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 .
Notice for all US Patent Applications filed on or after March 16, 2013
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.
Status of the Claims
This communication is in response to communications received on 2/10/26. Claim(s) 41, 49, and 57 is/are amended, claim(s) none is/are cancelled, claim(s) none is/are new, and applicant does not provide any information on where support for the amendments can be found in the instant specification as there are no amendments. Therefore, Claims 41-60 is/are pending and have been addressed below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 2/10/26 and 4/24/26 was/were considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remarks, filed 2/10/26, with respect to rejections under 35 USC 101 for claim(s) 41-60 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as far as they apply to the amended 101 rejection(s) below.
Applicant respectfully traversed the rejection on pg. 10-11.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees because while the amendment furthers the 101 argument, the mere inclusion of an additional item on a user interface does not provide a practical application for the abstract idea.
Thus, the argument(s) are unpersuasive.
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remarks, filed 2/10/26, with respect to rejections under 35 USC 102 and 103 for claim(s) 41-60 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as far as they apply to the amended 103 rejection(s) below.
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.
Claim(s) 41-60 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter as noted below.
The limitation(s) below for representative claim(s) 41, 49, and 57 that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, is directed to tracking actions performed in various disparate talent platforms and generating ratings for parties that use the talent platforms based on the tracked actions.
Step 1: The claim(s) as drafted, is/are a process (claim(s) 49-56 recites a series of steps) and apparatus (claim(s) 41-48 and 57-60 recites a series of components).
Step 2A – Prong 1: The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) (emphasis added):
Claim 49: an exchange system comprising a network interface in communication with a hiring talent platform associated with a hiring party and with a staffing talent platform associated with a staffing party:
receiving, via the network interface, at least one job requisition from the hiring talent platform;
in response to receiving the at least one job requisition, causing a graphical user interface executable at the staffing talent platform to display the at least one job requisition;
determining a rating of the staffing party using information from the at least one job requisition and an augmented dataset in a database;
causing the graphical user interface executable at the staffing talent platform to display the rating of the staffing party concurrently with displaying the at least one job requisition and a selectable option to initiate a candidate profile submission process for the at least one job requisition;
in response to causing selection of the selectable option, causing the graphical user interface executable at the staffing talent platform to trigger a candidate profile submission process; and
receiving the at least one candidate profile submission to the at least one job requisition from the staffing talent platform.
Claim(s) 41 and 57: same analysis as claim(s) 49.
Dependent claims 42-48. 50-56, and 58-60 recite the same or similar abstract idea(s) as independent claim(s) 41, 49, and 57 with merely a further narrowing of the abstract idea(s): .
The identified limitations of the independent and dependent claims above fall well-within the groupings of subject matter identified by the courts as being abstract concepts of:
a method of organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, or business relations) because the invention is directed to economic and/or business relationships as they are associated with tracking actions performed in various disparate talent platforms and generating ratings for parties that use the talent platforms based on the tracked actions.
Step 2A – Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because:
The additional elements unencompassed by the abstract idea include a graphical user interface (claim(s) 41, 49, 57), database; a network interface coupled to a hiring talent platform and to a staffing talent platform; at least one computer hardware processor; and at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (claim(s) 41), at least one processor of an exchange system comprising a network interface in communication with a hiring talent platform and with a staffing talent platform (claim(s) 49), a non-transitory computer readable medium, at least one processor of an exchange system comprising a network interface in communication with a hiring talent platform and with a staffing talent platform (claim(s) 57), database (claim 45, 53, 60), and trained statistical classifier (TSC) (claim 47, 55).
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 as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 fails to describe:
Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine – see MPEP 2106.05(b)
Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo.
Thus the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 are merely (as additionally noted by instant specification [0092]) invoked as a tool and/or general purpose computer to apply instructions of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and/or mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(f)&(h)).
