at date ranges, ¶¶[0019]-[0020]),
and including specifications for all intermediary nodal objects (obtains various information about positions, ¶¶[[0017], [0019]),
and further (i) receiving specification data and producer data from the user interface for each nodal object created by the producer, along with other informational content characterizing the nodal object (mines databases to provide the data, e.g. with web crawlers, obtained from companies about their employees, to obtain the data, ¶¶[0015], [0017]-[0019]);
(ii) linking successive nodal objects and relating them so that all of the nodal objects represent a pathway from the nodal object with the beginning specification to the nodal object with the ending specification (determines career path by looking at various information including date ranges, ¶¶[0019]-[0020]);
(iii) populating the database with data in respect of each of the related nodal objects in respect of which informational content is received (mines databases to provide the data, e.g. with web crawlers, ¶¶[0015], [0017]-[0019]);
and (iv) associating producer information with each of the related nodal objects populating the database (associates career positions with the person who held it, ¶[0017]).
Regarding claim 37, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 30 and Jing further teaches:
displaying multiple branches from one node to other intermediary nodes between the 'from' node and the 'to' node (shows multiple branches from CPN A to CPN E, with CPN B as one intermediary node and CPN D as another intermediary node, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 40, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 20 and Jing further teaches:
receiving and processing the results of the interrogating of the database by a results processing engine comprising: (i) ascertaining the result of the initial searching strategy process that locates nodal objects and determining whether the searching strategy of that process is satisfied, or whether a different searching strategy needs to be applied (search engine identifies career paths that match the query, ¶[0025], and if no starting or ending career positions match the query, system provides a best match, ¶[0027]);
and (ii) outputting reporting output data if the searching strategy of the initial searching strategy process is satisfied (present matching career path data to the user that submitted the career path query in the form of a graphical output depicting, ¶[0025]);
and (iii) initiating another interrogating of the database for nodal objects according to the different searching strategy of a subsequent searching strategy process if invoked by the process management engine (if no starting or ending career positions match the query, system provides a best match, ¶[0027]);
and (iv) outputting reporting output data if the different searching strategy of the subsequent searching strategy process is satisfied (provide identified data structures that include best matches career position instances to starting and/or ending career positions of a career path search query, ¶[0027]);
or (v) if the subsequent searching strategy process is not satisfied, performing the preceding steps (iii), (iv) and (v) of this claim according to another different searching strategy of a subsequent searching strategy process (search engine identifies career paths that match the query, ¶[0025], and if no starting or ending career positions match the query, system provides a best match, ¶[0027]).
Regarding claim 41, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 20 and Jing further teaches:
configuring search data input by a user interface into beginning specification search data and end specification search data and inputting the configured search data to the process management engine (user submit a career path query including at least one of a starting career position and an ending career position, ¶[0024])
and configuring output data by the user interface that is to be reported from the process management engine into a graphical presentation to the user (present resulting career path data to the user that submitted the career path query in the form of a graphical output depicting, ¶[0025]).
Regarding claim 42, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 20 and Barnfield further teaches:
wherein the dual end search of the searching strategy process includes: interrogating the database for locating link connections between terminal nodal objects in an instance of the searching strategy process being deployed to locate a plurality of producer paths, each instance invoking one search for 'from' nodal objects corresponding to the beginning specification search data and another search for 'to' nodal objects corresponding to the end specification search data sourced from the user interface by the process management engine (generates multiple career paths, (i.e. recommended next step, high performance path, and fast track path), ¶[0074] and Fig. 3; see also ¶[0043] discussing the different types of paths; and ¶[0064] and Fig. 2 showing career paths are generated based on aggregated data of multiple workers).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing with the creation of career paths based on aggregated data from multiple workers as taught by Barnfield because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that people planning a career might have different priorities that previous user (e.g. might wish to focus on a high-performance path or a fast track path) and accordingly would have enabled the user to select different career paths, e.g. as taught by Barnfield.
Regarding claim 43, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 41 and Jing further teaches:
retaining producer information (career position instance having various information about the person holding the position, ¶[0017]).
