JP2003108728A - Work flow support system, its method, work flow support program, and computer readable recording medium with the program recorded thereon - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To accurately completely execute the setting of an examination claim date in a data base, the information of an examination claim fact to an agent or the like after sending an examination claim from an electronic application terminal installed in its own enterprise to the Patent Office. SOLUTION: After accepting an examination claim bill, a proof returned from the Patent Office is stored in an FD and transferred to a terminal capable of accessing a document DB storing the data of respective applications. The application number of an application of which examination claim bill is received and the presented date (accepted data) of the examination claim bill are extracted from the proof stored in the FD. An examination claim evaluation table prepared for the application specified by the number is retrieved from the examination claim evaluation tables of individual applications stored in the document DB, the presented date is set up as the examination claim date and an agent read out from the document is informed of a fact that the examination of the application has been claimed by an e-mail.

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a workflow support system for evaluating the value of information, a workflow support method, a workflow support program, and a computer-readable recording medium recording the program.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art Due to the rapid progress of computer related technology and the rapid price reduction of computer related equipment,
In recent years, the number of companies introducing PCs, LANs, etc. has increased dramatically. And for companies of a certain size,
Software generally called "groupware" (a typical one is "Lotus Not" of Lotus, Inc. in the United States.
“Es”) is used to share information and communicate with multiple people, thereby greatly improving the productivity of work.

Further, by sequentially circulating electronic documents to predetermined destinations, it is generally used to support decision-making (approval / decision) as a company for a certain matter or office work after decision-making. A system called "workflow support system" has been widely put into practical use. For example, JP-A-11-143963, JP-A-11-143980, and JP-A-11-219401.
Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 11-219402, Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 11-219402
-219393 and the like propose a workflow support system for smoothly applying for a patent by a company.

By the way, for an invention once filed, it must be decided within seven years after filing whether or not a further request for examination should be made. In this way, since there are legal restrictions on the time when an examination request is possible, the value of an invention must be examined at an appropriate time so as to prevent an invention that cannot be patented by mistake. And for companies that file thousands of patent applications a year,
In general, it is common to consider whether or not an examination request is required for inventions that were applied several times a year in the past, and to select inventions that are necessary for a company and those that are not.

[0005]

The large companies as described above often have a dedicated terminal for performing various procedures for the JPO online, and request examination by themselves through this terminal. be able to. When the proof (receipt) is received from the JPO, the examination request is completed, and the examination request date of each application is input separately into the database for managing the patent application of the company.

However, even for large companies, the number of applications subject to the above examination is several hundred to several thousand at a time, and the number of final examination requests increases, so the above input work Not only is it complicated, but there is a problem that input errors are likely to occur.

Further, each application usually has an agent appointed at the time of the application, and this agent also separately manages the presence or absence of the examination request and the examination request deadline of each application. Therefore, in the case where a request for examination is made in-house, in order to avoid inquiries about whether or not to request an examination for the application for which examination has already been requested at a later date, the fact that the request for examination has been ex-post Must be notified. However,
This also has a problem that if the number of cases increases, it is inevitable that notifications will be missed and mistakes in the project (such as a mistake in entering the application number) will occur.

The present invention has been made in view of the above problems of the prior art, and is a workflow support system, a workflow support method, and a workflow support capable of accurately and completely processing after a request for examination by the company. It is an object to provide a program and a computer-readable recording medium recording the program.

[0009]

[Means for Solving the Problems]
In order to achieve the object, the workflow support system according to claim 1 comprises a plurality of steps for evaluating the value of information, and is necessary for the evaluation with respect to the email address of the worker in each step. In the workflow support system that evaluates the value of the information by sending the information or the information about the storage location of the information necessary for the evaluation by e-mail, the information about the information evaluated by the evaluation Is created from the database, first creating means for creating an electronic document of a predetermined format designated by the government office based on the information extracted by the first extracting means, and the first creating means. Transmitting means for transmitting the electronic document to the terminal of the government office, and the electronic document transmitted by the transmitting means for the public sector. Receiving means for receiving from the terminal of the government office an electronic document indicating that the electronic document has been received; second extracting means for extracting information stored in the database from the electronic document received by the receiving means; Updating means for updating the database based on the information extracted by the extracting means.

Further, in the workflow support system according to claim 2, in the invention according to claim 1, further, the procedure for the government office is completed for the information that the electronic document is received by the receiving means. It is characterized by further comprising a second transmitting means for transmitting the electronic mail of the contents to be notified to a mail address of a third party having an authority to proxy the procedure.

Further, in the workflow support system according to claim 3, in the invention according to claim 1 or 2, the information extracted by the second extracting means is transmitted by the transmitting means. It is characterized in that it includes information indicating the date when the electronic document is received by the government office.

Further, the workflow support system according to claim 4 is the invention according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the evaluation of the value of the information is an examination of an invention for which a patent application is pending. It is characterized in that it is an evaluation as to whether or not it is worth making a request, and the procedure is a procedure for requesting examination from the JPO.

Further, the workflow support method according to the present invention comprises a plurality of steps for evaluating the value of information, and the information necessary for the evaluation with respect to the mail address of the worker in each step. Alternatively, in the workflow support method for evaluating the value of the information by sending the information about the storage location of the information necessary for the evaluation by e-mail, the information about the information evaluated by the evaluation is displayed. A first extracting step of extracting from the database; a creating step of creating an electronic document of a predetermined format designated by the government office based on the information extracted in the first extracting step; and an electronic file created in the creating step. A transmission step of transmitting the document to a terminal of the government office, and the electronic document transmitted in the transmission step A reception step of receiving from the terminal of the government office an electronic document indicating that the agency has received the information; a second extraction step of extracting information stored in the database from the electronic document received in the reception step; And an updating step of updating the database based on the information extracted in the second extracting step.

The workflow support method according to a sixth aspect of the present invention is the method according to the fifth aspect, further comprising:
Sending an e-mail notifying that the procedure for the government office has been completed regarding the information received by the electronic document in the receiving step to a mail address of a third party authorized to proxy the procedure; It is characterized by including two transmission steps.

In the workflow support method according to claim 7, in the invention according to claim 5 or 6, the information extracted in the second extraction step is
It is characterized in that it includes information indicating a date when the government office receives the electronic document transmitted in the transmitting step.

Further, the workflow support method according to claim 8 is the invention according to any one of claims 5 to 7, wherein the evaluation of the value of the information is an examination of an invention for which a patent application is pending. It is characterized in that it is an evaluation as to whether or not it is worth making a request, and the procedure is a procedure for requesting examination from the JPO.

The work flow support program according to claim 9 comprises a plurality of steps for evaluating the value of information, and the information necessary for the evaluation with respect to the mail address of the worker in each step. Alternatively, in a workflow support program that evaluates the value of the information by sending information about the storage location of the information required for the evaluation by e-mail, information about the information whose value is evaluated by the evaluation is displayed. A first extracting step of extracting from the database; a creating step of creating an electronic document of a predetermined format designated by the government office based on the information extracted in the first extracting step; and an electronic file created in the creating step. Information stored in the database is extracted from an electronic document that indicates that the document has been received by the government office. A second extraction step of, characterized in that to perform the updating step of updating the database based on the information extracted by the second extraction step, to the computer.

According to a tenth aspect of the invention, there is provided the workflow support program according to the ninth aspect.
In addition, the authority to proxy the electronic mail created in the creating step by sending an electronic mail indicating that the electronic office has received the electronic document indicating that the electronic office has completed the procedure to the public office. Characterized in that the computer is caused to execute a second sending step for sending to a mail address of a third party having.

Further, in the invention according to claim 9 or 10, the workflow support program according to claim 11 is the evaluation of the value of the information, and the value of requesting examination for the invention for which a patent is pending. It is characterized in that it is an evaluation of whether or not there is, and the procedure is a procedure for requesting examination from the Patent Office.

A recording medium according to a twelfth aspect is characterized by recording the program according to any one of the ninth to eleventh aspects.

[0021]

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Preferred embodiments of a workflow support system, a workflow support method, a workflow support program, and a computer-readable recording medium recording the program according to the present invention will be described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. The details will be described.

(Schematic Configuration of Entire System) FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing a schematic configuration of a workflow support system according to an embodiment of the present invention. Main frame 101 in the figure
Is a “domestic special fact master” 101a that stores data of domestic patent applications and utility model registration applications for which the applicant is the applicant or right holder, and the applicant's current employment or past It holds a “personnel master” 101b that stores data about employees who have been employed.

In addition, the examination request DB is stored in the server 102.
(Database) ”102a (more precisely,“ examination request necessity evaluation DB ”, but hereinafter simply referred to as“ examination request DB ”) is held.