Step 2B: The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 are merely (as additionally noted by instant specification [0092]) invoked as a tool and/or a general purpose computer to apply instructions of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and/or mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application and thus similarly the combination and arrangement of the above identified additional elements when analyzed under Step 2B also fails to necessitate a conclusion that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons as set forth above (MPEP 2106.05(f)&(h)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
It has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of applicant’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
Claim(s) 41-46, 49-54, and 57-60 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chuang (US 2013/0275321 A1) in view of Slawson (US 2015/0074546 A1) and Linkedin published October 6, 2016 (reference U on the Notice of References Cited).
Regarding claim 41, 49, and 57 (currently amended), Chuang teaches a method implemented by at least one processor of an exchange system comprising a network interface in communication with a hiring talent platform associated with a hiring party and with a staffing talent platform associated with a staffing party, the method comprising {a database; a network interface coupled to a hiring talent platform associated with a hiring party and to a staffing talent platform associated with a staffing party; at least one computer hardware processor; and at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one computer hardware processor, causes the at least one computer hardware processor to perform a method comprising:- claim 41} {a non-transitory computer readable medium containing program instructions that, when executed, cause at least one processor of an exchange system comprising a network interface in communication with a hiring talent platform associated with a hiring party and with a staffing talent platform associated with a staffing party, to perform a method comprising: - claim 57} [see at least Figs. 1A, 1B, and 2 and [0079-0080, 0091-0092, 0096] “the system 100 is implemented using one or more computer systems … system 100 include a talent platform exchange 102, staffing talent platforms A, B and C 104 used by staffing parties A, B and C 106, and hiring talent platforms X, Y and Z 108 used by one or more hiring parties X, Y and Z 110 … the staffing talent platforms 104 and hiring party talent platforms 108 are coupled to, and can exchange data with, the talent platform exchange 102 via the network 124 … The talent platform exchange 102 may include a data storage 116 … One example of data storage 116 includes an instance of Amazon's Relational Database Service (RDS) which packages MySQL databases”; [0076] “Processes and systems in accord with some examples include a talent platform exchange system, a first integrated interface for the ATS services to provide direct access to the recruiter's candidate pool and a second integrated interface for the staffing services to provide direct access to the ATS database of job requisitions.”]:
receiving, via the network interface, at least one job requisition from the hiring talent platform;
in response to receiving the at least one job requisition, causing a graphical user interface executable at the staffing talent platform to display the at least one job requisition [for the limitations above, see at least [0087] “In one example, hiring parties 110 post one or more job orders to the talent platform exchange 102 via one of the hiring party platforms 108. The talent platform exchange 102 may process the job orders and provide them to one or more staffing parties 106 via one or more staffing party platforms 104.”;
Fig. 3 and [0112, 0114] “As shown in FIG. 3, the talent platform exchange interface within the staffing talent platforms 104 is presented as an “XpressHire” icon. In one example, by clicking the “XpressHire” icon, the staffing party 106 may access aspects and functions of the talent platform exchange 102 via the staffing application interface 118. …
The staffing talent platforms 104 may display job orders to the staffing party 106 provided by the talent platform exchange 102, in one example by displaying a sortable list of job orders. The job orders list may include additional information relating to each job order in one or more data fields, such as the date the job order was opened, the title of the job order and the company providing the job order, the job order status (e.g. open/active or closed), job order type (e.g. “Hot” or “Urgent”) and category (e.g. IT, Banking, Accounting, Customer Service, etc.).”];
determining a rating of the staffing party using information from the at least one job requisition and an augmented dataset in a database;
(original vs citation) causing the graphical user interface executable at the staffing talent platform to display the rating of the staffing party concurrently: with displaying the at least one job requisition and a selectable option to initiate a candidate profile submission process for the at least one job requisition [for the limitations above,
Examiner notes applicant does not provide any information on where support for the causing limitation can be found in the instant specification, therefore the causing limitation is interpreted without this clarification,