However Jing does not teach but Barnfield does teach:
(i) selecting one or more intermediary nodal objects between the terminal nodal objects from the results of the dual end search (user selects job from list of jobs, ¶[0069] and Fig. 3);
(iii) linking the selected nodal object with a chosen predecessory nodal object and successory nodal object to form the virtual pathway (assigns selected job to career path being constructed by a user, ¶[0069] and Fig. 2).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing with the creation of career paths based on aggregated data from multiple workers as taught by Barnfield because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that people planning a career might have different priorities that previous user (e.g. might wish to focus on a high-performance path or a fast track path) and accordingly would have enabled the user to select different career paths, e.g. as taught by Barnfield.
However, the combination of Jing and Barnfield does not explicitly teach:
(ii) disassociating the respective sequential links of each selected intermediary nodal object from its predecessory nodal object and its successory nodal object within the pathway of the producer path; and
Nevertheless, it would have been obvious, at the time of filing, to disassociate the related nodal objects because it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of a reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom, see MPEP 2144.01. That is, Barnfield teaches creating user-generated career paths, ¶[0069] of Barnfield and one of ordinary skill would have recognized the user generated career path is not based on a producer pathway (i.e., is based positions that have been removed from their career paths).
Regarding claim 44, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 30 and Jing further teaches:
receiving and processing the results of the interrogating of the database by:(i) ascertaining the result of the initial searching strategy that locates nodal objects and determining whether the searching strategy of that process is satisfied, or whether a different searching strategy needs to be applied (search engine identifies career paths that match the query, ¶[0025], and if no starting or ending career positions match the query, system provides a best match, ¶[0027]);
and (ii) outputting reporting output data if the searching strategy of the initial searching strategy process is satisfied (present matching career path data to the user that submitted the career path query in the form of a graphical output depicting, ¶[0025]);
and (iii) invoking the looping routine by initiating another interrogation of the database for nodal objects according to the different searching strategy as ultimately determined by the user specification (if no starting or ending career positions match the query, system provides a best match, ¶[0027]).
Regarding claim 45, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 30 and Jing further teaches:
configuring search data input by a user into beginning specification search data and end specification search data (user submit a career path query including at least one of a starting career position and an ending career position, ¶[0024])
and configuring output data into a graphical presentation to the user (present resulting career path data to the user that submitted the career path query in the form of a graphical output depicting, ¶[0025]).
Regarding claim 46, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 30 and Barnfield further teaches:
interrogating the database for locating link connections between terminal nodal objects in an instance of the searching strategy being deployed to locate a plurality of producer paths, each instance invoking one search for 'from' nodal objects corresponding to the beginning specification search data and another search for 'to' nodal objects corresponding to the end specification search data (generates multiple career paths, (i.e. recommended next step, high performance path, and fast track path), ¶[0074] and Fig. 3; see also ¶[0043] discussing the different types of paths; and ¶[0064] and Fig. 2 showing career paths are generated based on aggregated data of multiple workers).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing with the creation of career paths based on aggregated data from multiple workers as taught by Barnfield because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that people planning a career might have different priorities that previous user (e.g. might wish to focus on a high-performance path or a fast track path) and accordingly would have enabled the user to select different career paths, e.g. as taught by Barnfield.
Regarding claim 47, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 45 and Jing further teaches:
retaining producer information (career position instance having various information about the person holding the position, ¶[0017]).
However Jing does not teach but Barnfield does teach:.
(i) selecting one or more intermediary nodal objects between the terminal nodal objects from the results of the dual end search (user selects job from list of jobs, ¶[0069] and Fig. 3);
and (iii) linking the selected nodal object with a chosen predecessory nodal object and successory nodal object to form the virtual pathway (assigns selected job to career path being constructed by a user, ¶[0069] and Fig. 2).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing with the creation of career paths based on aggregated data from multiple workers as taught by Barnfield because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that people planning a career might have different priorities that previous user (e.g. might wish to focus on a high-performance path or a fast track path) and accordingly would have enabled the user to select different career paths, e.g. as taught by Barnfield.
