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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to the restriction election filed on 4/28/2025 for the application No. 18/375,992, Claims 13 and 16-34 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 13 and 16-34 have been rejected.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“placement module adapted to” in claims 13 and 29.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
The Examiner notes that in the instant case, the Examiner looks to the specification to determine the structure or material that performs the functions recited in the pointed claim limitations: analysis presented in independent Claims 1 and 29
“placement module adapted to”
In the claim, “a placement module, the placement module adapted to: receive an indication of a clinical performance event, the clinical performance event performed by the candidate: This function is described in at least “0008] The NurseBee blockchain consortium and ecosystem, called the “Hive,” is comprised of Hive participants which include clinicians, facilities, vendors, recruiters, service providers, contributors, and franchisees. A rewards system is triggered by the actions of the different Hive participants. For example, nurses create a profile on the NurseBee platform and start earning honey, a token, by completing shifts, referring other nurses, and participating in polls. Nurses can use honey to purchase services (such as childcare, financial advice, or mental health support) from service providers in a rewards redemption application. Nurses can also convert honey to stablecoins and withdraw them to their bank account. The platform is built on the Ethereum Virtual Machine with blockchain bridging capacity. It integrates NurseBee's needs in smart contracts to, for example, execute payouts, record rewards earned, and store medical credentials”, paragraph 8. This function is specialized. The limitation is definite.
In the claim, a placement module, the placement module adapted to:…trigger the smart contract to transfer a portion of the one or more tokens to a candidate wallet upon receiving the indication of the clinical performance event, the candidate wallet owned by the candidate. This function is described in at least “[0061] A method is provided for enabling a recruiter or employer in a blockchain consortium and ecosystem to input an opportunity (job order) using reward tokens earned according to a smart contract and receive matches. As shown in FIG. 3, the NurseBee Platform 300 comprises a rewards database/interface 303 enabling a recruiter to earn one or more token rewards according to a smart contract stored on a blockchain 302. A recruiter (opportunity poster) can post/input an opportunity (job order) into an opportunity database 308. Honey (tokens) can be provided to the recruiter as a reward for uploading the opportunity. Resumes (worker profiles) are stored in a worker/participant database 306. An artificial intelligence (AI) matching algorithm 307 matches worker data 306 with opportunity data 308, generates a match, and sends it one or more of the worker and the opportunity poster.
[0062] Thus, FIG. 5 shows the process enabling a recruiter or employer in a blockchain consortium and ecosystem to input an opportunity (job order) using reward tokens earned according to a smart contract and receive matches. In step 501, one or more smart contacts enable a recruiter (opportunity poster) to earn Honey tokens. In step 502, the NurseBee platform receives an opportunity and stores the opportunity in an opportunity database in exchange for at least a portion of the earned Honey tokens. In step 503, an artificial intelligence matching algorithm on the NurseBee platform generates a match based on matching worker data with opportunity data. In step 504, the NurseBee platform notifies one or more of the worker and the recruiter about the match.”, paragraph 61 and 62 and Fig. 5. This function is specialized. The limitation is definite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 13 and 16-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claims 13, 22 and 16-34 are not compliant with 101, according with the last “2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance” (2019 PEG), published in the MPEP 2103 through 2106.07(c). Examiner’s analysis is presented below for all the claims.
Claim 13: Step 1 of 2019 PGE, does the claim fall within a Statutory Category? Yes. The claim recites a system.
Step 2A - Prong 1: Is a Judicial Exception recited in the claim? Yes. The claim recites the limitations of “ [interface ]…adapted to enable one or more of an opportunity poster and a candidate to earn one or more …; … adapted to generate a match, the match matching a candidate profile to the opportunity, the candidate profile stored …., the candidate profile for the candidate’
The “earns, generate a match” limitations, as drafted, is a process and system that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations as certain methods of organizing human activity, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors. The system for providing nurses with employee opportunities, benefits and services. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A - Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application? No. The claim recites additional limitations, such as,
“[interface ]…adapted to enable the opportunity poster to input an opportunity for storage …; [interface ]…adapted to send the match to one or more of the candidate and the opportunity poster: and …[module]..adapted to: receive an indication of a clinical performance event, the clinical performance event performed by the candidate: and…upon receiving the indication of the clinical performance event, …”
These are limitations toward accessing or receiving data. It is merely gathering data.