then see at least [0095] “Continuing the example of FIG. 2, the hiring application interface 120 and the staffing application interface 118 may communicate with the data storage 116. The data storage 116 depicted in FIG. 2 may include components that store and retrieve information. Some of the methods and techniques of storing and retrieving information from the data storage are described below with reference to computer system 1602 and FIG. 16. In general, the information may include any information associated with candidates provided by the staffing party 106, any information associated with job orders provided by the hiring party 110, or any information associated with the staffing and hiring parties 106, 110 themselves. For example, information may include reference information, transaction information, candidate profile information, … candidate or employee tracking information, … job order information, such as full time, part-time, contract or contingent labor basis, position location, staffing party ID numbers, hiring party ID numbers, candidate ID numbers and job order ID numbers, as well as other information.”;
[0096] “The talent platform exchange 102 may include a data storage 116 … One example of data storage 116 includes an instance of Amazon's Relational Database Service (RDS) which packages MySQL databases”;
Fig. 5 and [0123] “As shown in FIG. 5, in one example, the staffing party 106 may enter a “from” date and at “to” date to display metrics relating to the staffing party 106 for that particular period of time. The staffing party 106 may select one or more of the cumulative results, and the staffing talent platforms may display detailed job order information associated with the cumulative results. For example, the staffing party 106 may select “# approved” and receive job order and candidate information for each candidate that has been approved by the hiring party.”; ];
Fig. 5 and [0120] “In some examples, the staffing talent platforms 104 may generate and display a rating associated with one or more staffing parties 106 (shown in FIG. 5 as "XpressHire Rating"). In one example, the rating is quantitative, tracking the staffing party's activity and candidate placement performance. The rating may be quantitatively based on one or more factors, such as volume of submittals, speed of submittals, candidate submittals that are approved versus rejected by the hiring party (and may include information about both sourcing of candidates and matching candidates), and candidate approvals that result in placements (may further include forming of relationships, negotiations with the hiring party and the final placement of the candidate). In one example, the rating may be based on A/B testing or bucket testing of two similarly situated staffing parties.”;
Fig. 15 and [0164] Fig. 15 for the concurrent display of recruiter ratings and a job requisition “The hiring party 110 may view the detailed list of submitted candidates for each job order. For example, as shown in FIG. 14 the detailed candidate list can be displayed by selecting the "#" in the "total candidates" column FIG. 15 shows one example of a detailed candidate list. … As described above, the talent platform exchange conceals some of the candidate and staffing party information, but may also reveal the recruiter rating, and the candidate's first name.”;
[0057] Fig. 15 can also be achieved via combine parts “Moreover, it is to be understood that both the foregoing information and the following detailed description are merely illustrative examples of various aspects and embodiments, and are intended to provide an overview or framework for understanding the nature and character of the claimed aspects and embodiments. Any example disclosed herein may be combined with any other example. References to “an example,” “some examples,” “an alternate example,” “various examples,” “one example,” “at least one example,” “this and other examples” or the like are not necessarily mutually exclusive and are intended to indicate that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection with the example may be included in at least one example. The appearances of such terms herein are not necessarily all referring to the same example.”;
[0057, 0123, 0120, 0164], ([0123]) Fig. 15 can also be achieved via display on the staffing platform the rating information of the staffing party ([0057]) and additionally display as allowed via combining parts ([0120, 0164]) the information displayed on the hiring platform specifically the concurrent display of recruiter ratings and a job requisition];
receiving the at least one candidate profile submission to the at least one job requisition from the staffing talent platform [see at least [0087] “Staffing parties 106 may match and submit a candidate to the posted job order, via the staffing party platform 104, which may be received by the talent platform exchange 102. The talent platform exchange 102 may process the submittal and provide it to the hiring party 110, via the hiring talent platform 108.”].
Chuang doesn’t/don’t explicitly teach but Slawson discloses
(original vs citation vs clarification: strikethrough of italicized original followed by plain lettering clarification in bold) causing the graphical user interface executable at the staffing talent platform to display item 1 concurrently: with displaying item 2 and item 3 [see at least [0046-0047] customize the interface of a recruiting application “In a use case scenario, a customizer user may have purchased a recruiting application (with in-application customization capabilities) to use as a tool to help the user's company coordinate their recruiting. The user may decide to add a workflow for an approval process as part of the recruiting application. Since the approval process by this company includes parts of the process that are generally performed at various locations and with mobile recruiters and parts of the process that are performed by other people (or at a central location) and which may not be relevant to the mobile recruiters, the customizer user can configure instances of the application specific for these roles by simply customizing the purchased recruiting application.