As will be described later, whether or not a request for examination is required is determined for a small portion of all applications stored in the mainframe 101 that have passed a certain period since the application. In the meantime, only the data of the application to be evaluated is transferred from the domestic special master 101a on the mainframe 101 to the examination request DB 102a on the server 102.
Read it to. And after finishing the judgment of necessity and after requesting examination for necessary applications,
Data from the examination request DB 102a is converted to the domestic special reality master 101
Try to write back to a.

A plurality of in-house PCs, such as a PC 103 in an intellectual property ward (intellectual property department) and a PC 104 in a development ward (development department), are connected to the server 102 via a LAN.
The server 102 and each of the PCs 103 and 104 are groupware, specifically, the above-mentioned "Lotus Notes".
Is installed and, depending on the functions it provides,
Examination request DB on the server 102 from the PC 103/104
The data of 102a can be referred to and edited. In addition to the PC 103, an IP application dedicated terminal 105 for performing various electronic procedures with the patent office is installed in the intellectual property area.

Further, the server 102 is a server 106 of a predetermined SP which holds a network line and a "office DB" 106a through a firewall (not shown).
It is connected to the.

As will be described later, in the case where the examination request is finally required and the procedure of the examination request is delegated to an external patent office, the necessary items are extracted from the examination request DB 102a and the office DB 106a is extracted. Copy it to. As a result, the agent can confirm the detailed contents of the requested item by copying the office DB 106a from the PC 107 in the office. In addition,
The "Lotus Notes" described above is also installed in the server 106 of this SP and the PC 107 of each office.

(Outline of Workflow) Next, an outline of an examination request necessity evaluation workflow (hereinafter simply referred to as “examination request workflow”) implemented by the above system will be described. Evaluation of necessity of examination request includes regular examination request processing that is regularly performed for inventions for which a certain period has passed from application, and temporary examination request processing that is temporarily performed for inventions for which immediate rights are requested. However, the former will be explained exclusively below.

Periodic examination request processing (hereinafter simply referred to as “periodic evaluation”)
Is the examination of the necessity of examination request and the actual procedure thereof, which is usually carried out for inventions that have passed for a year and a half to two years after the application. The general procedure of the periodic evaluation is as follows: (1) Examination request DB 102 from the domestic special fact master 101a
To a, read the data of the application to be evaluated this time (above, batch processing in mainframe 101) (2) Make necessary corrections to the above data (above, processing by clerical staff of intellectual property district) ( 3) Decide the person in charge of the IP zone and the evaluator of the development zone for each application (above, processing by the person in charge of the IP zone) (4) Determine the evaluator of the development zone for each application Judgment of necessity of examination request in development zone (above,
(Process by evaluator of development zone and supervisor) (5) Judgment of necessity of examination request in IP district for each application (above, processing by person in charge of IP district and supervisor) (6) Examination request DB 102a To domestic special reality master 101
Write the data back to a (above, batch processing in the server 102) (7) For applications that are judged to require examination, request an agent for examination or request for examination by themselves (above, intellectual property district) Processing by the administrative staff). Hereinafter, each work will be sequentially described.

(1) Reading of Data from Examination Request DB 102a FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing a procedure of reading (copying) data from the mainframe 101 to the server 102. When the software running on the mainframe 101 (specifically, "A-AUTO" of Beacon Information Technology Co., Ltd.) reaches the preset extraction date (step S201: Yes), the preset extraction conditions are set. The batch program for retrieving the record of the application that matches the above from the domestic special reality master 101a is started (step S202).

In the case of the present applicant, the extraction date is set three times a year, and the extraction condition is mainly based on the application date, for example, "February 1, 1997 to August 31, the same year".
Inventions that have been filed for a period of days and have not yet been requested for examination ”.

Then, when there is an application that meets the above conditions (step S203: Yes), a variable n indicating what number application is currently focused is initialized (step S204). Next, data of the nth application (if any) among the applications that meet the extraction conditions, for example, the company number (FNO: File Number),
Filing date, application number, publication date, publication number, inventor, title of invention, intellectual property person in charge (hereinafter also simply referred to as "person in charge"),
The agent, the abstract, etc. are read (step S205: Y
es, step S206), and sequentially writes the files in the CSV transfer file (step S207).

After that, n is incremented (step S208), and as a result of the above processing being repeated for the subsequent application, the data of all the applications that meet the extraction conditions are described in the transfer file. Then, this file is transmitted to the server 102 according to a predetermined protocol by software (specifically, “HULFT” of Saison Information Systems Co., Ltd.) operating on both the mainframe 101 and the server 102 (step S209). ).

(2) Correction of data The data of each application extracted from the mainframe 101 as described above is stored in the "examination request evaluation table" (hereinafter simply referred to as "evaluation table") created by the server 102 for each individual application. (Also referred to as “”). Then, these evaluation tables are stored in the examination request DB 102a of the server 102.

However, the data extracted above may be incomplete or inappropriate and cannot be stored in the evaluation table as it is. Therefore, the data is checked prior to the creation of the above-mentioned evaluation table, and if there is any deficiency, the deficiency is automatically corrected as much as possible. Furthermore, it notifies the examination request manager (administrative staff) of the intellectual property district of any deficiencies that could not be automatically compensated for, and allows them to supplement them manually. The typical deficiencies and examples of their complements are shown below.

Missing public number This is a case where there is no data in the public number item. As described above, since the periodical evaluation is carried out one and a half to two years after the application, the invention should have been published and the publication number should have been given at the time of the above extraction. The only exceptions are applications that are the basis of national priority claims, and these applications are considered withdrawn 1 year and 3 months after the filing of the application, so no publication number is given .

Therefore, the data of each application in the transfer file is automatically checked, and the applications with missing publication numbers are uniformly picked up in the error list. Then, the examination request manager collates this error list with the separately managed paper materials and determines whether the missing publication number of each application is due to mere omission of input or claim of priority. Do it. As a result, although the leaked publication number is entered for the former application, there is no practical benefit to evaluate the latter application in the first place (because there is no room for patenting due to request for examination due to dismissal) Exclude from evaluation.

There is no data in the item of the person in charge such as lack or absence of the person in charge, or there is data, but the person in charge is already out of charge of the invention due to personnel change. Regarding the former, it is sufficient to notify the examination request manager who knows the personnel of the intellectual property ward, and consult with the relevant parties to input the appropriate person in charge. For the latter, "person in charge movement status master"
Based on (a comparison table between the person in charge who is released and the person newly assigned, which is updated by the examination request manager each time there is a change), the old person is changed to the new person (current person)
Is automatically replaced.

Missing Inventor This is a case where there is no data in the item of the inventor. Such a gap can occur when all inventors are retired or on leave. However, even if this is discovered, it is difficult for the examination request manager who is solely in charge of clerical work to select another person in place of the absent inventor. Therefore, the lack of the inventor is usually not supplemented at the stage of the examination request manager,
As will be described later in (3), it is supplemented by a new evaluator being selected by the person in charge of the intellectual property ward in the subsequent stage.

On the contrary, when there are a plurality of inventors, one of them will be requested to perform the evaluation as will be described later. Therefore, at the time of creating the evaluation table, this representative (development area evaluator) Is selected. As a representative of these, the first inventor among the inventors, that is, the first inventor if there are a plurality of inventors, and the inventor is mechanically appointed if there is only one inventor.

(3) Determination of the person in charge and the evaluator When the automatically extracted data is corrected as required, either automatically or manually, the person in charge of the intellectual property district of each application is then asked. Then, the office work prior to the evaluation in the development zone is requested. And the subsequent work by the person in charge is
The procedure is to confirm the content of the invention, determine the person in charge in the intellectual property zone (change if necessary), and determine the evaluator in the development zone (change as necessary).
Hereinafter, they will be described in order.

Confirmation of Content of Invention FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a work request mail transmitted to a person in charge of an intellectual property district after data correction by an examination request manager. As shown in the figure, only the purpose of the request is shown in the mail text, and the information necessary for the work, such as the content of the invention, is referred to through the link embedded in the text.

FIG. 4 is a “Change Person & Evaluator” view displayed when the above link (indicated by an icon in the figure) is clicked, and FIG. 5 is displayed when any item is double clicked in the above view. It is explanatory drawing which shows an example of the examination request evaluation table made.

As described above, this evaluation table is created for each individual application and saved in the examination request DB 102a of the server 102. The overall layout such as where to place what in a document is document design information. Predefined as (form). Further, the summary sentence, the bibliographical matter, the person in charge of the intellectual property ward, the evaluator of the development ward, and the like, which are flown into the form, have been subjected to the above-mentioned corrections automatically or manually after being extracted into the server 102.