However, the combination of Jing and Barnfield does not explicitly teach:
(ii) disassociating the respective sequential links of each selected intermediary nodal object from its predecessory nodal object and its successory nodal object within the pathway of the producer path.
Nevertheless, it would have been obvious, at the time of filing, to disassociate the related nodal objects because it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of a reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom, see MPEP 2144.01. That is, Barnfield teaches creating user-generated career paths, ¶[0069] of Barnfield and one of ordinary skill would have recognized the user generated career path is not based on a producer pathway (i.e., is based positions that have been removed from their career paths).
Claim(s) 24, 25, 35 and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jing and Barnfield further in view of Savistky et al, US Pub. No. 2005/0114203, herein referred to as "Savistky".
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 23 and does not teach but Savistky does teach:
(a) receiving a producer contact query from the user interface directed to related nodal objects of a producer displayed in the graphical presentation to the user, (b) accessing the data store to retrieve contact information from the user information of a producer associated with creating the nodal objects; and (c) providing the user interface with the retrieved contact information for displaying to a user (allow user to contact employee associated with a particular background, by establishing an internet connection, ¶[0011]).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing and Barnfield with emailing employees with a particular background, as taught by Savistky because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that people planning a career (i.e., the users in Jing and Barnfield) would likely be interested in speaking to others who had progressed in their career, and as such would have offered the users of the career planning system a means to communicate with those had progressed in their career.
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 20 and does not teach but Jing does teach:
retaining producer information between nodal objects extracted from the database (career position instance having various information about the person holding the position, ¶[0017]).
However Jing does not teach but Barnfield does teach:
(i) receiving selections of intermediary nodal objects from the user interface to form a virtual pathway between two intermediary nodal objects, somewhere between the 'from' nodal object and the 'to' nodal object (user selects job from list of jobs, ¶[0069] and Fig. 3),
(ii) linking nodal objects between different producers where no previous link exists, including linking an intermediary nodal object belonging to one producer to an intermediary nodal object belonging to a different producer, thereby creating the virtual pathway as determined by the selection (assigns selected job to career path being constructed by a user, ¶[0069] and Fig. 2).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing with the creation of career paths based on aggregated data from multiple workers as taught by Barnfield because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that people planning a career might have different priorities that previous user (e.g. might wish to focus on a high-performance path or a fast track path) and accordingly would have enabled the user to select different career paths, e.g. as taught by Barnfield.
However, the combination of Jing and Barnfield does not teach but Savistky does teach:
and (iii) storing the virtual pathway as virtual pathway data in the data store separately from the data populating the database as created by the producer creation process (stores and emails the development plan, ¶[0051]).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing and Barnfield storing the career paths separately, as taught by Savistky because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognize the need to store the user-generated career paths separately from the career paths based on people' actual work experiences to prevent the user-generated career paths from influencing the determinations made using information from actual career paths (e.g. the calculations taught by Jing, ¶[0020]).
However, the combination of Jing, Barnfield and Savistky does not explicitly teach:
disassociating certain nodal objects from the virtual pathway as determined by the selection
Nevertheless, it would have been obvious, at the time of filing, to disassociate the related nodal objects because it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of a reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom, see MPEP 2144.01. That is, Barnfield teaches creating user-generated career paths, ¶[0069] of Barnfield and one of ordinary skill would have recognized the user generated career path is not based on a producer pathway (i.e., is based positions that have been removed from their career paths).
Regarding claim 35, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 30 and does not teach but Savistky does teach:
(a) receiving a producer contact query directed to related nodal objects of a producer displayed in the graphical presentation to the user:(b) accessing the database to retrieve contact information from the user information of a producer associated with creating the nodal objects; and (c) providing the user interface with the retrieved contact information for displaying to a user (allow user to contact employee associated with a particular background, by establishing an internet connection, ¶[0011]).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing and Barnfield with emailing employees with a particular background, as taught by Savistky because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that people planning a career (i.e., the users in Jing and Barnfield) would likely be interested in speaking to others who had progressed in their career, and as such would have offered the users of the career planning system a means to communicate with those had progressed in their career.