Thus, the original recruiting application can include a set of applications with subsets of functionality for use. In some cases, the customizer user may turn off certain features of the application that are not relevant to the mobile recruiters and/or that are not designed to work well on the particular devices being used (e.g., an instance for a watch computing device, an instance for a desktop computing device, and an instance for a phone computing device may have varying levels of features and functionality controlled by the customizer user).”;
Fig. 3 and [0048-0049] customization affects what information is presented “FIG. 3 illustrates a block diagram of an example implementation for in-application customization. Referring to FIG. 3, a template or original app 300 can be developed through a developer platform 110. The template/original app 300 can be created with original features 302 and specified settings options 304 for the original features that a user of the app can adjust.
In many applications, a user can modify certain settings, for example through an options menu as part of the specified settings options 304. These settings can sometimes adjust the way the application looks and even the information presented to the user. In-application customization can remove the limitations on the hard-coded adjustable settings currently available in many applications and enables a user to perform modifications to the application itself—as if the user was the developer of the application—but without requiring the user to be able to code or directly interact with a developer tool. In some cases, an application can include a settings menu and have a customization mode in which the user can customize the application and even determine the settings that users of the application can adjust.”;
[0040-0042] customization can include data not originally included in application “If the app did not originally include table functionality, the user may be able to search the marketplace for a table so that the table view 240 of FIG. 2G can be generated. For the example shown in FIGS. 2H and 2I, a map feature 251 is added so that the user can show in the app where the coins were minted. Once the map function is brought in to the application, the map's settings can be edited so the map 252 uses the correct data and displays the relevant US mint locations (e.g., via pins 253). One example of features that can be accessed through such a marketplace include apps based on Microsoft Office web extension functionality (e.g., apps for Office).
Other example functions that can be added include, but are not limited to adding charts/graphs, stock tickers, calendars, and content from other sites. Specific modifications that may be implemented to customize a variety of apps include, but are not limited to, renaming an app and changing its title, adding a custom background photo to personalize the app, changing the app's layout by moving, showing, or hiding fields of a view, creating entirely new views, and changing the app's functionality by adding or deleting fields or tables, customizing logic such as data validation or the steps, timing parameters or notification rules of a work flow process, and adding new functionality to the app such as charts, maps, and calendars.
Although numerous examples are presented for visual interfaces, embodiments are not limited thereto. For example, in some implementations for in-application customization, the application may be an audio application such as part of an interactive voice response (IVR) system. The IVR system application can include in-application customization where a user may program menus with touch tone or voice commands. In-application customization applications running on a video game console such as Microsoft Xbox®, Sony PlayStation® series or Nintendo Wii® may also be configured through voice commands.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included a completely customizable interface, as disclosed by Slawson in the system disclosed by Chuang, for the motivation of providing recruiters with all information needed (via complete customization including undisclosed viewing options and external information) to determine which candidates to submit for a job.
Furthermore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior arts of a) Chuang and b) Slawson and c) one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Chuang in view of Slawson doesn’t/don’t explicitly teach but Linkedin discloses
(original vs citation vs clarification: strikethrough of italicized original followed by plain lettering clarification in bold) causing the graphical user interface executable at the staffing talent platform to display item 1 concurrently: with displaying the at least one job requisition and a selectable option to initiate a candidate profile submission process for the at least one job requisition;
in response to selection of the selectable option, causing the graphical user interface executable at the staffing talent platform to trigger a candidate profile submission process [for the limitations above,
see at least [pg 2] “STEP 1: Click the share icon in the top right corner of the project OR open the project settings and click +share
STEP 2: Share with all recruiters on your team or with your connections (such as your hiring manager)
…
STEP 4: Click Done and you have now successfully shared the project with the intended audience.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included a streamlined recruiting candidate submission interface, as disclosed by Linkedin in the system disclosed by Chuang in view of Slawson (Chuang), for the motivation of providing recruiters with an explicit instead of an implied candidate submission interface.
