Systems, methods, and user interfaces in a patent management system

Abstract

A method may include receiving a search query from a computing device, the search query identifying an examiner in a patent office; in response to the receiving, gathering information associated with the examiner from at least one database, the information including experience metrics for the examiner and allowance metrics for the examiner; generating a user interface for display on the computing device; the user interface including: an experience section including a technology experience score for the examiner based on the experience metrics; and an allowance rate section that includes: allowance visualization options; and an allowance visualization based on the allowance metrics and a selected visualization option of the allowance visualization options.

1 . (canceled) 
     
     
         2 . A system for identifying commonly cited references, comprising:
 at least one processor; and   memory including instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations to:
 generate an application programming interface (API) call for obtaining examiner data for an examiner in a patent office from a set of experience sources; 
 submit the API call to the set of experience sources; 
 parse the examiner data, retrieved in response to the API call, to store patent prosecution data for the examiner in at least one database; 
 generate a user interface for display on a computing device as a pivot table; 
 receive, via the user interface, a search query, the search query identifying the examiner in the patent office; 
 query the at least one database with the search query; 
 in response to the query, receive results from the at least one database, the results including references cited by the examiner for patent rejections and allowance metrics that include case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections of the examiner; 
 display on the user interface in the pivot table, a name for the examiner and a. reference section, wherein the reference section includes reference metrics, determination of the reference metrics comprising operations to:
 calculate for each respective reference of the references cited, a total number of instances where a respective reference was cited by the examiner; 
 select references for a list of most common references cited by the examiner in rejections based on a total calculated for each respective reference of the references cited; 
 transmit an update command to the at least one database for an entry of the examiner with a list of common references cited by the examiner in rejections; 
 calculate for each respective case law reference of the case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections, a total number of instances where a respective case law reference was cited in office action responses against patent rejections for patent applications which were allowed; and 
 select case law references for a list of most common case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections for allowed patent applications based on the total calculated for each respective case law reference of the case law references cited; and. 
 
 display in the reference section of the user interface, the list of most common references cited by the examiner in rejections based on the total calculated for each respective reference of the references cited. 
   
     
     
         3 . The system of  claim 2 , wherein the reference section indicates a percentage of cases a reference of the list of most common references is used in. 
     
     
         4 . The system of  claim 2 , wherein the pivot table includes an experience section and the memory further comprising instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations to:
 parse the examiner data, retrieved in response to the API call to identify experience metrics based on educational experience, patent office experience, and work experience of the examiner;   generate a technology experience score for the examiner based on the experience metrics, wherein the technology experience score is generated by applying an educational experience score, a patent office experience score, and a work experience score to a technology scoring formula, wherein the instructions to generate the technology experience score comprises instructions that case the at least one processor to perform operations to:
 calculate the educational experience score as a sum of numerical values assigned to educational degrees in the educational experience based on determined relevance to a patent art unit of the patent office; 
 calculate the patent office experience score as a sum of numerical values assigned to years the examiner has worked in the patent art unit as determined from the patent office experience; and 
 calculate the work experience score as a sum of numerical values assigned to years worked in jobs determined relevance to the patent art unit in the work experience; and 
   display the technology experience score in the experience section of the pivot table.   
     
     
         5 . The system of  claim 4 , the memory further comprising instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations to:
 compare the technology experience score for the examiner to technology experience scores for other examiners in an art unit of the examiner to determine an art unit experience comparison score, wherein the experience section includes the art unit experience comparison score.   
     
     
         6 . The system of  claim 2 , wherein the pivot table includes an allowance section and the memory further comprising instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations to:
 display in the allowance section:
 the allowance metrics; 
 allowance visualization options; 
 an allowance visualization based on the allowance metrics and a selected visualization option of the allowance visualization options; and 
 the list of most common case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections for allowed patent applications based on the total calculated for each respective case law reference of the case law references cited. 
   
     
     
         7 . The system of  claim 6 , wherein the allowance visualization options include an option to display an allowance rate for the examiner by assignee and wherein the allowance visualization is updated based on selection of the option. 
     
     
         8 . The system of  claim 6 , wherein the allowance visualization options include an option to display an allowance rate for the examiner by time of year and wherein the allowance visualization is updated based on selection of the option. 
     
     
         9 . At least one non-transitory machine-readable medium for instructions for identifying commonly cited references that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations to:
 generate an application programming interface (API) call for obtaining examiner data for an examiner in a patent office from a set of experience sources;   submit the API call to the set of experience sources;   parse the examiner data, retrieved in response to the API call, to stoic patent prosecution data for the examiner in at least one database;   generate a user interface for display on a computing device as a pivot table;   receive, via the user interface, a search query, the search query identifying the examiner in the patent office;   query the at least one database with the search query;   in response to the query, receive results from the at least one database, the results including references cited by the examiner for patent rejections and allowance metrics that include case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections of the examiner;   display on the user interface in the pivot table, a name for the examiner and a reference section, wherein the reference section includes reference metrics, determination of the reference metrics comprising operations to:
 calculate for each respective reference of the references cited, a total number of instances where a respective reference was cited by the examiner; 
 select references for a list of most common references cited by the examiner in rejections based on a total calculated for each respective reference of the references cited; 
 transmit an update command to the at least one database for an entry of the examiner with a list of common references cited by the examiner in rejections; 
 calculate for each respective case law reference of the case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections, a total number of instances where a respective case law reference was cited in office action responses against patent rejections for patent applications which were allowed; and 
 select case law references for a list of most common case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections for allowed patent applications based on the total calculated for each respective case law reference of the case law references cited; and 
   display in the reference section of the user interface, the list of most common references cited by the examiner in rejections based on the total calculated for each respective reference of the references cited.   
     