As shown in the figure, the title and summary of the invention are displayed at the beginning of the evaluation table, and by clicking the "PV start" button, the entire publication of the application can be displayed. Here, PV (patient vie)
“Wer)” is the name of the patent publication search system that the applicant operates in-house.

A plurality of sections are provided below the title and abstract of the invention. This section is Lot
It is a design term of us Notes and means an area that can be opened and closed directly under "section mark (down arrow or right arrow) + section name" in the document.

For example, in the figure, the “intellectual property ward person in charge” section and the “development area evaluator” section are open, but by clicking the section mark, the section is closed and its contents are not displayed. be able to.
At this time, the section mark changes from the downward arrow to the right arrow. On the contrary, although the "bibliographical matters" section is closed in the figure, the section can be opened and its contents can be displayed by clicking the section mark in the same manner. At this time, the section mark changes from a rightward arrow to a downward arrow.

In the initial state, that is, immediately after the evaluation table is opened, which section is displayed, and which of the displayed sections is open and which is closed are up to the evaluation stage. It depends on whether or not it is progressing, but this point will be described later.

Determination of Person in Charge The person in charge of the invention, who has confirmed the contents of the invention by the above-mentioned evaluation table, decides the person in charge of the person himself or herself when he / she decides that he / she is not suitable as the person in charge of the application. You can ask your boss to make that decision. If the user is appropriate as the person in charge of the application, the following processing will be omitted and the procedure will be described later.

A) When deciding the person in charge to replace himself / herself First, the "edit" button in the evaluation table shown in FIG. 5 is clicked to put the document in edit mode (editable state). FIG. 6 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an evaluation table in the edit mode, particularly in the vicinity of the section "person in charge of intellectual property ward".

In the figure, when the "Select from Address Book" button in the "Person in charge of IP ward" is clicked, the address book as shown in FIG. 7 is displayed. Select it and click the "OK" button. After that, when the "change person in charge" button is clicked, the same work request mail as shown in FIG. 3 is transmitted to the person in charge after the change.

By clicking the "Change person in charge" button on the list screen shown in FIG. 4, a plurality of cases (limited to those who are in charge) are selected at that time. You can change the person in charge at once.

B) When requesting the supervisor to determine a person in charge of replacing himself or when the person in charge cannot select an appropriate person in charge of himself or herself, in the evaluation table shown in FIG. "
Click the button to display the dialog as shown in FIG. Then, if necessary items such as the requestee for changing the person in charge (usually the approver of the person in charge), the person in charge who seems to be appropriate and the outline of the invention are entered and the “OK” button is clicked, the requestee is changed to A work request mail as shown in is sent.

FIG. 10 is a "confirm change of person in charge" view that is displayed when the link embedded in the above-mentioned mail is clicked at the request destination, and by double-clicking on any case, the examination request evaluation table for that case Can be displayed. The evaluation table displayed here is the same as that shown in FIG. 5, and the requestee determines a new person in charge by the same procedure as above.

The person in charge can click the "person in charge change request" button on the list screen shown in FIG.
It is possible to request the change of the person in charge for a plurality of items selected at that time (limited to those for which the person is the person in charge). In addition, at the request destination, FIG.
By clicking the "Change person in charge" button on the list screen shown in, multiple items selected at that time (limited to those who are the person in charge of changing person in charge) You can change the person in charge.

Determination of Evaluator (Intellectual Property District) When the person in charge is determined as described above, the next person in charge is determined by the evaluator listed in the examination request evaluation table to examine the application. Judge whether it is appropriate as a person who should judge the necessity of billing. If it is judged to be inappropriate, the evaluator is changed.

First, the "edit" button on the evaluation table shown in FIG. 5 is clicked to put the document in edit mode (editable state). FIG. 11 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the evaluation table in the edit mode, particularly in the vicinity of the "development area evaluator" section.

In the figure, when the "Select from inventor list" button in the "Development area evaluator" item is clicked, FIG.
A list of inventors set in the evaluation table as shown in is displayed. When the “Select from Address Book” button is clicked in the evaluation table of FIG. 11, the same address book as shown in FIG. 7 is displayed. After selecting an appropriate evaluator from the inventor list or the address book and clicking OK, when the “evaluation request” button is clicked, a work request mail as shown in FIG. 13 is transmitted to the changed evaluator.

(4) Determination of Evaluator and Evaluation of Development Zone Next, in the subsequent work in the development zone which received the work request mail of FIG. 13, the contents of the invention are confirmed and the evaluator is determined (changed as necessary). ), The evaluator himself performs the evaluation, and then the approver performs the evaluation. Hereinafter, they will be described in order.

Confirmation of Invention Content When the person in charge and the evaluator are determined by the intellectual property district, the work request mail as shown in FIG. 13 is transmitted to the determined evaluator as described above. As shown in the figure, the above-mentioned work is specifically the judgment of the necessity of examination request, only the purpose of the request is shown in the email body, and the information necessary for the work is the link embedded in the body. It is supposed to be referred to through.

FIG. 14 is a “development area evaluation” view that is displayed by clicking the link (indicated by an icon in the figure), and FIG. 15 is an examination that is displayed by double-clicking any item in the view. It is explanatory drawing which shows an example of a claim evaluation table.

Decision of evaluator (development zone) When the evaluator confirms the content of the invention by the evaluation table of the same figure and judges that it is not suitable for judging the necessity of examination request of the application, the evaluator evaluates it. You can request the person in charge of the IP district to change the person. First, the evaluation table shown in the figure is put in edit mode, and the "Development Zone Evaluator" section is opened.

FIG. 16 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the evaluation table in the edit mode, particularly in the vicinity of the "development area evaluator" section. The “development zone evaluator” section shown in FIG. 11 (displayed to the person in charge of the intellectual property zone when changing the person in charge or the evaluator) is newly provided with a “evaluator reset request” button. It is different in that it is done. When this button is clicked, an e-mail requesting re-setting (change) of the evaluator is sent to the person in charge, whereby the processing can be temporarily transferred back from the development zone to the intellectual property zone.

The evaluator clicks the "reset evaluator" button on the list screen shown in FIG. 14 to select a plurality of items selected at that time (in which the self is the evaluator. (Limited), you can request the change of evaluators at once. The person in charge of the intellectual property district who received the reset request selects another appropriate evaluator by the same procedure as above.

Evaluation by Evaluator Further, when it is appropriate to judge whether the application for examination is required or not, the evaluator skips the above and directly starts the evaluation. FIG. 17 is a flowchart showing the evaluation procedure by the evaluator of the development zone.

First, from the list linked to the work request mail as described above, the evaluation table (FIG. 15) of the item assigned to itself is opened (steps S2901 and S29).
02), by clicking the "Edit" button, the document is set in the edit mode, that is, in the editable state (step S2903: Yes).

Then, the "development area examination request necessity evaluation"
When the "Evaluation" button in the section is clicked (step 2904: Yes), a dialog for selecting whether or not to request examination and entering each reason is opened. When the necessary items are selected and input in this dialog and OK, the reason for the input to the selected side of "examination request" or "examination request" is displayed in the displayed evaluation table (step S2905). .

After that, the "Examination / approval request" button is clicked (step S2906: Yes), and an appropriate approver is selected from the dialog shown in FIG. 18 and OK (step S2907). A work request mail as shown is transmitted (step S2908). Then, the evaluation table is closed after setting the necessity and the reason in the "evaluation result" and the approver in the "approver" (steps S2909 and S2910).

If the user simply presses the "save and return" button without pressing the "examination / approval request" button (step S2906: No, step S2911:
Yes), only setting and closing in the evaluation table (steps S2909 and S2910), and only pressing the "return" button (step S2906: No, step S2911: No, step S2912: Yes), evaluation table Is closed (step S2910), respectively.

If only the "save" button is pressed (step S2906: NO, step S2
911: No, step S2912: No, step S
2913: Yes), the setting contents at that time are saved in the evaluation table (step S2914), and then the process waits for editing (step S2904).

If the "collective review / approval request" button is clicked on the list screen shown in FIG. 14, a plurality of projects (limited to those for which the self is the evaluator) are selected at that time. You can also request approval at once. By the way, there is a distinction between “examination” and “approval”, but approval is the final examination, and when three or more people are involved in the evaluation in the same department, the first one is the evaluator and the last one. Is the approver and the other is the examiner. However, here, for convenience of explanation, it is assumed that only two evaluators and approvers perform the evaluation in the development zone, that is, there is no examiner.