Furthermore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior arts of a) Chuang in view of Slawson and b) Linkedin and c) one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 42, 50, and 58, modified Chuang teaches the method of claim 49,
and Chuang teaches wherein the rating of the staffing party includes at least a job specific rating indicative of a performance of the staffing party in a job category associated with the at least one job requisition [see at least [0080, 0017] for staffing talent platforms A, B and C 104 used by staffing parties A, B and C 106 and agency personnel (e.g., recruiters); [0095] store data on various users (profile) including staffing party metrics, job order information, staffing party ID numbers, job order ID numbers, other information (such as in [0017, 0028, 0082] ); [0028] receive and store job orders and plurality of candidates, track placement of candidate to job order, and payment to hiring party for placement of candidate to job order;
[0086-0087] receive (obtain) job orders from hiring parties; Fig. 3 and [0020, 0114] textual job descriptions of the one or more job including categories and as noted in Fig. 3 a job can have categories of Banking/Mortgage, Accounting and Finance, etc.;
[0017, 0237-0238, 0291] determine (match) recruiter for a job order based on measures of compatibility including etc (such as in [0028, 0082, 0095, 0239-0241] ); [0176] combine parts thus the ([0020, 0114]) job categories can be a ([0237-0291]) determined signal used to rate recruiters].
Regarding claim 43, 51, and 59, modified Chuang teaches the method of claim 50,
and Chuang teaches wherein the rating of the staffing party additionally includes an overall rating indicative of overall performance of the staffing party [see at least Fig. 5 and [0123] “As shown in FIG. 5, in one example, the staffing party 106 may enter a “from” date and at “to” date to display metrics relating to the staffing party 106 for that particular period of time. The staffing party 106 may select one or more of the cumulative results, and the staffing talent platforms may display detailed job order information associated with the cumulative results. For example, the staffing party 106 may select “# approved” and receive job order and candidate information for each candidate that has been approved by the hiring party.”;
Fig. 5 and [0120] “In some examples, the staffing talent platforms 104 may generate and display a rating associated with one or more staffing parties 106 (shown in FIG. 5 as "XpressHire Rating"). In one example, the rating is quantitative, tracking the staffing party's activity and candidate placement performance. The rating may be quantitatively based on one or more factors, such as volume of submittals, speed of submittals, candidate submittals that are approved versus rejected by the hiring party (and may include information about both sourcing of candidates and matching candidates), and candidate approvals that result in placements (may further include forming of relationships, negotiations with the hiring party and the final placement of the candidate). In one example, the rating may be based on A/B testing or bucket testing of two similarly situated staffing parties.”;
[0017, 0237-0238, 0291] determine (match) recruiter for a job order based on measures of compatibility including etc (such as in [0028, 0082, 0095, 0239-0241] ); [0176] combine parts thus the ([0020, 0114]) job categories can be a ([0237-0291]) determined signal used to rate recruiters;
[0057] combine parts “Moreover, it is to be understood that both the foregoing information and the following detailed description are merely illustrative examples of various aspects and embodiments, and are intended to provide an overview or framework for understanding the nature and character of the claimed aspects and embodiments. Any example disclosed herein may be combined with any other example. References to “an example,” “some examples,” “an alternate example,” “various examples,” “one example,” “at least one example,” “this and other examples” or the like are not necessarily mutually exclusive and are intended to indicate that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection with the example may be included in at least one example. The appearances of such terms herein are not necessarily all referring to the same example.”;
[0057, 0123, 0120, 0164, 0237-0291], ([0123]) display on the staffing platform the rating information of the staffing party ([0057]) and additionally display as allowed via combining parts a) ([0120, 0164]) the information displayed on the hiring platform specifically the concurrent display of recruiter ratings and a job requisition and b) ([0237-0291]) any of the determined signal used to rate recruiters].
