DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Status of Claims
This Non-Final Office Action is in reply to the communications filed on 01 April 2025.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 10/23/2024 has been considered. An initialed copy of Form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
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 a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without significantly more and therefore directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Under Step 1, the claims are analyzed to determine whether the claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Claims 1-10 are directed to a method (i.e. a process) and claims 11-20 are directed to a system (i.e. machine). Thus, these claims fall within one of the four statutory categories. Nonetheless, the claims fall within the judicial exception of an abstract idea.
Under Step 2A Prong 1, the claims are analyzed to determine whether the claims recite any judicial exceptions including certain groupings of abstract ideas (i.e., mathematical concepts, certain methods of organizing human activity such as fundamental economic practice, or mental processes).
Claims 1 and 11 as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation is directed to certain methods of organizing human activity because they recite,
generating…a new user pipeline data structure comprising an ordered data set of new user data profiles associated with new users based at least in part on the user data obtained from the plurality of third-party data sources, wherein each new user data profile comprising new user data items from the user data and associated with a particular new user; determining…at least one activity metric indicative of a likelihood of the new user to perform an activity based at least in part on the user data associated with the new user; modifying, …the new user pipeline data structure by updating an order of the new user data profiles in the ordered data set based at least in part on the at least one activity metric; monitoring,…the plurality of third-party data sources across… for changes to the user data associated with each new user data profile in the new user pipeline data structure; determining…in response to the changes, at least one update to the at least one activity metric based at least in part on the changes to the user data; and …depict at least one new user data profile of the new user data profiles based at least in part on the order of the ordered data set; allow a user…to select to perform at least one action for contacting at least one new user associated with the at least one new user data profile based at least in part on the associated user data items. The limitations describe steps in identifying and engaging with a potential recruit. This is a method of managing interactions between people. See MPEP 2016.04 II.
Dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20 merely reiterate the same abstract ideas with further embellishments of the new user data profile of the new user, evaluating the new user based on a trigger, activity metrics, a custom on- boarding plan, new user rating, and the invitation to join the electronic entity network which are nonetheless directed towards fundamentally the same abstract ideas as indicated above, which are nonetheless directed towards fundamentally the same abstract ideas as indicated above, for independent claims 1 and 11.
Under Step 2A Prong 2 of the 2019 PEG the claims are analyzed to determine whether the claims recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claims 1 and 11 recite additional elements including, a processor, internet, user interface, client device, at least one non-transitory computer readable medium having software instructions stored thereon. The additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality and perform generic computing functions such as obtaining, generating, determining, modifying, monitoring, auto populating and depicting. In this case, the claims merely involve automated steps executed by generic computing components recited above at a high-level of generality with no technical improvement to the functioning of the processor, user interface, client device, internet or the or non-transitory computer readable medium. At best, the additional elements merely pertain to using the computing components as tools to perform the recited abstract idea such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to implement the abstract idea recited above by adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception.
Claims 1 and 11 further recite, obtaining…from a plurality of third-party data sources…, user data associated with each new user of a plurality of new users. The limitations are recited at a high level of generality and amount to mere data gathering and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
The recitation of “internet” merely indicates a field of use or technological environment in which the judicial exception is performed.
Dependent claims 2-10, 12-20 reiterate the same additional elements as recited above and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Dependent claims 8 and 18 recite the additional element, “graphical dashboard” to display at least one new user update. The “graphical dashboard” is recited at a high-level of generality and perform ordinary computing function of displaying information.
Accordingly, even in combination, the 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 claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Under Step 2B of the 2019 PEG the claims are analyzed to determine whether the claims recite additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (aka “significantly more”) than the recited judicial exception.
Claims 1-20 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The processor, client device, internet, user interface, non-transitory computer readable medium are being used as tools to perform the abstract idea. Automating the recited claimed features does not qualify an otherwise unpatentable abstract idea as patent eligible since it amounts to no more than mere instructions to implement the abstract idea recited above by adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception or providing nothing more than generally linking the use of the abstract to a particular technological environment or field of use. See MPEP 2106.05(f & h).
For the obtaining steps that were considered extra-solution activity in Step 2A, this has been re-evaluated in Step 2B and determined to be well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. See MPEP 2106.05(d). The court decisions of Ultramercial, Symantec, OIP Techs. And Versata Dev. Group indicate that mere data collection and transmission are well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). For these reasons, there is no inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II.