Evaluation by Approver As described above, the work request mail as shown in FIG. 19 is transmitted to the approver selected in the dialog shown in FIG. As shown in the figure, only the purpose of the request is shown in the mail body, and the information necessary for the work is referred to via the link embedded in the body.

FIG. 20 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a "development zone examination / approval" view displayed by clicking the link (indicated by an icon in the figure). When any item is clicked on this list screen, the same evaluation table as shown in FIG. 15 is displayed. However, in the "Development Zone Examination Request Required Evaluation" section, the evaluation results by the former evaluator are described (if the evaluation by the former evaluator is "necessary", the "evaluation request required" and below in the figure The reason, if "No", the reason is displayed below "No request for examination").

FIG. 21 is a flow chart showing the procedure of evaluation by the approver of the development zone. First, from the list linked to the work request mail as described above, open the evaluation table (FIG. 15) of the case assigned to itself (steps S3301 and S3302), and click the "Edit" button. The document is set in the edit mode, that is, in the editable state (step S3303: Yes).

If there is no particular need to redo the previous evaluation, the approver clicks the "Approve" button (step S3304: Yes), and the "Necessary" is displayed in the dialog shown in FIG. Either "no" is selected (step S3305).

Then, regardless of whether or not the approver's conclusion is necessary, an approval notification mail as shown in FIG. 23 is sent to the evaluator (step S3306), and the person in charge of the intellectual property district is informed. Then, a work request mail as shown in FIG. 24 is transmitted (step S3307). Then, the evaluation table is closed after setting the approver, the approval date, and the evaluation result of the approver (steps S3308 and S330).
9).

If the "collective approval" button is clicked on the list screen shown in FIG. 20, a plurality of items selected at that time (limited to those who are the approvers themselves)
Therefore, it is possible to approve all at once.

If the former evaluation needs to be redone, the approver clicks the "deny" button in the evaluation table shown in FIG. 15 (step S3304: No,
Step S3310: Yes), FIG.
Send a denial notification email as shown in (step S33
11) After setting the denial person and the denial date (step S3)
312) Close the evaluation table (step S330)
9). The evaluator who is denied the evaluation by the approver must repeat the evaluation.

(5) Evaluation of intellectual property district Next, in the subsequent work in the intellectual property district that receives the work request mail of FIG. 24, the person in charge evaluates the work and the approver performs the evaluation. Can be advanced. This procedure is basically the same as the procedure for evaluation by the evaluator and approver in the development zone, so the differences will be briefly explained below.

After the evaluation by the person in charge in the evaluation zone is completed, the work request mail as shown in FIG. 24 is transmitted to the person in charge in the intellectual property zone as described above. As shown in the figure, only the purpose of the request is shown in the mail body, and the information necessary for the work is referred to via the link embedded in the body.

FIG. 26 is displayed when the above-mentioned link (indicated by an icon in the drawing) is clicked to display the “IP evaluation” view, and FIG. 27 is displayed when any item is double-clicked in the above view. It is explanatory drawing which shows an example of an examination request evaluation table.

When the "evaluation" button is clicked in the "evaluation of necessity for examination request for intellectual property area" shown in the figure, a plurality of sets of necessity and reason for examination request prepared in advance are displayed. Select and OK. In addition, when the “evaluation same as development zone” button is clicked, in principle, the same evaluation as that made in the development zone can be performed (that is, the evaluation in the development zone can be followed).

In any case, if a conclusion is required, whether or not to carry out amendment, division, or accelerated examination procedure when requesting examination is set in the above section. To set the correction to "Yes", you must specify the file in which the correction details are entered by using the "Specify file" button or enter the correction details directly in the "Attach Amendment Notification" field. . Also, if there is an amendment, the number of claims that increases or decreases due to it must be entered.

When the evaluation is made by either "evaluation" or "evaluation same as the development zone", and when the conclusion is "necessary" or "no", the final result is "examination /
By clicking the "approval request" button, the work of the person in charge is completed when the work request mail as shown in FIG. 28 is transmitted to the approver at the latter stage.

Evaluation by Approver When the evaluation by the person in charge is completed in this way, the work request mail as shown in FIG. 28 is transmitted to the approver who is the boss as described above. As shown in the figure, only the purpose of the request is shown in the mail body, and the information necessary for the work is referred to via the link embedded in the body.

FIG. 29 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the "IP zone examination / approval" view displayed by clicking the link (indicated by an icon in the figure). When you double-click on any item in this list screen, the same evaluation table as shown in Fig. 27 will be displayed (however, the "evaluation result" item shows the evaluation result by the person in charge in the previous stage. 3), click the "Approve" button.
If the approval notification mail as shown in 0 is clicked on by clicking the "repudiation" button, the rejection notification mail as shown in FIG. 31 is transmitted to the person in charge at the preceding stage. If the approver disapproves, the person in charge must re-evaluate:
It is the same as when there is a denial in the development zone.

Schedule up to completion of evaluation Here, the schedules of the above-mentioned operations (2) to (5) will be summarized. The examination request manager of the intellectual property district determines the work schedule in the current periodical evaluation in parallel with (or prior to) the correction of the data in (2) above. The decided schedule is the examination request D
Registered in the "schedule master" in B102a, the examination request manager can view and change at any time.

FIG. 32 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a schedule registered in the schedule master. As shown in the same figure, this schedule is specifically a deadline of processing at each stage, and for example, the data correction deadline (above (2)) in an intellectual property district is May 23, 2001.
Deadline for decision by the person in charge and evaluator in IP ward (same (3))
Is the same as 28th, the evaluation deadline in the development zone (the same (4)) is June 11, the evaluation deadline in the intellectual property zone (the same (5)) is the same 18th,
As shown in, each is set by the date.

Then, the above-mentioned works (2) to (5) are carried out in accordance with this schedule, and when the processing which should be carried out is not carried out even when the deadline is reached, the processing is forced to shift to the next stage. If you do not, or send a reminder e-mail to those who have neglected the processing, measures will be taken automatically (below).

A) When the decision of the person in charge or the evaluator is delayed If there is a case in which the person in charge or the evaluator has not been decided even if the decision deadline has been defined in advance, the case is set to the default setting. As it is, it is forcibly transferred from the intellectual property zone to the development zone.

B) When the evaluation in the development zone is delayed, a few days before the predetermined evaluation deadline (specifically, 3
If there is a project that has not been evaluated in the development zone even before (day), the evaluator and approver will be e-mailed a reminder. At the time of passing, the development zone is forcibly transferred to the intellectual property zone.

C) When the evaluation in the intellectual property district is delayed, several days before the predetermined evaluation deadline (specifically, 3
If there is a project that has not been evaluated in the IP zone even before (day before), the person in charge and the approver will be urged by e-mail, and if the reminder is not evaluated, the above will be applied. A similar reminder will be issued when the deadline is exceeded.

(6) Writing back data to the domestic special master 101a When the evaluations by the development zone and intellectual property zone are completed as described above, next, the domestic special facts of the mainframe 101 from the examination request DB 102a of the server 102. Data is written back to the master 101a.

FIG. 33 is a flow chart showing the procedure for writing back (copying) data from the server 102 to the mainframe 101. The software operating on the server 102 has passed a preset date, specifically, the evaluation deadline in the intellectual property district (step S650).
1: Yes), the examination request DB 10 is currently attracting attention
A variable n indicating the number of the evaluation table in 2a is initialized (step S6502). It should be noted that, here, the data is written back to the IP district evaluation deadline,
It may be any time after the deadline.

Next, the data set in the n-th evaluation table (if any) is sequentially written in the CSV transfer file (step S6503: YES, step S6).
504), n is incremented (step S650
5) Upon completion of the above processing for all evaluation tables (step S6503: No), the transfer file is transmitted to the mainframe 101 according to a predetermined protocol (step S6506). Then, the mainframe 101 updates the data of the domestic special reality master 101a based on the received transfer file (step S
6507).

The above-mentioned processing is actually performed by the middleware "MQ" of IBM Corp., which operates on a third computer (not shown) different from the mainframe 101 and the server 102. However, the reason why the server 102 is not in charge of the above processing is solely due to the convenience of system construction, and therefore, for convenience of explanation, the above processing will be described as being performed by the server 102.

(7) Examination Request After the evaluation by the development zone and the intellectual property zone, for applications for which it is finally determined that an examination request is necessary, after this, mainly under the examination request manager of the intellectual property zone, The procedure for requesting examination from the JPO is taken.

The request for examination is made by requesting an agent (request for examination) or by the dedicated terminal 105 connected to the JPO (in-house examination request).
There is. Then, which of the above treatments a given application should be handled is mechanically determined by whether or not the procedure for amendment / division or accelerated examination is taken at the same time as the request for examination.

That is, in the evaluation table shown in FIG. 27,
If the person in charge of the intellectual property district has set “Yes” to either amendment / division or accelerated examination, it will be treated as above, and if both are set to “No”, it will be treated as above. Become. Hereinafter, they will be described in order.

Request for Examination Request FIG. 34 is a flowchart showing the procedure for requesting an examination request to an agent. The examination request manager of the intellectual property ward opens the examination request DB 102a of the server 102 to display the subject matter of the request for examination, that is, the matter requiring correction / division or accelerated examination by the intellectual property ward (step S
6701). FIG. 35 is displayed when the “office request” button is clicked in the examination request DB 102a,
It is explanatory drawing which shows an example of a "office request" view.

Then, select any item in the list and click the "Office Request" button (step S
6702: Yes, step S6703: Yes), for each agent set in the evaluation table of the selected item,
A work request mail for delegating the examination request procedure is created and transmitted as shown in FIG. 36 (step S670).
4). In addition, if the above button is pressed without selecting anything (step S6703: NO), an error message such as "Please select a case to request" is displayed (step S67).
05).

Furthermore, a procedure request list as shown in FIG. 37 is created for each agent of the item selected above (step S6706), and this request list and the data of each item are used as the agent's work. What you need is the server 10
2 is copied from the examination request DB 102a on the SP 2 to the office DB 106a on the SP server 106 (step S67).
07).

When the link (indicated by the icon in the figure) embedded in the work request mail shown in FIG. 36 is clicked, the copy is made on the office DB 106a as shown in FIG.
38 is displayed, and when a link (indicated by an icon in the figure) embedded in this request list is clicked, as shown in FIG. 38, based on the data of each case similarly copied in the office DB 106a. A request form for each individual item is created and displayed. In this way, the agent can refer to the necessary data at any time by following the link from the received work request mail.

In-house examination request Next, FIG. 39, FIG. 40, FIG. 41 and FIG. 42 are flowcharts showing the procedure of the in-house examination request. FIG. 39
Is a procedure for creating an examination request, FIG. 40 is an examination request procedure in the dedicated terminal 105, FIG. 41 is a procedure for setting an examination request date in the examination request evaluation table, and FIG. 42 is a procedure for notifying an agent after completion of the examination request. Are shown respectively.

First, the examination request manager of the intellectual property district is the server 1
The examination request DB 102a of 02 is displayed to display the subject matter of the in-house examination request, that is, the matter for which neither correction / division nor accelerated examination is required by the intellectual property district (FIG. 39).
Step S7201). FIG. 43 shows the examination request DB 102.
It is explanatory drawing which shows an example of the "in-house examination request" view displayed when the "in-house procedure" button is clicked in a.

[0106] Then, when any of the items under "Waiting for in-house examination request" in the list is selected and the "FD creation" button is clicked (step S7202: Yes, step S720).
7203: Yes), the FD setting waits. In addition,
If you select a case other than "Waiting for in-house examination request" or press the above button without selecting anything (step S72)
03: No), "FD has already been created""F
An error message such as "Please select a matter to create D" is displayed (step S7204).

Then, when the FD is inserted into the FD drive (step S7205: YES), the variable n indicating which item is currently being focused on is initialized (step S7206) and selected. From the evaluation table of the n-th item, the items necessary for creating the examination request, specifically, the application number, the number of claims, the claimant identification number, and the agent are read (step S7208).

Then, an examination invoice in HTML format is created from these data (step S7209), and the FD is sent.
Is output (step S7210). After that, n is incremented (step S7211), and the above process is repeated for all the selected items.

Thereafter, the FD is inserted into the dedicated terminal 105 (step S7301 in FIG. 40: Yes), and all examination invoices in the FD are read (step S730).
2). Then, when a desired one of the read examination invoices is selected and the "shipment" button is clicked (step S7303: Yes, step S7304: Ye
s), after converting the examination request into the JPO format (step S
7305) and sends it to the JPO (step S73).
06).

After that, when the proof is received from the JPO, the proof is received (step S730).
8: Yes), and outputs the proof to the FD (step S7309). In addition, "shipment" without selecting any item
When the button is pressed (step S7304: NO), an error message such as "Please select an application for examination request" is displayed (step S7307).

The FD in which the proof is stored is returned from the dedicated terminal 105 to a terminal that can access the examination request DB 102a again (step S7401: Yes in FIG. 41).
s) First, a variable n indicating what number of the proof in the FD is currently focused is initialized (step S).
7402). If there is an nth proof (step S7403: YES), a variable m indicating what number application in the proof is currently focused is initialized (step S7404).

Regarding the m-th application of the n-th proof (note that, as is well known, a plurality of applications for which examination requests have been submitted are described in the proof), its evaluation table is searched from the examination request DB 102a. (Step S740
6) The "submission date" described in the proof is set as the "examination request date" of the evaluation table (step S7407).

After that, m is incremented (step S7408), and after setting the examination request date for all applications in the proof (step S7405: No), n is incremented (step S7409) and all proofs in the FD are incremented. Therefore, the above processing is repeated.

Then, the examination request manager opens the examination request DB 102a of the server 102 to display a list of items subject to in-house examination request as shown in FIG. 43 (step S7501 in FIG. 42), and in the list, “Create own FD” Completed ”and select any of the following cases and click the“ Examination Request Complete ”button (step S7502: Yes, step S7)
503: Yes).

[0115] If a case other than "Company's FD has been created" is selected, or if the above button is pressed without selecting anything (step S7503: No), "the case is not yet requested for examination". An error message such as "Already completed" is displayed (step S750).
4).

Next, in the evaluation table of the selected item, information indicating that an examination request has been made for the application is set (step S7505), and the agent set therein is read (step S7506). ). Then, the e-mail address of the agent is acquired from the patent common master (step S7507), and an e-mail having the content of notifying the completion of the examination request as shown in FIG. 44 is transmitted to this address (step S7508). ).

In order to avoid a situation in which the examination request was created but was not sent to the JPO, a certain period (specifically 10
If there is a case that the proof has not been received even after (days), the examination request manager will be warned.

The status of each application, such as whether an examination request has been prepared for that application and whether the proof has been received, is held in the examination request evaluation table as a status classification code as described later. So
Each evaluation table in the examination request DB 102a is regularly checked, and if there is any item left after the FD is created, the examination request manager is notified by email.

(8) Differences between Various Documents Since various documents similar to each other are used in the examination request workflow described above, the differences between the main ones will be finally summarized. The documents used in the workflow are roughly classified into documents to be sent to each worker, and documents existing in the server 102 and referred to / edited by each worker. The main request mail is the examination request evaluation table described above.

Work request mail The work request mails sent to the examination request manager, the person in charge of the intellectual property district, the approver, or the evaluator in the development zone, the approver only differ in the content of the request, and both are almost the same. Similar style. As described above, a link to the document in the examination request DB 102a (may be called its location information) is embedded at the end of the email body so that the information necessary for the work of each person can be immediately viewed. Has become.

The text in the text is stored on the server 1 in advance.
It is created by selecting one from the request texts (standard texts) stored in 02 and fitting the work deadline set in the schedule master. The request text and deadline used are a series of work It depends on how many stages have been completed. Then, the “state classification code” is stored in the evaluation table indicating the progress of the process for a certain application.

FIG. 45 is an explanatory diagram summarizing each status classification code and its meaning. For example, as a result of the person in charge of the intellectual property district clicking the “evaluation request” button in the evaluation table shown in FIG. 11 or the decision deadline for the person in charge and the evaluator in the intellectual property district being exceeded, the evaluation of the development zone Figure 1
When the work request mail shown in 3 is transmitted, the status classification code is changed from "2x" to "3x".

Similarly, as a result of the approver of the development zone clicking the “Approve” button in the evaluation table shown in FIG. 15 or the evaluation deadline in the development zone being exceeded, the person in charge of the intellectual property zone is shown in FIG. The state classification code is changed from "3x" to "4x" when the work request mail shown in is transmitted.

[0124] Further, when the evaluation deadline in the intellectual property district has passed, it is judged that the examination request is necessary and that it is necessary to amend / divide the request, that is, to request the examination request to the agent, the status classification Codes changed from "4x" to "6x" that require examination but none of the amendments / divisions, etc., that is, those requesting examination by themselves, have status classification codes of "4x" to "7x" , Respectively.

By referring to this status classification code, it is possible to know to whom the next work should be requested, and therefore, it is possible to select, from a plurality of request sentences, the contents for which the work is requested. Further, since the work deadline can be obtained from the schedule master, it is possible to create the various work request mails described above by inserting the work deadline in an appropriate position in the request sentence.

Examination Request Evaluation Table The examination request evaluation table is created for each application as described above and published on the server 102. However, the display form differs depending on the status classification code, and it is edited in addition to the reference. It is also different whether it is possible.

A) Difference in display form As can be seen by comparing the evaluation tables shown in FIG. 5, FIG. 15 or FIG. 27, the evaluation tables displayed for each worker at each evaluation stage are not necessarily the same. Absent. However, the title and summary of the invention at the beginning of the evaluation table are always displayed (for everyone), and the difference is in the section below.

FIG. 46 is an explanatory diagram summarizing the default display form of each section in the examination request evaluation table at each stage. In the figure, the circle mark indicates that the section is displayed in the open state, the triangle mark indicates that the section is displayed in the closed state, and the cross mark indicates that the section itself is not displayed (“section mark + section name”). "Even not displayed").

For example, the evaluation table shown in FIG. 5 is displayed in a phase (state classification code = 2x) for determining the person in charge of the intellectual property zone and the evaluator of the development zone. In the initial state, the "Bibliographic items" section is closed, the "Person in charge of intellectual property zone" and "Development zone evaluator" sections are open, and "Evaluation of necessity for development zone examination request""IP zone examination request required" None of the "Disclaimers" sections are displayed.

The evaluation table shown in FIG. 15 is displayed in the evaluation phase (state classification code = 3x) in the development zone. The section is shown closed and
A new "Development Zone Examination Request Needs Evaluation" section is displayed in an open state.

As shown in FIG. 27, the “IP zone examination request necessity evaluation” section is displayed in the open state for the first time in the evaluation phase (state classification code = 4x) in the IP zone.
At this time, all other sections are closed. Which section is displayed and in which aspect the display is opened or closed is mainly determined by what information the viewer needs in that aspect.

B) Difference in authority Further, not only how the evaluation table is displayed, but also who is given the reference authority and the edit authority (including the reference authority) is different depending on the state classification code. FIG. 47 is an explanatory diagram summarizing the reference right holder and the editing right holder of the examination request evaluation table at each stage.

As shown in the figure, the examination request manager has the right to edit the evaluation table in all aspects. This is so that if the data in the evaluation table is incorrect, it can be corrected at any time.

Further, in the phase in which the person in charge and the evaluator are determined in the intellectual property ward (state classification code = 2x), only the person in charge of the intellectual property ward and the approver can see the evaluation table in addition to the examination request manager. Can be rewritten. In the aspect of evaluation in the development zone (state classification code = 3x), in addition to the examination request manager, the evaluator and approver of the development zone, other inventors of the application not selected as the evaluator (if any (Everyone) is given editing rights. In addition, in the evaluation phase in the IP zone (state classification code = 4x), it is of course possible to give the members of the IP zone the editing right, but also to the members of the development zone that have an interest in the whereabouts of the evaluation. Give reference only.

Each evaluation table has a column for writing the reference right holder or the editing right holder, and every time the status classification code is changed, the person in charge in the evaluation table, its approver, the evaluator, The approver, the inventor, or the like is referred to, and the ID is written in the column of reference right holder or edit right holder.

(System Hardware Configuration) Next,
The hardware configuration of each computer that constitutes the workflow support system according to the embodiment of the present invention will be described. For convenience of explanation, it is assumed that the server 102 to the patent office PC 107 all have the same hardware configuration.

FIG. 48 is an explanatory diagram showing the hardware configuration of each computer that constitutes the workflow support system according to the embodiment of the present invention. 880 in the figure
1 is a CPU for controlling the entire apparatus, 8802 is a ROM storing basic input / output programs, and 8803 is a CPU 8
RAMs used as work areas 801 are shown.

Reference numeral 8804 denotes an HDD (hard disk drive) that controls reading / writing of data from / to the HD (hard disk) 8805 under the control of the CPU 8801, and 8805 denotes an HD that stores data written under the control of the HDD 8804. Shown respectively.

Reference numeral 8806 denotes an FD (floppy (registered trademark) disk) 8 under the control of the CPU 8801.
FD that controls data read / write to 807
D (floppy disk drive), 8807 is FD
Removable FDs that store data written under the control of D8806 are shown.

Reference numeral 8808 denotes a cursor, menu, window, or display for displaying various data such as characters and images. Reference numeral 8809 denotes a communication cable 8810.
A network I / F (interface) that is connected to a network such as a LAN via a network and functions as an interface between the network and the CPU 8801.
Are shown respectively.

Reference numeral 8811 denotes a keyboard equipped with a plurality of keys for inputting characters, numerical values, various instructions, etc.
Reference numeral 812 denotes a mouse for selecting and executing various instructions, selecting a processing target, and moving a cursor. 8813 is a removable recording medium CD-
A ROM, 8814 is a CD-ROM drive for controlling the reading of data from the CD-ROM 8813.
Denoted at 15 are buses or cables for connecting the above-mentioned respective parts.

(Functional Configuration of System) Next, a functional configuration of the workflow support system according to the embodiment of the present invention will be described. FIG. 49 is an explanatory diagram showing a functional configuration of the workflow support system according to the embodiment of the present invention. However, this figure shows only the minimum functional units necessary for explaining the invention described in the claims.

In the figure, 8901 to 8903 are servers 102.
Is the functional part of. First, reference numeral 8901 denotes an evaluation table storage unit, which holds an examination request evaluation table prepared for each application. As described above, in the evaluation table, in addition to bibliographic items such as the name and summary of each application, application date and application number, workers in each process in the workflow (IP zone staff / approver and development zone evaluation) Personnel, approvers, etc.), evaluation results by each worker, agents, status classification codes, etc. are stored.

Reference numeral 8902 denotes a read / write unit,
It controls reading of data from the evaluation table storage unit 8901 and writing of data to the evaluation table storage unit 8901 in general. For example, the examination invoice preparing section 8904 of the intellectual property district PC 103 (of which PC used by the examination request administrator in particular), which will be described later, is notified that the "FD creation" button has been clicked in the view shown in FIG. Read /
The writing unit 8902 searches the evaluation table storage unit 8901 for the evaluation table of the item currently selected. Then, the items necessary for preparing the examination invoice are read out from the evaluation table and transmitted to the examination invoice preparing unit 8904.

Further, when the reading / writing unit 8902 is notified of the application number and the submission date described in the proof from the examination request information extracting unit 8906 of the above-described PC, the reading / writing unit 8902 displays the evaluation table specified by the application number. Evaluation table storage unit 8
A search is made from 901, and the above submission date is set as the examination request date.

Further, when notified that the "examination request completion" button has been clicked in the view shown in FIG. 43, the read / write unit 8902 causes the evaluation table storage unit to display the evaluation table of the item currently selected. Search from 8901. Then, the information necessary to create the e-mail shown in FIG. 44, that is, the agent set in the evaluation table, the examination request date (“submission date” in the figure), FNO, filing date, application number, and billing The number of terms and the person in charge of the intellectual property district are read out and notified to the e-mail creation / transmission unit 8903 described later.

Reference numeral 8903 denotes an electronic mail creating / transmitting unit, which acquires the mail address of the agent notified from the reading / writing unit 8902 from a patent common master (not shown). And the examination request date and FNO that were notified at the same time
By embedding the like in a fixed text that is held in advance, an electronic mail as shown in FIG. 44 is created and transmitted to the mail address of the agent acquired above. As shown in the figure, the email is for notifying the agent that the examination request procedure by the company has been completed and its details.

Returning to FIG. 49, next, 8904-8906.
Is a functional unit of the intellectual property district PC 103, and in particular, the PC used by the examination request manager. First, 8904 is the examination invoice preparing section, and when it is detected that the “FD preparing” button is clicked in the view shown in FIG. 43, the fact is read / written together with the item currently selected at that time.
Notify 902. Then, the read / write unit 89
By inserting the matters returned from 02 into the fixed text that is held in advance, the examination request for each of the above-mentioned cases is created, and the created examination request is described later in the FD input / output unit 89.
Hand over to 05.

Reference numeral 8905 denotes an FD input / output unit, which sends the examination request delivered from the examination request preparation unit 8904 to the FD8.
Save in 807. In addition, as will be described later, FD8807
The proof stored therein is read out and delivered to the examination request information extraction unit 8906 described later.

Reference numeral 8906 denotes an examination request information extraction unit, which is F
In the proof delivered from the D input / output unit 8905, items to be set in the evaluation table are extracted and transmitted to the read / write unit 8902 on the server 102 side. As for this matter, the application number (at least one) in the proof extracted by the application number extraction unit 8906a, and the submission date in the proof extracted by the examination request date extraction unit 8906b (the examination request is It may be said that the day it was accepted by).

Next, 8907 to 8909 are functional units of the electronic application dedicated terminal 105. First, reference numeral 8907 denotes an FD input / output unit, which reads an examination request stored in the FD 8807 and delivers it to an examination request transmission unit 8908 described later. Further, the proof delivered from the proof receiving unit 8909 described later is stored in the FD8807.

Reference numeral 8908 denotes the examination request transmission unit, which is the FD
The examination request read from the FD by the input / output unit 8907 is transmitted to the terminal installed in the patent office according to a predetermined protocol. Note that, prior to this transmission, the examination request transmission unit 8908 performs the examination request conversion unit 8908.
The format of the examination request to be transmitted is converted to the JPO format by a.

Reference numeral 8909 denotes a proof receiving unit, which receives a proof (receipt) returned from the terminal of the JPO after the examination request is transmitted by the examination request transmitting unit 8908. Then, this receipt is delivered to the FD input / output unit 8907 and is output to the FD 8807.

The read / write unit 890
2. E-mail creation / transmission unit 8903, examination request preparation unit 8904, FD input / output unit 8905/8907, examination request information extraction unit 8906, examination request transmission unit 8908, and proof reception unit 8909 are respectively from HD8805 to RAM8803. The CPU 8801 executes the instruction processing in accordance with the instruction of the program read out to realize the function of each unit. This program is HD8805, FD8807, CD-R
It can be stored in various recording media such as OM8813 or MO, or can be distributed via a network.

The read / write unit 8902 shown in FIG. 49 corresponds to the "first extraction means" and the "update means" in the claims, and the "first extraction" in the claims is included in the processing. "Step" and "update step" are included. Further, the electronic mail creating / sending unit 8903 corresponds to the "second sending means" in the claims, and the processing to be performed includes the "second sending step" in the claims.

The examination bill preparing unit 8904 corresponds to the "preparing means" in the claims, and the processing to be performed includes the "preparing step" in the claims. Further, the examination request information extraction unit 8906 corresponds to the “second extraction means” in the claims, and the processing to be performed includes the “second extraction step” in the claims.

The examination bill transmission unit 8908 corresponds to the "transmission means" in the claims, and the processing to be performed includes the "transmission step" in the claims. The proof receiving unit 8909 corresponds to the "receiving means" in the claims, and the processing to be performed includes the "receiving step" in the claims.

As described above, according to the workflow support system according to the present embodiment, for a case for which the examination request procedure by the company has been completed, the necessary items are automatically extracted from the proof and the examination request DB 102a.
(By extension, it is set to the domestic special reality master 101a), so that it is possible to avoid input omissions and input errors as in the past. Further, it is possible to give a posteriori notice to the agent without omission.

[0159]

As described above, according to the present invention, it comprises a plurality of steps for evaluating the value of information, and the information necessary for the evaluation is provided to the mail address of the worker in each step. Alternatively, in a workflow support system that evaluates the value of the information by sending information about the storage location of the information necessary for the evaluation by e-mail, information about the information whose value is evaluated by the evaluation is displayed. First to extract from database
Extracting means, creating means for creating an electronic document of a predetermined format specified by the government office based on the information extracted by the first extracting means, and the electronic document created by the creating means for the terminal of the government office. Sending means for sending to, a receiving means for receiving an electronic document indicating that the government office has received the electronic document transmitted by the transmitting means from a terminal of the government office, and an electronic document received by the receiving means. Second extracting means for extracting information stored in the database from the database, updating means for updating the database based on the information extracted by the second extracting means, and the electronic document received by the receiving means. The third party who has the authority to represent the above-mentioned procedure by sending an e-mail notifying that the procedure to the above-mentioned government office regarding the information provided has been completed. The second sending means for sending to the e-mail address of is provided, so after the request for examination, the fact is set in the database and the agent is notified automatically. This has the effect of providing a workflow support system that can perform subsequent processing accurately and without omission.

According to another invention, it comprises a plurality of steps for evaluating the value of information, and the information necessary for the evaluation or the information necessary for the evaluation is attached to the mail address of the worker in each step. In the workflow support method for evaluating the value of the information by sending the information related to the storage location of the information necessary for e-mail, the information related to the information whose value is evaluated by the evaluation is extracted from the database. A first extracting step; a creating step of creating an electronic document of a predetermined format designated by the government office based on the information extracted in the first extracting step; and the electronic document created in the creating step of the government office. Indicating that the electronic document transmitted in the transmitting step has been received by the government office. A receiving step of receiving an electronic document from the terminal of the government office, a second extracting step of extracting information stored in the database from the electronic document received in the receiving step, and an extracting step of the second extracting step. Authority to act on behalf of the updating step of updating the database based on the information, and an email notifying that the procedure for the government office has been completed for the information received by the electronic document in the receiving step. The second sending step of sending to a third party's e-mail address having is included, so that after the request for examination, the fact is set in the database and the agent is notified automatically. , When a workflow support method that can perform processing after examination request by the company accurately and without omission is obtained Achieve the cormorant effect.

According to another invention, it comprises a plurality of steps for evaluating the value of information, and the information necessary for the evaluation or the information necessary for the evaluation is attached to the mail address of the worker in each step. In a workflow support program that evaluates the value of the information by sending information related to the storage location of the information necessary for this by email, the information related to the information whose value has been evaluated by the evaluation is extracted from the database. A first extracting step; a creating step of creating an electronic document of a predetermined format designated by a government office based on the information extracted in the first extracting step; and an electronic document created in the creating step of the government office. Secondly extracting information stored in the database from the electronic document indicating that the second document has been received
And an updating step of updating the database based on the information extracted in the second extracting step, and an electronic document indicating that the government office has accepted the electronic document created in the creating step. A second sending step of sending an e-mail notifying that the procedure to the government office is completed for the information thus obtained to a mail address of a third party authorized to proxy the procedure to the computer. As a result, after the request for examination, the fact that the fact is set in the database and notification to the agent is automatically made, so that the workflow support program that can perform the processing after the examination request by the company accurately and without omission The effect is obtained.

According to another invention, by recording the program according to the above invention, the program can be made readable by a computer, whereby the processing of the invention can be realized by a computer. There is an effect that a different recording medium can be obtained.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing a schematic configuration of a workflow support system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing a procedure of reading (copying) data from the mainframe 101 to the server 102.

FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a work request mail transmitted to a person in charge of an intellectual property district after data correction by an examination request manager.

FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a “person in charge & evaluator change” view that is displayed when a link in a work request mail to the person in charge of intellectual property district is clicked.

FIG. 5 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an examination request evaluation table, which is displayed when any item is double-clicked in the “person in charge & evaluator change” view.

FIG. 6 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an evaluation table being edited by a person in charge of an intellectual property ward, particularly around the “person in charge of intellectual property ward” section.

FIG. 7 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an address book displayed when a “select from address book” button is clicked.

FIG. 8 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a dialog displayed when a “person in charge change request” button is clicked.

FIG. 9 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a work request mail transmitted to a person in charge of changing a person in charge.

FIG. 10 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a “personnel change confirmation” view that is displayed when a link in a work request mail to a person in charge of person in charge change request is clicked.

FIG. 11 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an evaluation table being edited by a person in charge of an intellectual property ward, particularly around the “development ward evaluator” section.

FIG. 12 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an inventor list displayed by clicking a “select from inventor list” button.

FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a work request email transmitted to the development zone evaluator after the person in charge of the intellectual property district has decided the person in charge and the evaluator.

FIG. 14 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a “development area evaluation” view that is displayed when a link in a work request mail to a development area evaluator is clicked.

FIG. 15 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an examination request evaluation table that is displayed when any item is double-clicked in the “development zone evaluation” view.

FIG. 16 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an evaluation table being edited by a person in charge of a development zone, particularly an area around the “development zone evaluator” section.

FIG. 17 is a flowchart showing an evaluation procedure by a development zone evaluator.

FIG. 18 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a dialog displayed when a “Review / Approval request” button is clicked.

FIG. 19 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a work request mail transmitted to a development zone approver after evaluation by the development zone evaluator.

FIG. 20 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a “development zone examination / approval” view that is displayed by clicking a link in the work request mail to the development zone approver.

FIG. 21 is a flowchart showing a procedure of evaluation by a development zone approver.

FIG. 22 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a dialog displayed when an “approval” button is clicked.

FIG. 23 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an approval notification mail transmitted to a development area evaluator after approval by the development area approver.

FIG. 24 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a work request mail transmitted to a person in charge of an intellectual property district after approval by the developer approver.

FIG. 25 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a denial notification mail sent to the development zone evaluator after denial by the development zone approver.

FIG. 26 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an “IP zone evaluation” view that is displayed when a link in a work request mail to a person in charge of an IP zone is clicked.

FIG. 27 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an examination request evaluation table that is displayed when any item is double-clicked in the “IP property evaluation” view.

FIG. 28 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a work request mail transmitted to the intellectual property district approver after the evaluation by the person in charge of the intellectual property district.

FIG. 29 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the “IP zone examination / approval” view displayed when a link in the work request mail to the IP zone approver is clicked.

FIG. 30 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an approval notification mail transmitted to the person in charge of the intellectual property ward after the approval by the intellectual property ward approver.

FIG. 31 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a denial notification mail sent to the person in charge of the intellectual property ward after the denial by the person approving the intellectual property ward.

FIG. 32 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a schedule registered in a schedule master.

FIG. 33 is a flowchart showing a procedure for writing back (copying) data from the server 102 to the mainframe 101.

FIG. 34 is a flowchart showing a procedure for requesting an examination request to an agent.

FIG. 35 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an “office request” view displayed when a “office request” button is clicked in the examination request DB 102a.

FIG. 36 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a work request mail transmitted to the agent after the evaluation by the development area and the intellectual property area is completed.

FIG. 37 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a procedure request list that is displayed when a link in a work request mail to an agent is clicked.

FIG. 38 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the examination request procedure request form for each case, which is displayed when a link in the procedure request list is clicked.

FIG. 39 is a flowchart showing the procedure for an examination request by the company (procedure for preparing examination request).

FIG. 40: Procedure for requesting examination by the company (dedicated terminal 105
3 is a flowchart showing a procedure for requesting examination).

FIG. 41 is a flowchart showing the procedure for requesting examination by the company (the procedure for setting the examination request date in the examination request evaluation table).

FIG. 42 is a flowchart showing the procedure for requesting examination by the company (the procedure for notifying an agent after completion of the examination request).

FIG. 43 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a “in-house examination request” view that is displayed by clicking the “in-house examination request” button in the examination request DB 102a.

FIG. 44 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a notification mail sent to the agent of each application after the completion of the in-house examination request.

FIG. 45 is an explanatory diagram summarizing each status classification code and its meaning.

FIG. 46 is an explanatory diagram summarizing the default display form of each section in the examination request evaluation table at each stage.

FIG. 47 is an explanatory diagram summarizing the reference right holder and the editing right holder of the examination request evaluation table at each stage.

FIG. 48 is an explanatory diagram showing a hardware configuration of each computer that constitutes the workflow support system according to the exemplary embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 49 is an explanatory diagram showing a functional configuration of the workflow support system according to the embodiment of the present invention.

[Explanation of symbols]

101 mainframe 101a Domestic special reality master 101b Human Resources Master 102 servers 102a Examination request DB 103 Intellectual Property District PC 104 Development Zone PC 105 Electronic Application Terminal 106 SP server 106a Office DB 107 Patent Office PC 8801 CPU 8802 ROM 8803 RAM 8804 HDD 8805 HD 8806 FDD 8807 FD 8808 display 8809 Network I / F 8810 communication cable 8811 keyboard 8812 mouse 8813 CD-ROM 8814 CD-ROM drive 8815 bus or cable 8901 Evaluation table storage section 8902 read / write unit 8903 E-mail composer / sender 8904 Examination bill preparation department 8905, 8907 FD input / output unit 8906 Examination request information extraction unit 8906a Application number extraction unit 8906b Examination request date extraction unit 8908 Examination request transmission section 8908a Examination bill conversion unit 8909 Proof receiver

Continued front page    (72) Inventor Chisako Fukasaku             1-3-3 Nakamagome, Ota-ku, Tokyo Stocks             Company Ricoh (72) Inventor Nobufumi Nomura             1-3-3 Nakamagome, Ota-ku, Tokyo Stocks             Company Ricoh (72) Inventor Yasushi Suzuki             1-3-3 Nakamagome, Ota-ku, Tokyo Stocks             Company Ricoh (72) Inventor Toshiharu Moriki             1-3-3 Nakamagome, Ota-ku, Tokyo Stocks             Company Ricoh (72) Inventor Katsuhiko Takahashi             2-1-11 Higashiueno, Taito-ku, Tokyo

Claims (12)

[Claims] 1. Comprising a plurality of steps for evaluating the value of information, storing the information necessary for the evaluation or the information necessary for the evaluation with respect to the mail address of the worker in each step. In a workflow support system that evaluates the value of the information by sending information about the destination by e-mail, a first extracting unit that extracts information about the information whose value is evaluated by the evaluation from a database, Creating means for creating an electronic document of a predetermined format specified by the government office based on the information extracted by the first extracting means, and transmitting the electronic document created by the creating means to a terminal of the government office. Transmitting means, and an electronic document indicating that the government office has received the electronic document transmitted by the transmitting means, the terminal of the government agency Receiving means for receiving from the electronic document, second extracting means for extracting information stored in the database from the electronic document received by the receiving means, and the database based on the information extracted by the second extracting means A workflow support system comprising: an updating unit for updating the. 2. An e-mail notifying that the procedure for the government office has been completed for the information on which the electronic document has been received by the receiving means is sent by a third party who has the authority to proxy the procedure. The workflow support system according to claim 1, further comprising a second transmission unit that transmits to an address. 3. The information extracted by the second extracting means includes information indicating the date when the government office has received the electronic document transmitted by the transmitting means. Alternatively, the workflow support method according to claim 2. 4. The evaluation of the value of the information is an evaluation of whether or not there is a value to file an examination request for an invention for which a patent is being applied, and the procedure is an examination request procedure to the Patent Office. The workflow support system according to any one of claims 1 to 3. 5. A method comprising a plurality of steps for evaluating the value of information, and storing the information necessary for the evaluation or the information necessary for the evaluation with respect to the mail address of the worker in each step. In a workflow support method for evaluating the value of the information by sending information about the destination by e-mail, a first extraction step of extracting information about the information whose value is evaluated by the evaluation from a database, A creating step of creating an electronic document in a predetermined format designated by the government office based on the information extracted in the first extracting step; and transmitting the electronic document created in the creating step to a terminal of the government office. A transmission step, and an electronic document showing that the government office has received the electronic document transmitted in the transmission step, Based on the information extracted in the second extraction step, and a second extraction step of extracting information stored in the database from the electronic document received in the reception step. A workflow support method comprising: an update step of updating the database. 6. Further, an e-mail notifying that the procedure for the government office has been completed for the information received by the electronic document in the receiving step is an e-mail of a third party authorized to proxy the procedure. The workflow supporting method according to claim 5, further comprising a second transmitting step of transmitting to an address. 7. The information extracted in the second extracting step includes information indicating a date when the government office has received the electronic document transmitted in the transmitting step. Alternatively, the workflow support method according to claim 6. 8. The evaluation of the value of the information is an evaluation as to whether or not there is a value to file an examination request for an invention for which a patent is being applied, and the procedure is an examination request procedure to the Patent Office. The workflow support method according to any one of claims 5 to 7. 9. A method comprising a plurality of steps for evaluating the value of information, and storing information necessary for the evaluation or information necessary for the evaluation with respect to an email address of a worker in each step. In a workflow support program that evaluates the value of the information by sending information about the destination by e-mail, a first extraction step of extracting information about the information whose value is evaluated by the evaluation from a database, A creating step of creating an electronic document of a predetermined format designated by the government office based on the information extracted in the first extracting step; and an electronic indicating that the government office has accepted the electronic document created in the creating step. A second extraction step for extracting information stored in the database from a document; and a second extraction step. Workflow support program characterized by executing the updating step of updating the database, to the computer in based on the extracted information. 10. The e-mail having the content of notifying that the procedure for the government office has been completed with respect to the information received by the government office indicating that the government document has received the electronic document created in the creating step, 10. The workflow support program according to claim 9, further comprising causing a computer to execute a second transmission step of transmitting to a mail address of a third party having an authority to proxy the procedure. 11. The evaluation of the value of the information is an evaluation of whether or not there is a value to file a request for examination of an invention for which a patent is applied, and the procedure is a procedure for requesting examination to the Patent Office. The workflow support program according to claim 9 or claim 10. 12. A computer-readable recording medium in which the program according to any one of claims 9 to 11 is recorded.