Regarding claim 44 and 52, modified Chuang teaches the method of claim 49,
and Chuang teaches further comprising, by the at least one processor: using the rating of the staffing party to make recommendations to users [see at least [0236] “According to yet another aspect, a talent platform exchange may be adapted to score postings based on a variety of attributes (or signals) with a defined set of weights assigned to each signal. Results of recommended postings and search postings are then sorted and displayed to a user in descending order by score. This capability allows the agent/agency or recruiter/employer to focus on the highest ranked material because they have the confidence that talent platform exchange has already done a thorough filtering of the material, and the talent exchange has determined the most appropriate postings. This capability saves time and displays the most appropriate postings or candidates in the foreground.”;
Fig. 5 and [0120] “In some examples, the staffing talent platforms 104 may generate and display a rating associated with one or more staffing parties 106 (shown in FIG. 5 as "XpressHire Rating"). In one example, the rating is quantitative, tracking the staffing party's activity and candidate placement performance. The rating may be quantitatively based on one or more factors, such as volume of submittals, speed of submittals, candidate submittals that are approved versus rejected by the hiring party (and may include information about both sourcing of candidates and matching candidates), and candidate approvals that result in placements (may further include forming of relationships, negotiations with the hiring party and the final placement of the candidate). In one example, the rating may be based on A/B testing or bucket testing of two similarly situated staffing parties.”].
Regarding claim 45, 53, and 60, modified Chuang teaches the method of claim 49,
and Chuang teaches further comprising, by the at least one processor:
storing transaction data in a database of the exchange system, wherein the transaction data includes:
user interactions associated with accepting and/or rejection one or more candidate submissions; and/or
a time taken to perform respective user interactions at the hiring talent platform [see at least [0076] “Processes and systems in accord with some examples include a talent platform exchange system, a first integrated interface for the ATS services to provide direct access to the recruiter's candidate pool and a second integrated interface for the staffing services to provide direct access to the ATS database of job requisitions.”;
[0087] “Staffing parties 106 may match and submit a candidate to the posted job order, via the staffing party platform 104, which may be received by the talent platform exchange 102. The talent platform exchange 102 may process the submittal and provide it to the hiring party 110, via the hiring talent platform 108. The hiring party 110 reviews the submitted candidates and selects a percentage of submittals for interviews, a percentage of which may receive job offers.”
[0095] “Continuing the example of FIG. 2, the hiring application interface 120 and the staffing application interface 118 may communicate with the data storage 116. The data storage 116 depicted in FIG. 2 may include components that store and retrieve information. Some of the methods and techniques of storing and retrieving information from the data storage are described below with reference to computer system 1602 and FIG. 16. In general, the information may include any information associated with candidates provided by the staffing party 106, any information associated with job orders provided by the hiring party 110, or any information associated with the staffing and hiring parties 106, 110 themselves. For example, information may include … hiring party metric information, … as well as other information.”;
[0118] “In various examples, the staffing talent platforms 104 may capture, generate and display performance metrics relating to one or more staffing parties. This metric information may provide the staffing parties with detailed and summary activity reports and performance metrics in real-time.”;
[0146] “In various examples, the hiring talent platforms 108 may generate and display performance metrics relating to hiring parties. This metric information may provide the hiring parties with detailed and summary activity reports and performance metrics in real-time.”;
[0147] “In one example, the statistical analysis may calculate the average number of days to fill open job orders (i.e. "avg. days to fill") and the average fee paid by the hiring party (i.e. "avg. fee). As shown in FIG. 11, both the placement information and the statistical analysis may be displayed as a chart, allowing the hiring party to compare the information generated.)” NOTE: The Examiner understands that the number of days to fill a position is the equivalent of a time from the submission of the candidate profile.]; and
determining the rating of the staffing party at least in part by using the augmented dataset including at least a portion of the stored transaction data in the database [see at least [0120] “In some examples, the staffing talent platforms 104 may generate and display a rating associated with one or more staffing parties 106 (shown in FIG. 5 as "XpressHire Rating"). In one example, the rating is quantitative, tracking the staffing party's activity and candidate placement performance. The rating may be quantitatively based on one or more factors, such as volume of submittals, speed of submittals, candidate submittals that are approved versus rejected by the hiring party (and may include information about both sourcing of candidates and matching candidates), and candidate approvals that result in placements (may further include forming of relationships, negotiations with the hiring party and the final placement of the candidate). In one example, the rating may be based on A/B testing or bucket testing of two similarly situated staffing parties.”].