The Examiner analyses other supplementary elements in the claim in view of the instant disclosure:
“a token reward interface, tokens according to a smart contract stored on a blockchain; an opportunity interface; in an opportunity database[AltContent: ]; one or more processors, in a candidate database; a notification interface; a placement module; trigger the smart contract to transfer a portion of the one or more tokens to a candidate wallet; the candidate wallet owned by the candidate.”
The limitations comprise generic recited computer elements and software including data manipulation activity. The use of “a smart contract stored on a blockchain” is not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea because it merely reflects the use of conventional technology and amounts to only generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. MPEP 2106.05(h).
The combination of these additional elements can also be considered no more than mere instructions “to apply” the exception, See MPEP 2106.05(f).
The Examiner gives the broadest reasonable interpretation to the above elements. They are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
The claim as a whole does not integrate the method of organizing human activity into a practical application. Thus, the claim is ineligible because is directed to the recited judicial exception (abstract idea).
Step 2B : claim provides an inventive concept? No.
As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claim,
“a token reward interface, tokens according to a smart contract stored on a blockchain; an opportunity interface; in an opportunity database[AltContent: ]; one or more processors, in a candidate database; a notification interface; a placement module; trigger the smart contract to transfer a portion of the one or more tokens to a candidate wallet; the candidate wallet owned by the candidate.” amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception. i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception using generic hardware and software cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
Under the 2019 PEG, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B.
Here, the limitations:
“a token reward interface, tokens according to a smart contract stored on a blockchain; an opportunity interface; in an opportunity database[AltContent: ]; one or more processors, in a candidate database; a notification interface; a placement module; trigger the smart contract to transfer a portion of the one or more tokens to a candidate wallet; the candidate wallet owned by the candidate.” were considered to be extra-solution activity in Step 2A, and thus it is re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if it is more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field.
Other limitations in the claim, such as:
“[interface ]…adapted to enable the opportunity poster to input an opportunity for storage …; [interface ]…adapted to send the match to one or more of the candidate and the opportunity poster: and …[module]..adapted to: receive an indication of a clinical performance event, the clinical performance event performed by the candidate: and…upon receiving the indication of the clinical performance event, …”
These are limitations toward accessing or receiving data (gathering data). Accessing or receiving data is very well understood, routine and conventional computer task activity; It represents insignificant extra solution activity. Mere data-gathering step[s] cannot make an otherwise nonstaturory claim statutory In re Grams,888 F.2d 835, 840 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (quoting In re Meyer, 688 F.2d 789, 794 (CCPA 1982)).
Further, the instant specification does not provide any indication that the elements
“a token reward interface, tokens according to a smart contract stored on a blockchain; an opportunity interface; in an opportunity database[AltContent: ]; one or more processors, in a candidate database; a notification interface; a placement module; trigger the smart contract to transfer a portion of the one or more tokens to a candidate wallet; the candidate wallet owned by the candidate.” are anything other than generic software and hardware, and the Intellectual Ventures I v. Capital One Fin. Corp., 850 F.3d 1332, 121 USPQ2d 1940 (Fed. Cir. 2017), the steps in the claims described "the creation of a dynamic document based upon ‘management record types’ and ‘primary record types.’" 850 F.3d at 1339-40; 121 USPQ2d at 1945-46. The claims were found to be directed to the abstract idea of "collecting, displaying, and manipulating data." 850 F.3d at 1340; 121 USPQ2d at 1946. Concluding that generating information as a function of other information and a "dynamic" limitation is not sufficient to remove the claims from the abstract realm. The use of an estimation function is similarly deficient, as it merely reflects the use of the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea of estimating advertising elasticity. In this case, “tokens according to a smart contract stored on a blockchain” limitation, the use of
“opportunity database[AltContent: ]; “ a candidate database” and “token reward interface”, “opportunity interface”; “a notification interface” and “candidate wallet “ are well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here).
Accordingly, a conclusion that“a token reward interface, tokens according to a smart contract stored on a blockchain; an opportunity interface; in an opportunity database[AltContent: ]; one or more processors, in a candidate database; a notification interface; a placement module; trigger the smart contract to transfer a portion of the one or more tokens to a candidate wallet; the candidate wallet owned by the candidate.”
limitations (pointed above) are well-understood, routine, conventional activity is supported under Berkheimer Option 2. See MPEP 2106.05 (d). The claim is ineligible.
Claim 22: Step 1 of 2019 PGE, does the claim fall within a Statutory Category? Yes. The claim recites a method.
Step 2A - Prong 1: Is a Judicial Exception recited in the claim ? Yes. Because the same reasons pointed above.
Step 2A - Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application? No. Because the same reasons pointed above.
Step 2B : claim provides an inventive concept? No. Because the same reasons pointed above. The claim is ineligible.
Claim 29: Step 1 of 2019 PGE, does the claim fall within a Statutory Category? Yes. The claim recites a system.
Step 2A - Prong 1: Is a Judicial Exception recited in the claim ? Yes. Because the same reasons pointed above.
Step 2A - Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application? No. Because the same reasons pointed above.
Step 2B : claim provides an inventive concept? No. Because the same reasons pointed above. The claim is ineligible.
Dependent claims 16-21, 23-28 and 30-34, the claims recite elements such as “further comprising a candidate profile interface, the candidate profile interface adapted to: enable the candidate to input at least a portion of the candidate profile; and trigger the smart contract to transfer a second portion of the one or more tokens to the candidate wallet”, etc. These elements do not integrate the system of organizing human activity into a practical application. The claims are ineligible.
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 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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 13 and 16-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PG PUB. No. 20220180416(SHOOK) in view of US PG PUB. No. 20200098072 (Escobar).
As to claims 13 and 29, SHOOK discloses a system (“system and method is implemented to facilitate a blockchain based labor arbitrage”, abstract) comprising:
a) a token reward interface, the token reward interface adapted to enable one or more of an opportunity poster and a candidate to earn one or more tokens according to a smart contract stored on a blockchain;
(“…The method starts with a description for a job request received from a business operator device [Examiner equates an opportunity poster ]. After distributing the job description, the method receives proposals from the laborer devices [Examiner equates a candidate to earn one or more tokens ]. Then method matches a primary laborer device to the job description and generates a smart contract in the blockchain between the business operator device and the primary laborer device”, abstract);
b) an opportunity interface, the opportunity interface adapted to enable the opportunity poster to input an opportunity for storage in an opportunity database[AltContent: ];
(“[0034] As can be seen in FIG. 3, the method for facilitating a blockchain based marketplace for labor arbitrage of the present invention includes a step of receiving, using a communication device 202, a job description for a job from a business operator device 231, wherein the job description is entered to a blockchain 205 stored on a storage device 203, and wherein the business operator device 231 is granted access to the blockchain 205,…”, paragraph 34.
See also,
“[0029] As can be seen in FIG. 1, an online platform 100 consistent with various embodiments of the present invention facilitates a system and method for autonomous economies based on a distributed ledger technology (DLT) may be hosted on a centralized server 102, such as, for example, a cloud computing service 1300, as can be seen in FIG. 10. The centralized server 102 may communicate with other network entities, including, but not limited to, a mobile device 106 (such as a smartphone, a laptop, a tablet computer, etc.), other electronic devices 110 (such as desktop computers, server computers, etc.), databases 114…”, paragraph 29);
c) one or more processors, the one or more processors adapted to generate a match, the match matching a candidate [profile] to the opportunity, the candidate [profile] stored in a candidate database, the candidate profile for the candidate;
(“Upon receiving a laborer preference from the business operator device, the method determines a match of a primary laborer from the plurality of laborers….”, paragraph 9);
d) [AltContent: ]a notification interface, the notification interface adapted to send the match to one or more of the candidate and the opportunity poster:
(see at least elements (f) and (g) in Fig. 3 and associated disclosure)
and e) a placement module, the placement module adapted to: receive an indication of a [ clinical ] performance event, the [ clinical ] performance event performed by the candidate:
(see “quality of performance”, paragraph 44 and Fig. 7.
See also “[0042] As can be seen in FIG. 5, the method may comprise a sub-process for providing at least one record for the at least one laborer device 251 that provides a job proposal for the job requested by the business operator device 231. More specifically, the method includes a step of transmitting, using the communication device, at least one record in the blockchain 205 for the at least one laborer device 251 in Step D to the business operator device 231 through the processor; wherein the at least one record includes at least one of past job performance records, skill records, technical certificates, and credentials that are saved in the blockchain 205 in the storage device 203..”, paragraph 42);
and f) trigger the smart contract to transfer a portion of the one or more tokens to a candidate wallet upon receiving the indication of the[ clinical ] performance event, the candidate [wallet] owned by the candidate.
(“…Governing quality needs to include platform rules and rewards for these labor economy roles and, payment for these assurance activities would be contingent on the finalized labor transaction achieving, at least, two out of three digital signatures, thereby releasing token transfer and finalization…”, paragraph 82.
SHOOK does not expressly disclose but Escobar discloses
Profile
(Escobar’s system that is in the business of “creating employment contracts and possession contracts between users which are stored on a blockchain ledger”, abstract.
Escobar teaches “user profile 214 is verified”, paragraph 62)
clinical performance
(“worker's job history and performance for particular employers to be stored in a trustworthy and reliable manner”, paragraph 4.
“…Client-endorsers 228 can provide feedback on job performance of a worker 224….”, paragraph 62).
wallet
(“…wallets may (optionally) each include one or more instances of wallet private keys, utility tokens, crypto currency,…”, paragraph 42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Escobar’s teaching with the teaching of SHOOK. One would have been motivated to provide functionality using blockchain ledger in order to support employment and possession contracts (see Escobar abstract).
As to claim 22, it comprises the same limitations than claim 13 above, therefore is rejected in similar manner.
As to claim 29, it comprises the same limitations than claim 13 above, therefore is rejected in similar manner.
As to claims 17, 25 and 32, SHOOK discloses
wherein the at least a portion of a candidate profile is one or more of: a resume; a credential; and a verified credential.
(“…wherein the at least one record includes at least one of past job performance records, skill records, technical certificates, and credentials that are saved in the blockchain 205 in the storage device 203. ..”, paragraph 42).
As to claims 16, 24 and 31, SHOOK does not disclose but Escobar discloses
further comprising a candidate profile interface, the candidate profile interface adapted to: enable the candidate to input at least a portion of the candidate profile;
(“ The web browser 314 or the application 324 may enable a user 220 to securely login for creating and/or accessing their user profile 214, stored on the user device 204 and/or service database 201…”, paragraph 46 and Figs. 2 and 5 and associated disclosure);
and trigger the smart contract to transfer a second portion of the one or more tokens to the candidate wallet.
(“[0042] In some embodiments, security feature 360 may implement or otherwise interact with a removable or other digital wallet 366. Such wallets may (optionally) each include one or more instances of wallet private keys, .. tokens, crypto currency…”, paragraph 42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Escobar’s teaching with the teaching of SHOOK. One would have been motivated to provide functionality using blockchain ledger in order to support employment and possession contracts (see Escobar abstract).
As to claims 18 and 26, SHOOK discloses
wherein the one or more processors utilize an artificial intelligence algorithm to improve the accuracy of candidate-to-opportunity matches based on one or more of:
opportunity criteria;
facility historical performance; facility preferences;
facility requirements; facility data;
candidate historical performance; candidate preferences;
candidate attributes; and candidate availability.
(SHOOK’s system teaches, “[0037] With the laborer indication, as can be seen in FIG. 3, the method may include a step of identifying, at the processor 201, a primary laborer device of the at least one laborer device from the plurality of laborer devices 251 based on the job indication (Step F). In this step, the method may include selecting the at least one primary laborer of the at least one laborer. The method matches a qualified and willing primary laborer to a job requirement based on the business operator's preference and any relevant quality requirement….”, paragraph 37, Fig. 3 and associated disclosure.
Shook’s system also comprises “… wherein the at least one record includes at least one of past job performance records, skill records, technical certificates, and credentials that are saved in the blockchain 205 in the storage device 203…”, paragraph 42 and Fig. 5. See also in Fig. 4 steps (i) and (j), “signatures of the job completion indication”, “quality of performance” , etc in Fig. 7 and associated disclosure.
Next, “[0045] As can be seen in FIG. 10, a system consistent with the embodiments of the present invention may include a computing device or a cloud service, such as the computing device 1300. … Operating system 1305, for example, may be suitable for controlling computing device 1300's operation. In one embodiment, programming modules 1306 may include image-processing module, machine learning module and/or image classifying module…”, paragraph 45 and Fig. 10 and associated disclosure).
As to claims 19, 27 and 33, SHOOK discloses
wherein additional tokens are transferred [to the candidate wallet] when the candidate performs one or more of:
inputs a referral for a second candidate; participates in a poll;
participates in governance voting;
uploads a credential; verifies a credential; completes a survey; provides feedback;
engages with educational content; participates in continuing education; completes an educational course; uses mental health services;
uses wellness services; participates in carpooling; completes an assigned task; and uses specified services.
(SHOOK’s system teaches, “…the method receives proposals from the laborer devices. Then method matches a primary laborer device to the job description and generates a smart contract in the blockchain between the business operator device and the primary laborer device. Upon job completion, the method verifies that all job requirements plus quality standards are satisfactorily met and signatures of both the business operator device and the primary laborer device are validated, the method transmits a compensation of a predetermined type and amount of cryptographic token to the primary laborer device…”, abstract).
SHOOK does not expressly disclose but Escobar discloses
wallet
(“…wallets may (optionally) each include one or more instances of wallet private keys, utility tokens, crypto currency,…”, paragraph 42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Escobar’s teaching with the teaching of SHOOK. One would have been motivated to provide functionality using blockchain ledger in order to support employment and possession contracts (see Escobar abstract).
As to claims 20, 28 and 34, SHOOK does not expressly disclose but Escobar discloses
further comprising a reputation management module, the reputation management module adapted to adjust candidate profiles based on one or more of:
feedback scores; and verified work history.
(“[0005] This presently disclosed invention utilizes a blockchain-based ledger e.g., a distributed, remotely accessible, immutable ledger) for creation and development of a worker and employer reputation score, including work history. By permitting crowd-source reviews, migratory workers can maintain a global reputation that is immutable and stored in using the blockchain system…”, paragraph 5.
“[0047] Each user profile 214 may have corresponding user attributes (or user attribute metadata) 216. User attributes 216 may include one or more of the following: user ID 250, pseudo user ID or public key 217 (which has a one-to-one association with the user ID), private key 221 paired with the user public key 217 (i.e., using public-key or asymmetric cryptography), reputation score 210, reviews 244, comments 231, ratings 251, creation date 260, last update date 252, verification status 253, job history 254…”, paragraph 47).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Escobar’s teaching with the teaching of SHOOK. One would have been motivated to provide functionality using blockchain ledger in order to support employment and possession contracts (see Escobar abstract).
As to claims 21, 23 and 30, SHOOK discloses wherein the [ clinical ] performance event is one or more of:
a completed shift; accepting the opportunity;
accepting a last-minute shift; being available for work;
being placed into a recommended shift; being placed into an optimized shift;
providing care that meets performance metrics; demonstrating protocol compliance;
receiving positive peer feedback; receiving positive patient feedback;
completing monitored training;
completing monitored continuing education; and receiving a high rating from an employer.
(SHOOK discloses feedback, “0042] As can be seen in FIG. 5, the method may comprise a sub-process for providing at least one record for the at least one laborer device 251 that provides a job proposal for the job requested by the business operator device 231. More specifically, the method includes a step of transmitting, using the communication device, at least one record in the blockchain 205 for the at least one laborer device 251 in Step D to the business operator device 231 through the processor; wherein the at least one record includes at least one of past job performance records [feedback], skill records, technical certificates, and credentials that are saved in the blockchain 205 in the storage device 203…”, paragraph 42 and Fig. 5.
“…. As can be seen in FIG. 8, in some embodiments of the present invention, the method may include a step of receiving, using the communication device 202, signatures of the job completion indication from both the at least one arbitrator device 271 and the business operator device 231, …, quality of performance, etc…”, paragraph 44 and Fig. 8).
SHOOK does not expressly disclose but Escobar discloses
clinical performance
(“worker's job history and performance for particular employers to be stored in a trustworthy and reliable manner”, paragraph 4.
“…Client-endorsers 228 can provide feedback on job performance of a worker 224….”, paragraph 62).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Escobar’s teaching with the teaching of SHOOK. One would have been motivated to provide functionality using blockchain ledger in order to support employment and possession contracts (see Escobar abstract).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
“Blockchain-based Solutions for Education Credentialing System:
Comparison and Implications for Future Development”.IEEE. 2022
“Blockchain technology is reshaping fundamental structures in many industries. Similarly, there is an increasing interest in adopting blockchain as a new solution to addressing educational credentialing problems. However, none of the existing blockchain initiatives in educational credentialing seems to meet their original goal of global adoption. Based on the Australian tertiary education credentialing industry, this paper presents an abstract credentialing workflow and involved stakeholders, identifies six practical problems in the industry, and proposes five desired attributes of ideal credentials infrastructure. In addition, the paper presents a layered framework for evaluating seven blockchain-based education projects, and provides insights into factors hindering the wide adoption of these blockchain solutions. Finally, we suggest future considerations for the application development of blockchain-based education solutions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA VICTORIA VANDERHORST whose telephone number is (571)270-3604. The examiner can normally be reached on business hours from Monday through Friday from 8:30 AM to 4:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ashraf Waseem can be reached on 571-270-3948. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MARIA V VANDERHORST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621 2/13/2026