Dependent claims 2-10, 12-20 reiterate the same additional elements as recited above and are insufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Thus, after considering all claim elements, both individually, in combination and in ordered combination, it has been demonstrated that claims 1-20 are not sufficient to transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible the claim limitations fail to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Costa (US 20120197835 A1) in view of McCagg et al (US 20100131418 A1).
Claims 1 and 11: Costa discloses a method comprising and a system comprising: at least one processor in communication with at least one non-transitory computer readable medium having software instructions stored thereon, wherein the at least one processor is configured, upon execution of the software instructions (see [0043]: The device 610 may be a general-purpose computer that includes a processing unit, a system memory, and a system bus that couples various system components including the system memory to the processing unit. Computers typically include a variety of computer-readable media that can form part of the system memory and be read by the processing unit.):
obtaining, by at least one processor, from a plurality of third-party data sources across the internet, user data associated with each new user of a plurality of new users (see [0008]: method for identifying active candidates for recruitment. [0021]: aggregate feeds of information from one or more social-media sites. [0022]: downloading streams of information available through end-user accounts, relevant information or events available in the social-media streams may be identified. [0023]: help a recruiter preemptively identify individuals that are about to become active job seekers),
generating, by the at least one processor, a new user pipeline data structure comprising an ordered data set of new user data profiles associated with new users based at least in part on the user data obtained from the plurality of third-party data sources, wherein each new user data profile comprising new user data items from the user data and associated with a particular new user (see [0022]: The relevant information may then be aggregated and analyzed over a period of time for patterns that indicate future behavior. This may be accomplished by assigning a numeric relevance strength to each event or piece of information and computing a score based on the weighted numeric aggregate, either as a snapshot or, more typically, over time);
determining, by the at least one processor, at least one activity metric indicative of a likelihood of the new user to perform an activity based at least in part on the user data associated with the new user (see [0036]: A profile update indicating a new job title receives a higher number of points, so long as the candidate has not changed employers; while a recent promotion may increase the candidate's marketability and entice her to consider leveraging her elevation into greater opportunity elsewhere, a change of employer within, for example, the previous three months is treated as a false-positive trigger (as discussed above), since it is unlikely that an individual will leave a new job immediately);
modifying, by the at least one processor, the new user pipeline data structure by updating an order of the new user data profiles in the ordered data set based at least in part on the at least one activity metric (see [0036]: Any profile update may receive a baseline number of points (e.g., four), as the activity is itself potentially indicative of receptivity to new opportunities. A profile update indicating a new job title receives a higher number of points, so long as the candidate has not changed employers; while a recent promotion may increase the candidate's marketability and entice her to consider leveraging her elevation into greater opportunity elsewhere. [0038]: Establishing a new connection is typically considered a modest but nonzero indicator, so may have a signal weight of, for example, one or two points; but connecting to a recruiter is obviously a strong indicator of job-seeking behavior, and may have a weight that is a multiple of (e.g., 2 to 10 times) the weight assigned to establishing a new connection);
monitoring, by the at least one processor, the plurality of third-party data sources across the internet for changes to the user data associated with each new user data profile in the new user pipeline data structure (see Fig. 4, [0030]: event collection and analysis 405 and connection reporting 410. In step 415, a candidate's social network updates are obtained on a scheduled basis using the SMA's APIs. These updates typically contain messages from the SMA reporting changes that have occurred in the candidate's profile or personal page(s), including, for example, new connections between people (e.g., other social-network users), new recommendations, etc. Indications of these updates ("events") may be stored (step 420) in a temporary cache while they are analyzed.);
automatically determining, by the at least one processor, in response to the changes, at least one update to the at least one activity metric based at least in part on the changes to the user data (see Fig. 4, [0032] If the candidate has not been disqualified, the method 400 obtains the candidate's full profile (step 445), as well as the profile of any other social-media user connected with the event. For example, if the candidate connects with an individual whose title or company name suggests that the individual is a recruiter, the event may be weighted as more relevant. Fig. 5, [0038]); and
utilizing, by the at least one processor, the new user pipeline data structure to autopopulate a user interface of a client device to depict at least one new user data profile of the new user data profiles based at least in part on the order of the ordered data set; wherein the user interface comprises: at least one user interface element to depict the at least one new user data profile, and perform at least one action for contacting at least one new user associated with the at least one new user data profile based at least in part on the associated user data items (see [0027] An action module 150 periodically scans the database 140 for notification items 145 and takes action based thereon. One such action may be periodic generation of a report listing potential recruitment candidates and their scores, as well as any action items associated with the relevant database records. For example, the action module 150 may generate HTML pages containing the report information for display to an end user via a conventional web browser or other user interface 155; the HTML pages may be loaded to a website maintained by or for the proprietor of the prediction system and served to authorized requesters, and in some embodiments, the action module 150 contains webserver functionality. ).
