Appeal 2007-0611
Application 09/800,986
offer letter in an electronic format prior to the conclusion of the employer-
hosted recruiting event.
THE REJECTION
The Examiner relies upon the following as evidence of unpatentability:
Puram US 6,289,340 B1 Sep. 11, 2001
Smith US 6,701,313 B1 Mar. 2, 2004
The following rejection is before us for review:
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-8, and 11-13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
(2002) as unpatentable over Smith in view of Puram (Answer 3).
ISSUE
Appellant contends that the Examiner erred in rejecting the claims as
unpatentable over the combination of Smith and Puram because the combination
fails to disclose each and every claimed element (Br. 3). More specifically,
Appellant contends that (1) the “interview notes” of Smith do not “constitute an
‘assessment’ upon which a hiring decision is subsequently made” (Br. 5) and (2)
“Smith does not teach a separate interface for presenting each candidate’s
assessment in real-time during the employer-hosted recruiting event” (Br. 5)
(emphasis in original). The Examiner finds (1) the interview of Smith is
equivalent to the claimed employer-hosted recruiting-event, (2) Smith teaches an
interface for recording and displaying assessments of candidates during the
interview, and (3) the feature of enabling multiple specialists to participate in the
assessment/hiring process in real time during a recruiting event, relied upon by
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013