Regarding claim 36, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 30 and does not teach but Jing does teach:
retaining producer information between nodal objects extracted from the database (career position instance having various information about the person holding the position, ¶[0017]).
However Jing does not teach but Barnfield does teach:
(i) receiving selections of intermediary nodal objects from the user interface to form a virtual pathway between two intermediary nodal objects, somewhere between the 'from' nodal object and the 'to' nodal object (user selects job from list of jobs, ¶[0069] and Fig. 3),
(ii ) linking nodal objects between different producers where no previous link exists, including an intermediary nodal object belonging to one producer to an intermediary nodal object belonging to a different producer, creating the virtual pathway as determined by the selection (assigns selected job to career path being constructed by a user, ¶[0069] and Fig. 2).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing with the creation of career paths based on aggregated data from multiple workers as taught by Barnfield because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that people planning a career might have different priorities that previous user (e.g. might wish to focus on a high-performance path or a fast track path) and accordingly would have enabled the user to select different career paths, e.g. as taught by Barnfield.
However, the combination of Jing and Barnfield does not teach but Savistky does teach:
and (iii) storing the virtual pathway as virtual pathway data separately from the data populating the database (stores and emails the development plan, ¶[0051]).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing and Barnfield storing the career paths separately, as taught by Savistky because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognize the need to store the user-generated career paths separately from the career paths based on people' actual work experiences to prevent the user-generated career paths from influencing the determinations made using information from actual career paths (e.g. the calculations taught by Jing, ¶[0020]).
However, the combination of Jing, Barnfield and Savistky does not explicitly teach:
disassociating certain nodal objects from the virtual pathway as determined by the selection,
Nevertheless, it would have been obvious, at the time of filing, to disassociate the related nodal objects because it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of a reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom, see MPEP 2144.01. That is, Barnfield teaches creating user-generated career paths, ¶[0069] of Barnfield and one of ordinary skill would have recognized the user generated career path is not based on a producer pathway (i.e., is based positions that have been removed from their career paths).
Claims 28 and 38 is is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Jing and Barnfield, further in view of Brodie et al, US Pub. No. 2008/0270444, herein referred to as "Brodie".
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Jing and Barnfield teaches all the limitations of claim 20 and Barnfield further teaches:
a scratchpad display area for the user to create a virtual pathway (users can alter displayed career paths to conduct a what-if analysis, ¶[0089] and Fig. 3).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing with the what-if analysis, as taught by Barnfield because known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in the same field based on design incentives, see MPEP 2143.I.F. That is, one of ordinary skill would have recognized people planning a career may wish to view multiple possible options.
However the combination of Jing and Barnfield does not teach but Brodie does teach
wherein the pane is divided into a main display area for displaying the output data and a scratchpad display area for the user to create a virtual pathway using selected nodes from the main display area by dragging and dropping a chosen node from the main display area to the scratchpad display area (user drags and drops nodes to create new nodes and relationships, ¶[0018] and Figs. 2A-3C).
Further, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to combine the career planning system of Jing and Barnfield with the drag and drop user interface of Brodie because simple substitution of one known element for another is obvious, see MPEP 2143.I.B. That is, Barnfield teaches a career planning using user selections. One of ordinary skill could have simply substituted the selections made in the user interface shown in Barnfield with a drag-and-drop interface, as taught by Brodie.
Claim 38 recites similar limitations as claim 28 and accordingly is rejected for similar reasons.
Claims 29 and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jing, Barnfield and Brodie in view of Dardinski et al, US Pat. No. 7,089,530, herein referred to as "Dardinski".
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Jing, Barnfield, and Brodie teaches all the limitations of claim 28 and does not teach but Dardinski does teach:
wherein the interface generator includes a virtual display validating process for checking that selected nodes from the main display area are connected as related nodes in the actual pathway either: (a) directly by a single pathway without any intermediary nodal objects being linked between the selected nodes; or (b) indirectly by a plurality of pathways including one or more intermediary nodal objects between the selected nodes; before verifying that the virtual pathway is valid (validates relationships of objects selected by user and determines the type of relationshi