Regarding claim 46 and 54, modified Chuang teaches the method of claim 49,
and Chuang teaches wherein the augmented dataset includes:
additional datasets referenced in at least one of a job description of the job requisition and the candidate profile; and/or candidate assessments [see at least [0095] “Continuing the example of FIG. 2, the hiring application interface 120 and the staffing application interface 118 may communicate with the data storage 116. The data storage 116 depicted in FIG. 2 may include components that store and retrieve information. Some of the methods and techniques of storing and retrieving information from the data storage are described below with reference to computer system 1602 and FIG. 16. In general, the information may include any information associated with candidates provided by the staffing party 106, any information associated with job orders provided by the hiring party 110, or any information associated with the staffing and hiring parties 106, 110 themselves. For example, information may include reference information, transaction information, candidate profile information, … candidate or employee tracking information, … job order information, such as full time, part-time, contract or contingent labor basis, position location, staffing party ID numbers, hiring party ID numbers, candidate ID numbers and job order ID numbers, as well as other information.”;
[0096] “The talent platform exchange 102 may include a data storage 116 … One example of data storage 116 includes an instance of Amazon's Relational Database Service (RDS) which packages MySQL databases”].
Claim(s) 47-48 and 55-56 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chuang in view of Slawson and Venkatraman as applied to claim(s) 41 and 49 above and further in view of Thankappan et al. (US 2014/0074738 A1).
Regarding claim 47 and 55, modified Chuang teaches the method of claim 49,
and Chuang teaches (original vs citation) further comprising, by the at least one processor, executing a trained statistical classifier (TSC), the TSC being configured to perform:
classifying the job requisition within a class of job requisitions; and
determining the rating of the staffing party for the class of job requisitions [see at least [0086-0087] receive (obtain) job orders from hiring parties; Fig. 3 and [0020, 0114] textual job descriptions of the one or more job including categories and as noted in Fig. 3 a job can have categories of Banking/Mortgage, Accounting and Finance, etc.;
[0017, 0237-0238, 0291] determine (match) recruiter for a job order based on measures of compatibility including etc (such as in [0028, 0082, 0095, 0239-0241] ); [0176] combine parts thus the ([0020, 0114]) job categories can be a ([0237-0291]) determined signal used to rate recruiters].
Modified Chuang doesn’t/don’t explicitly teach but Linkedin discloses
(original vs citation) further comprising, by the at least one processor, executing a trained statistical classifier (TSC), the TSC being configured to perform:
classifying the job requisition within a class of job requisitions [see at least [pg 7-8, 10 (2-3, 5 of sub document)] “To solve the challenges we face when building the LinkedIn knowledge graph, we apply machine learning techniques, which is essentially a process of data standardization on user-generated content and external data sources, in which machine learning is applied to entity taxonomy construction, entity relationship inference, data representation for downstream data consumers, insight extraction from graph, and interactive data acquisition from users to validate our inference and collect training data. LinkedIn’s knowledge graph is a dynamic graph. New entities are added to the graph and new relationships are formed continuously. Existing relationships can also change. For example, the mapping from a member to her current title changes when she has a new job. We need to update the LinkedIn knowledge graph in real time upon member profile changes and when new entities emerge.
…
The below figure visualizes an example title entity “Software Engineer” in the title taxonomy. The title taxonomy has a hierarchical structure: similar titles such as “Programmer” and “Web Developer” are clustered into the same supertitle of “Software Developer,” and similar supertitles are clustered into the same function of “Engineering.” ”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included a streamlined recruiting candidate submission interface, as disclosed by Linkedin in the system disclosed by modified Chuang, for the motivation of providing recruiters with an explicit instead of an implied candidate submission interface.