     
         10 . The at least one non-transitory machine-readable medium of  claim 9 , Wherein the reference section indicates a percentage of cases a reference of the list of most common references is used in. 
     
     
         11 . The at least one non-transitory machine-readable medium of  claim 9 , wherein the pivot table includes an experience section and further comprising instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations to:
 parse the examiner data, retrieved in response to the API call to identify experience metrics based on educational experience, patent office experience, and work experience of the examiner;   generate a technology experience score for the examiner based on the experience metrics, wherein the technology experience score is generated by applying an educational experience score, a patent office experience score, and a work experience score to a technology scoring formula, wherein the instructions to generate the technology experience score comprises instructions that case the at least one processor to perform operations to:
 calculate the educational experience score as a sum of numerical values assigned to educational degrees in the educational experience based on determined relevance to a patent art unit of the patent office; 
 calculate the patent office experience score as a sum of numerical values assigned to years the examiner has worked in the patent art unit as determined from the patent office experience; and 
 calculate the work experience score as a sum of numerical values assigned to yearsworked in jobs determined relevance to the patent art unit in the work experience; and 
   display the technology experience score in the experience section of the pivot table.   
     
     
         12 . The at least one non-transitory machine-readable medium of  claim 11 , further comprising instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations to:
 compare the technology experience score for the examiner to technology experience scores for other examiners in an art unit of the examiner to determine an art unit experience comparison score, wherein the experience section includes the art unit experience comparison score.   
     
     
         13 . The at least one non-transitory machine-readable medium of  claim 9 , Wherein the pivot table includes an allowance section and further comprising instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations to:
 display in the allowance section:
 the allowance metrics; 
 allowance visualization options; 
 an allowance visualization based on the allowance metrics and a selected visualization option of the allowance visualization options; and 
 the list of most common case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections for allowed patent applications based on the total calculated for each respective case law reference of the case law references cited. 
   
     
     
         14 . The at least one non-transitory machine-readable medium of  claim 13 , wherein the allowance visualization options include an option to display an allowance rate for the examiner by assignee and wherein the allowance visualization is updated based on selection of the option. 
     
     
         15 . The at least one non-transitory machine-readable medium of  claim 13 , wherein the allowance visualization options include an option to display an allowance rate for the examiner by time of year and wherein the allowance visualization is updated based on selection of the option. 
     
     
         16 . A method for identifying commonly cited references, comprising:
 generating an application programming interface (API) call for obtaining examiner data. for an examiner in a patent office from a set of experience sources;   submitting the API call to the set of experience sources;   parsing the examiner data, retrieved in response to the API call, to store patent prosecution data for the examiner in at least one database;   generating a user interface for display on a computing device as a pivot table;   receiving, via the user interface, a search query, the search query identifying the examiner in the patent office;   querying the at least one database with the search query;   in response to the querying, receiving results from the at least one database, the results including references cited by the examiner for patent rejections and allowance metrics that include case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections of the examiner;   displaying on the user interface in the pivot table, a name for the examiner and a reference section, wherein the reference section includes reference metrics, wherein the reference metrics are determined by:
 calculating for each respective reference of the references cited, a total number of instances where a respective reference was cited by the examiner; 
 selecting references for a list of most common references cited by the examiner in rejections based on a total calculated for each respective reference of the references cited; 
 transmitting an update command to the at least one database for an entry of the examiner with a list of common references cited by the examiner in rejections; 
 calculating for each respective case law reference of the case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections, a total number of instances where a respective case law reference was cited in office action responses against patent rejections for patent applications which were allowed; and 
 selecting case law references for a list of most common case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections for allowed patent applications based on the total calculated for each respective case law reference of the case law references cited; and 
   displaying in the reference section of the user interface, the list of most common references cited by the examiner in rejections based on the total calculated for each respective reference of the references cited.   
     
     
         17 . The method of  claim 16 , wherein the reference section indicates a percentage of cases a reference of the list of most common references is used in. 
     
     
         18 . The method of  claim 16 , wherein the pivot table includes an experience section and further comprising:
 parsing the examiner data, retrieved in response to the API call to identify experience metrics based on educational experience, patent office experience, and work experience of the examiner;   generating a technology experience score for the examiner based on the experience metrics, wherein the technology experience score is generated by applying an educational experience score, a patent office experience score, and a work experience score to a technology scoring formula, wherein generating the technology experience score comprises:
 calculating the educational experience score as a sum of numerical values assigned to educational degrees in the educational experience based on determined relevance to a patent art unit of the patent office; 
 calculating the patent office experience score as a sum of numerical values assigned to years the examiner has worked in the patent art unit as determined from the patent office experience; and 
 calculating the work experience score as a sum of numerical values assigned to years worked in jobs determined relevance to the patent art unit in the work experience; and 
   displaying the technology experience score in the experience section of the pivot table.   
     
     
         19 . The method of  claim 18 , further comprising:
 comparing the technology experience score for the examiner to technology experience scores for other examiners in an art unit of the examiner to determine an art unit experience comparison score, wherein the experience section includes the art unit experience comparison score.   
     
     
         20 . The method of  claim 16 , wherein the pivot table includes an allowance section and further comprising:
 displaying in the allowance section:
 the allowance metrics; 
 allowance visualization options; 
 an allowance visualization based on the allowance metrics and a selected visualization option of the allowance visualization options; and 
 the list of most common case law references cited in office action responses against patent rejections for allowed patent applications based on the total calculated for each respective case law reference of the case law references cited. 
   
     
     
         21 . The method of  claim 20 , wherein the allowance visualization options include an option to display an allowance rate for the examiner by assignee and wherein the allowance visualization is updated based on selection of the option.