Costa discloses at [0027]: One such action may be periodic generation of a report listing potential recruitment candidates and their scores, as well as any action items associated with the relevant database records. For example, the action module 150 may generate HTML pages containing the report information for display to an end user via a conventional web browser or other user interface 155; the HTML pages may be loaded to a website maintained by or for the proprietor of the prediction system and served to authorized requesters, and in some embodiments, the action module 150 contains webserver functionality. Another action item may be generation of emails, either to the end user on a scheduled basis or to alert him of a particularly important candidate-specific event; or, in some embodiments, to the candidate herself, informing her of the end user's recruitment services and possibly some specifics regarding an open position to arouse the candidate's interest. Costa does not expressly disclose, at least one user selectable interface element configured to allow a user of the client device to select to perform at least one action but McCagg which also discloses an analogous system of recruiting candidates teaches, at least one user selectable interface element configured to allow a user of the client device to select to perform at least one action (see [0032]: The organization's hiring manager may, for example, select a subset of the matching candidates 142 (e.g., the top 10) by checking them off in a list and then hitting a button labeled "Submit" or something similar. This instruction from the hiring manager is transmitted 304 back to the system 100, which retrieves the selected candidates' contact information and then contacts those candidates 306, such as by sending email messages to them notifying them that the organization is interested in communicating with them about an open job position).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to include in the system of Costa, at least one user selectable interface element configured to allow a user of the client device to select to perform at least one action as taught by McCagg because it would “provide the organization with the ability to indicate which, if any, of the matching candidates 142 the organization wishes to contact.” (McCagg, [0032]).
Claim 2: The combination of Costa and McCagg discloses the claimed invention as applied to claim 1 above. McCagg further teaches, wherein a new user data profile of the new user data profiles of the new user comprises: a plurality of answers to a questionnaire comprising a plurality of questions, wherein the plurality of questions comprise: i) a question seeking a response to identify that the new user plans to seek a new job in the future (see [0048], [0057] career preferences, such as career status (e.g., actively looking, open to opportunities, or no contact), iii) a question seeking a response to identify an importance ranking among job characteristics of a future job to be considered by such new user (see [0057]: the candidate's preferred employer size (if any), the name of the candidate's preferred employer(s) (if any), and the candidate's preference for the employer's amount of assets under management (if any)), and iv) a question seeking a response to identify that such new user is open to relocation (see [0059] As the description above indicates, a candidate's profile may include not only information about the candidate's past job experience and current skills, but also information about the candidate's requirements in the future, such as whether the candidate is seeking a job in a geographic location that differs from where she lives now).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to include in the method and system of Costa as modified by McCagg, wherein a new user data profile of the new user data profiles of the new user comprises: a plurality of answers to a questionnaire comprising a plurality of questions as taught by McCagg because it “facilitates creating more useful profiles” (McCagg, [0060]).
Costa and McCagg do not expressly disclose, wherein the plurality of questions comprise: ii) a question seeking a response to identify a satisfaction level of such new user with a current job of such new user. However, the Examiner asserts that the type of questions that includes a question seeking a response to identify a satisfaction level of such new user with a current job of such new user adds little if adds little, if anything, to the claimed acts or steps and thus does not serve to distinguish over the prior art. Any differences related merely to the meaning and information conveyed through labels (i.e., the specific type of questions) which does not explicitly alter or impact the steps of the method does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a question seeking a response to identify a satisfaction level of such new user with a current job of such new user be included in the user record of Costa as modified by McCagg because the type of questions and responses being collected does not functionally alter or relate to the steps of the method and therefore does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention.
Claims 3 and 13: The combination of Costa and McCagg discloses the claimed invention as applied to claims 2 and 12 above. Costa further discloses determining, using the at least one processor, the new user according to at least one trigger, wherein the at least one trigger is a lapse of a predetermined time interval determined based on the response to the question seeking a response to identify that the new user plans to seek a new job in the future (see [0029]: this information is analyzed (step 315) over a period of time to find patterns that indicate future behavior of a prospective candidate and, based on those patterns, to determine whether the candidate is likely to become an active candidate (step 320). Fig. 5, [0033]: he LinkedIn routine 510, the types of signals considered are changes in job title or other profile updates; new connections established; new recommendations; and postings that included certain telltale phrases (e.g., "looking for," "seeking," "searching," "available") suggestive of interest in new employment.).