Furthermore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior arts of a) modified Chuang and b) Linkedin and c) one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Modified Chuang doesn’t/don’t explicitly teach but Thankappan discloses
(original vs citation) further comprising, by the at least one processor, executing a trained statistical classifier (TSC), the TSC being configured to perform:
determining the rating of the staffing party for the class of job requisitions [see at least [0053] “Embodiments of the present application are directed to a talent recruiting application which can be used by recruiters and/or managers of a business to recruit and hire candidates for open positions or by the candidates to locate and apply for open positions.”;
[0049, 0051, 0053; additionally see 0054-0057] “In some embodiments, the one or more predictive metrics may include a source effectiveness value of one or more employment position sources. … The employment position sources may include a job board, a job placement agency, a print source, a social media application, a job networking application, an academic job recruiting application, or any other source for posting an employment position. In some embodiments, the one or more predictive metrics may include an effectiveness value of one or more employment position source types (instead of a particular source), wherein the effectiveness value indicates a predicted effectiveness of each of the one or more employment position source types.
The effectiveness values may be generated using different calculations. For example, the effectiveness values may be indicative of a source type effectiveness and may be calculated as follows: Source Type Effectiveness=Applications from Source Type/Total Applications. As another example, the effectiveness values may represent a source type efficiency for a particular type of source. Effectiveness values based on a source type efficiency may be calculated as follows: Source Type Efficiency=Hires from Source Type/Applications from Source Type. As yet another example, effectiveness values may be based on an effectiveness of a particular source and may be calculated as follows: Source Effectiveness=Applications from Source/Total Applications. As another example, effectiveness values may represent efficiency of a particular source. Effectiveness values based on source efficiency may be calculated as follows: Source Efficiency=Hires from Source/Applications from Source. In some embodiments, the sources and/or source types may be ranked on a normalized scale on both effectiveness and efficiency.
In some embodiments, predictive modeling techniques may be used to rank sources and/or source types based on their effectiveness values. For example, a machine learning library, such as an Apache Mahout machine learning library, may be used as a predictive modeling technique. The predictive modeling techniques may use various inputs to rank the sources and/or source types. … Utilizing an amount of employees hired, an amount of aces hired, and a total number of applications per each instance of a job title, job function, and location in the customer database, a classifier model may be trained with a machine learning library application programming interface (API). As used herein, an ace may refer to a candidate that scores above a predetermined threshold in the job screening process based, for example, on past experience (e.g., number of years, position(s) held, awards received, number and/or type of publications, and the like) and/or needs of the company. The classifier model may then be utilized to output effectiveness rankings. Further details relating to predictive modeling techniques used to rank sources and/or source types will now be described.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included recruiter ranking, as disclosed by Thankappan in the system disclosed by modified Chuang, for the motivation of providing recruiters with additional metrics to compare themselves to their counterparts or discern which jobs to submit candidates for.
Furthermore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior arts of a) modified Chuang and b) Thankappan and c) one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 48 and 56, modified Chuang teaches the method of claim 55,
and Chuang teaches further comprising, by the at least one processor, classifying the job requisition using at least one member of a group comprising:
job category; salary; experience requirement; education requirement; and/or geographical location [see at least [0086-0087] receive (obtain) job orders from hiring parties; Fig. 3 and [0020, 0114] textual job descriptions of the one or more job including categories and as noted in Fig. 3 a job can have categories of Banking/Mortgage, Accounting and Finance, etc.].
Conclusion
When responding to the office action, any new claims and/or limitations should be accompanied by a reference as to where the new claims and/or limitations are supported in the original disclosure.
116. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP §706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES WEBB whose telephone number is (313)446-6615. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10-3.
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, Jerry O’Connor can be reached on (571) 272-6787. 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.
/JAMES WEBB/Examiner, Art Unit 3624
Prosecution Insights