DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is responsive to the claims filed 10/30/2023.
Claims 1-20 have been examined.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of prior-filed application 63/381830 under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) is acknowledged and granted.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of providing curriculum-vitae to a potential employer computer for a job without significantly more.
Subject Matter Eligibility Standard
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea), and if so, it must additionally be determined whether the claim is a patent-eligible application of the exception. If an abstract idea is present in the claim, any element or combination of elements in the claim must be sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Examples of abstract ideas include fundamental economic practices; certain methods of organizing human activities; an idea itself; and mathematical relationships/formulas. Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v.CLS Bank International, et al., 573 U.S. _ (2014) as provided by the interim guidelines FR 12/16/2014 Vol. 79 No. 241.
Analysis
Step 1, the claimed invention must be to one of the four statutory categories. 35 U.S.C. 101 defines the four categories of invention that Congress deemed to be the appropriate subject matter of a patent: processes, machines, manufactures and compositions of matter. In this case independent claim 1 and all claims which depend from it are directed toward a method, and independent claim 19 and all claims which depend from it are directed toward a system and independent claim 20 all claims which depend from it are directed toward a computer-readable storage device storing instruction to perform functions/steps. As such, all claims fall within one of the four categories of invention deemed to be the appropriate subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1, Under Step 2 A, Prong 1 of the 2019 Revised § 101 Guidance, it is determined whether the claims are directed to a judicial exception such as a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea (See Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2355) by identify the specific limitation(s) in the claim that recites abstract idea(s); and then determine whether the identified limitation(s) falls within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in the 2019 PEG.
Specifically, claim 1 comprises inter alia the functions or steps of “A method comprising: providing a blockchain-based wallet to a user device, the blockchain-based wallet being associated with a user and being associated with a blockchain network; creating, for the user, a smart curriculum-vitae stored within the blockchain-based wallet; receiving, from a third party, information associated a qualification associated with the user; creating a record on the blockchain network that confirms the qualification associated with the user; storing, upon the user claiming the qualification, data associated with the qualification in the blockchain-based wallet and in connection with the smart curriculum-vitae; andtransmitting, from the blockchain-based wallet, the smart curriculum-vitae to a potential employer computer for a job, wherein a potential employer uses the smart curriculum-vitae to verify the qualification of the user”.
Claim 19 comprises inter alia the functions or steps of “A system comprising: a processor; and a computer-readable storage device storing instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform operations comprising: creating, for a user, a smart curriculum-vitae stored within a blockchain-based wallet using a blockchain network; receiving, from a third party, information associated a qualification associated with the user; creating a record on the blockchain network that confirms the qualification associated with the user; storing, upon the user claiming the qualification, data associated with the qualification in the blockchain-based wallet and in connection with the smart curriculum-vitae; and transmitting, from the blockchain-based wallet, the smart curriculum-vitae to a potential employer computer for a job, wherein a potential employer uses the smart curriculum-vitae to verify the qualification of the user”.
Claim 20 comprises inter alia the functions or steps of “A computer-readable storage device storing instructions which, when executed by one or more processor, cause the one or more processor to perform operations comprising: creating, for a user, a smart curriculum-vitae stored within a blockchain-based wallet using a blockchain network; receiving, from a third party, information associated a qualification associated with the user; creating a record on the blockchain network that confirms the qualification associated with the user; storing, upon the user claiming the qualification, data associated with the qualification in the blockchain-based wallet and in connection with the smart curriculum-vitae; and transmitting, from the blockchain-based wallet, the smart curriculum-vitae to a potential employer computer for a job, wherein a potential employer uses the smart curriculum-vitae to verify the qualification of the user”.
Those claim limits in bold are identified as claim limitations which recite the abstract idea, while those that are un-bolded are identified as additional elements.
The cited limitations as drafted are systems and methods that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of a method of organizing human activity, but for the recitation of the generic computer components. Further, none of the limitations recite technological implementations details for any of the steps but, instead, only recite broad functional language being performed by the generic use of at least one processor. Providing curriculum-vitae to a potential employer computer for a job is a fundamental economic practice long prevalent in commerce systems. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers a fundamental economic principle or practice but for the general linking to a technological environment, then it falls within the organizing human activity grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2, Next, it is determined whether the claim is directed to the abstract concept itself or whether it is instead directed to some technological implementation or application of, or improvement to, this concept, i.e., integrated into a practical application. See, e.g., Alice, 573 U.S. at 223, discussing Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981). The mere introduction of a computer or generic computer technology into the claims need not alter the analysis. See Alice, 573 U.S. at 223—24. “[T]he relevant question is whether the claims here do more than simply instruct the practitioner to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer.” Alice, 573 U.S. at 225.
In the present case, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim limitations are not indicative of integration into a practical application by claiming an improvement to the functioning of the computer or to any other technology or technical field. Further, the claim limitations are not indicative of integration into a practical application by applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way.
In particular, the claims contain the following additional elements: a user device; a blockchain network; transmitting; a system; a processor; a computer-readable storage device;. However, the specification description of the additional elements a user device ([Figure 2, element 210] [0088]); a blockchain network ([Figure 1] [0034]); transmitting ([0070] [0079]); a system ([Figure 13] [0089-0095]); a processor ([Figure 13, element 1303] [0080] [0089]); a computer-readable storage device; ([0097-0098]) are at a high level of generality using exemplary language or as part of a generic technological environment and are functions any general purpose computer performs such that it amount no more than mere instruction to apply the exception to a particular technological environment. Further, none of the limitations recite technological implementations details for any of the steps but, instead, only recite broad functional language being performed by the generic use of at least one processor. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaning limits on practicing the abstract idea. Thus, the claim is directed toward an abstract idea.
Step 2B, the claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements when considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea(s). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a processor to perform the abstract idea(s) amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exaction using a generic computer component. Mere instruction to apply an exertion using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. These generic computer components are claimed at a high level of generality to perform their basic functions which amount to no more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to the particular technological environment of field of use (Specification as cited above for additional elements) and further see insignificant extra-solution activity MPEP § 2106.05 I. A. iii, 2106.05(b), 2106.05(b) III, 2106.05(g). Thus, the claims are not patent eligible.
As for dependent claims 2-18 these claims recite limitations that further define the same abstract idea using previously identified additional elements noted from the respective independent claims from which they depend. Therefore, the cited dependent claims are considered patent ineligible for the reasons given above.
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, 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zaidi (PGPub Document No. 20220318757) in view of Colter (PGPub Document No. 2025/0053928).
As per claim 1, Zaidi teaches a method ([Figure 2] [0021] [0037]) comprising: providing a blockchain-based wallet to a user device (resume wallet), the blockchain-based wallet being associated with a user and being associated with a blockchain network ([Figure 2, element 208] [0010] “…the existing systems and methods using a wallet on the blockchain network for sharing documents to the users…” [0012] “…the present invention discloses a system for verifying education and employment documents of candidates via a blockchain network and creating a blockchain based credentials wallet for the users and/or candidates to securely transfer/share the credentials to universities, human resources, companies, organizations, institutions, and third parties, etc…”); creating, for the user, a smart curriculum-vitae stored within the blockchain-based wallet ([Abstract] “…create a blockchain based credential wallet for the users and/or candidates to securely transfer/share the credentials…” [0012] “…the present invention discloses a system for verifying education and employment documents of candidates via a blockchain network and creating a blockchain based credentials wallet for the users and/or candidates to securely transfer/share the credentials to universities, human resources, companies, organizations, institutions, and third parties, etc…” [0013] [0025] [0035] [claim 1] “…create at least one blockchain based credential wallet for the users and/or candidates to securely transfer/share credentials;…” The examiner takes the position that the credentials (education and experience) are updated over time and are more akin to a curriculum-vitae than a concatenated resume.); creating a record on the blockchain network that confirms the qualification associated with the user ([0038] “…If the user chooses to keep their wallet public, employers can search and sort users based on their credentials and qualifications in the "Wallet" (resU111e) 208. Employers could contact users for job openings and users can apply to jobs posted by employers, upon which the contents of their "wallet" (which they choose to make public) will be shared with the employer….”); storing, upon the user claiming the qualification, data associated with the qualification in the blockchain-based wallet and in connection with the smart curriculum-vitae ([0013] “…In one embodiment, the system is further configured to enable the users to share the blockchain credentials and apply universities and jobs using the blockchain credentials stored in the blockchain based credential wallet and also enables the candidates to share the blockchain credentials with one or more third parties through a quick response (QR) code/URL link/HyperLink. The blockchain based credential wallet is configured to enable the users or candidates to store the user's blockchain credentials….” [0038] “…If the user chooses to keep their wallet public ….”); and transmitting, from the blockchain-based wallet, the smart curriculum-vitae to a potential employer computer for a job, wherein a potential employer uses the smart curriculum-vitae to verify the qualification of the user ([0038] “…Employers could contact users for job openings and users can apply to jobs posted by employers, upon which the contents of their "wallet" (which they choose to make public) will be shared with the employer…” [claim 14] “…enable the users to share or transfer and/or issue the blockchain credentials and apply universities and jobs using the blockchain credentials stored in the blockchain based credential wallet, and enable the candidate to share or transfer and/or issue the professional and educational credentials and/or blockchain credentials to one or more third parties through a quick response (QR) code” Note that the phrase “wherein a potential employer uses the smart curriculum-vitae to verify the qualification of the user” is a statement of intended use or intended result.).
Zaidi further teaches receiving information associated a qualification associated with the user ([0038] “…If the user chooses to keep their wallet public, employers can search and sort users based on their credentials and qualifications in the "Wallet" (resU111e) 208. Employers could contact users for job openings and users can apply to jobs posted by employers, upon which the contents of their "wallet" (which they choose to make public) will be shared with the employer….”). However, the received data is not from a third party (such as a headhunter, employment service, agent, or scout).
Colter teaches receiving, from a third party (recruiting platform [0015-0017] in the form of a hiring architecture (e.g., a hiring ecosystem) [0018]), information associated a qualification associated with the user ([0019] “As an example, a biotic actors may be Artificial Intelligence models or smart contracts, and abiotic actions may be candidate matching ( e.g., to a job posting), submittals ( e.g., submissions of a job posting), offers ( e.g., offer for a job), or other actions, in accordance with some implementations of the present technology. …As users interact with the hiring architecture, users may be assigned as a biotic actor based on one or more qualifications the user possesses. The abiotic and biotic actors and actions may work together, as governed by smart contracts, to place qualified candidates to one or more jobs” [0021]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the hiring architecture as found in Colter with the system for verifying and issuing the credentials of a candidate using blockchain technology of Zaidi in order to improve the user experience, provide data transparency, and reduce the amount of wasted computer processing and memory resources caused by manual verification of each contribution. Additionally, users may also experience a clear insight as to a hiring process, decreased job placement timelines, and equality amongst users within the hiring ecosystem . The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 2,
Zaidi does not teach the claim limits.
Colter teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, in the blockchain-based wallet, alerts about potential jobs matching at least in part the qualification of the user ([0113] “…alert nodes within the hiring ecosystem that a job placement event has occurred…”).
As per claim 3,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the smart curriculum-vitae provides a three-level verification for each qualification in the smart curriculum-vitae and wherein the three-level verification comprises at least one or more of a self-verification, a proof verification and a blockchain verification ([0025] “…verifying education and employment of candidates and creating a blockchain based credentials wallet…”).
As per claim 4,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: providing referencing as a service from a network-based computer system for confirming user qualifications ([0005] [0007] [0008] [0010]).
As per claim 5,
Zaidi does not teach the claim limits.
Colter teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a request for a job alert within the blockchain-based wallet for receiving job alerts from job information sources ([0110] “…signup…” [0113] “…alert nodes within the hiring ecosystem that a job placement event has occurred…”).
As per claim 6,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the potential employer uses the smart curriculum-vitae to verify one or more of a right to work status and an identity of the user ([0002] “…Several categories of background checks may be performed including identity checks…” [0005] [0009] [0035]).
As per claim 7,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: providing a scannable object from the blockchain-based wallet that, when scanned by a computing device, causes the blockchain-based wallet to transmit the smart curriculum-vitae to the computing device ([0031-0032]).
As per claim 8,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the scannable object comprises a QR code ([0031-0032]).
As per claim 9,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 7, further comprising: verifying for a second user associated with the computing device an identity of the user and the qualification described in the smart curriculum-vitae ([0038] “…Employers could contact users for job openings and users can apply to jobs posted by employers, upon which the contents of their "wallet" (which they choose to make public) will be shared with the employer…” [claim 14] “…enable the users to share or transfer and/or issue the blockchain credentials and apply universities and
jobs using the blockchain credentials stored in the blockchain based credential wallet, and enable the candidate to share or transfer and/or issue the professional and educational credentials and/or blockchain credentials to one or more third parties through a quick response (QR) code” Note that the term “second” when describing a user does not impose functional or structural boundaries on the method or system operation.).
As per claim 10,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a selection from a computing device associated with the potential employer regarding a level of verification for each element in the smart curriculum-vitae; and verifying each element for the potential employer according to the selection ([0013] “…In one embodiment, the system is further configured to enable issuers to check, verify, and also transfer or share diplomas and certificates, test results, and professional accreditation, etc. to the user's blockchain based credential wallet via the network….”).
As per claim 11,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 10, where the selection comprises a first level of self-verified, a second level of proof verified and a third level of blockchain verified ([0013] “…In one embodiment, the system is further configured to enable issuers to check, verify, and also transfer or share diplomas and certificates, test results, and professional accreditation, etc. to the user's blockchain based credential wallet via the network….” where the examiner takes the position that each document in the blockchain wallet is a level of proof.).
As per claim 12,
Zaidi does not teach the claim limits.
Colter teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, from the user and within the blockchain-based wallet, one or more of a job search request and a timing of when the user is open to start work ([0052]).
As per claim 13,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: providing job offers (offers) from potential employers to the blockchain-based wallet ([0002-0003]).
As per claim 14,
Zaidi does not teach the claim limits.
Colter teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: providing a digital assistant to interact with the user to create a tailored version of the smart curriculum-vitae in terms of a length and its topical focus ([0105]).
As per claim 15,
Zaidi does not teach the claim limits.
Colter teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the length comprises a short smart curriculum-vitae, a long smart curriculum-vitae and a topical focus of a job type and wherein a respective non-fungible token is created for each qualification in the smart curriculum-vitae (non-fungible token [0021] [0031] [0105]).
As per claim 16,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the smart curriculum-vitae comprises a respective interactive software object that enables users to confirm respective qualifications via a reference to the blockchain network and a respective non-fungible token through interacting with respective interactive software object and wherein the smart curriculum-vitae is shared with another computing device via a PDF file, an AirDrop function, a QR code or from an integration with an existing payment wallet ([0024] “…The included drawings show examples of the invention as, but not limited to, a webpage application (web app ), docker containers nm on virtual machines, and/or a browser extension created, designed, and/or coded to interact with the web forums of online sites, to copy data that has been previously entered and is now displayed on one web page or web form and paste this data into the appropriate fields of another website's online forum, where data can include, but not be limited to, text, HTML markup or tags, images, videos, graphics, other types of files, and any other relevant data type as could be fotmd online or entered into an online form” Note that the phrase “to confirm respective qualifications via a reference to the blockchain network and a respective non-fungible token through interacting with respective interactive software object and wherein the smart curriculum-vitae is shared with another computing device via a PDF file, an AirDrop function, a QR code or from an integration with an existing payment wallet” is a statement of intended use or intended result and not a functional or structural claim limitation.).
As per claim 17,
Zaidi does not teach the claim limits.
Colter teaches the method of claim 16, wherein prior to storing, upon the user claiming the qualification, the respective non-fungible token associated with the qualification in the blockchain-based wallet, the method comprises: receiving, from the user, a claiming the qualification associated with the respective non-fungible token and verified on the blockchain network (non-fungible token [0021] [0031] [0105]).
As per claim 18,
Zaidi teaches the method of claim 1, wherein transmitting, from the blockchain-based wallet, the smart curriculum-vitae to the potential employer computer for the job comprises transmitting a link to the smart curriculum-vitae to the potential employer computer and wherein the record on the blockchain network comprises a non-fungible token ([0009] [0038] “…Employers could contact users for job openings and users can apply to jobs posted by employers, upon which the contents of their "wallet" (which they choose to make public) will be shared with the employer…” [claim 14] “…enable the users to share or transfer and/or issue the blockchain credentials and apply universities and
jobs using the blockchain credentials stored in the blockchain based credential wallet, and enable the candidate to share or transfer and/or issue the professional and educational credentials and/or blockchain credentials to one or more third parties through a quick response (QR) code” Note that the term “second” when describing a user does not impose functional or structural boundaries on the method or system operation.).
As per claim 19, Zaidi teaches a system comprising: a processor; and a computer-readable storage device storing instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform operations ([Figure 1] [0025-0026] [claim 1]).
The limits of this claim are rejected using the same prior art and rationale as previously addressed in Claim 1.
As per claim 20, Zaidi teaches a computer-readable storage device storing instructions which, when executed by one or more processor, cause the one or more processor to perform operations ([Figure 1] [0014] [0026]).
The limits of this claim are rejected using the same prior art and rationale as previously addressed in Claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gregory A Pollock whose telephone number is (571) 270-1465. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM - 4 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abhishek Vyas can be reached on 571 270-1836. 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.
/Gregory A Pollock/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3691
03/30/2026
Prosecution Insights