Claims 4 and 14: The combination of Costa and McCagg discloses the claimed invention as applied to claims 3 and 13 above. Costa further discloses wherein the at least one trigger is determined based on the new user data of the new user (see [0036] In the LinkedIn routine 510, the types of signals considered are changes in job title or other profile updates; new connections established; new recommendations; and postings that included certain telltale phrases (e.g., "looking for," "seeking," "searching," "available") suggestive of interest in new employment.).
Claims 5 and 15: The combination of Costa and McCagg discloses the claimed invention as applied to claims 3 and 13 above. McCagg further teaches wherein the at least one activity metrics comprises a metric identifying a cultural fit of the new user to at least one particular entity associated with an entity-related network (see [0048]: the candidate's preference for the employer's amount of assets under management).
Claims 6 and 16: The combination of Costa and McCagg discloses the claimed invention as applied to claims 3 and 13 above. McCagg further discloses including, using the at least one processor, an electronic invitation to join an electronic entity network with an electronic request for providing at least one reference to an active user of the plurality of active users (See [0035]: notifies 310 the organization of whether the candidate has accepted the organization's invitation to communicate regarding the position. For example, if the candidate accepts the organization's invitation, the system 100 notifies the organization that the candidate has accepted. [0038] In the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 4, if the initial candidate clicks on "Refer" 320 in response to receiving the invitation 306 to communicate with the employer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to include in the method and system of Costa as modified by McCagg, using the at least one processor, an electronic invitation to join an electronic entity network with an electronic request for providing at least one reference to an active user of the plurality of active users as taught by McCagg so that “the recruiting process can be completed by internal staff more quickly and efficiently” (McCagg, [0068]).
Claims 7 and 17: The combination of Costa and McCagg discloses the claimed invention as applied to claims 6 and 16 above. McCagg further teaches wherein inclusion of the electronic invitation is being controlled by the at least one entity (see [0035]: whether the candidate has accepted the organization's invitation to communicate regarding the position. For example, if the candidate accepts the organization's invitation).
Claims 8 and 18: The combination of Costa and McCagg discloses the claimed invention as applied to claims 9 and 19 above. Costa further discloses, causing to display, by the at least one processor, the at least one new user update to a graphical dashboard; wherein the graphical dashboard further a custom on-boarding plan for the new user having a higher probability for applying to at least one specific user function (see [0027]: For example, the action module 150 may generate HTML pages containing the report information for display to an end user via a conventional web browser or other user interface 155; the HTML pages may be loaded to a website maintained by or for the proprietor of the prediction system and served to authorized requesters, and in some embodiments, the action module 150 contains webserver functionality. Another action item may be generation of emails, either to the end user on a scheduled basis or to alert him of a particularly important candidate-specific event; or, in some embodiments, to the candidate herself, informing her of the end user's recruitment services and possibly some specifics regarding an open position to arouse the candidate's interest).
Claims 9 and 19: The combination of Costa and McCagg discloses the claimed invention as applied to claims 1 and 11 above. Costa further discloses, wherein a new user data profile of the new user data profiles of the new user comprises a rating which is calculated, based, at least in part, on the user data (see [0040]: In a representative embodiment, the accumulation of a minimum number of points and/or signals in the recent past (e.g., a threshold number within the range of 10-20 points and/or 5-10 signals in the previous 60 days) identifies the candidate as a likely active candidate for recruitment.
Claims 10 and 20: The combination of Costa and McCagg discloses the claimed invention as applied to claims 9 and 19 above. Costa further discloses, determining, using the at least one processor, the new user according to at least one trigger, wherein the at least one trigger is determined based on the rating (see Fig. 5, [0040]: the accumulation of a minimum number of points and/or signals in the recent past (e.g., a threshold number within the range of 10-20 points and/or 5-10 signals in the previous 60 days) identifies the candidate as a likely active candidate for recruitment).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Kaufman et al (US 20080064019 A1): [0014] Further, upon employers finding potential future employees with assessment results that match with the employer's desired hiring criteria profile, employers can browse the interactive online community to view additional details about the potential candidate through posted online profiles, and may use the system to contact the prospective employee to express an interest in learning more about the potential candidate based upon the candidate's assessment results and additional background information posted online.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAAME BALLOU whose telephone number is (571)270-1359. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Lynda Jasmin can be reached at 571-272-6782. 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.
MAAME BALLOU
Examiner
Art Unit 3629
/MAAME BALLOU/ Examiner, Art Unit 3629
/LYNDA JASMIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights