Application apparatus and method

• US RE44,626 E1
• Filed: 04/25/2012
• Issued: 12/03/2013
• Est. Priority Date: 04/07/1999
• Status: Expired due to Term

• Current Assignee: Juno Holdings S.a.r.l.
• Original Assignee: Juno Holdings S.a.r.l.
• Inventors: Ma, Sherman Ching
• Primary Examiner(s): Hewitt, II, Calvin L
• Assistant Examiner(s): Qayyum, Zeshan
• Application Number:
  US13/455,872
• Time in Patent Office: 587 Days
• Field of Search: 705/11
• US Class Current: 705/50
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/042 characterized in that the payment protocol involves at least one cheque
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/02 Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/02 Banking, e.g. interest calculation or account maintenance credit or loans G06Q40/03
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/12 Accounting

Abstract

The present invention provides an apparatus and method for receiving and assessing an application made by an applicant. In one aspect, the apparatus includes: computing means configured or programmed to present a plurality of application forms to the applicant, to receive the forms once completed from the applicant and to assess the application; input means for the applicant to complete and return the forms to the computing means; and communication means for communicating or sending the assessment of the application to the applicant; wherein the computing means is configured or programmed to construct second and subsequent forms of the plurality of forms progressively on the basis of information provided by the applicant by means of the input means in the completed and received forms, to assess the application, and to communicate the assessment by means of the communication means.

Claims

1. An apparatus for receiving an application made by an applicant and for assessing the application by a plurality of application recipients, said apparatus comprising:

computer memory; and

a processor for executing instruction for;

;

the computer memory storing instructions that, when executed, cause the processor to perform the steps of;

(a) collecting at least two sets of decision criteria from at least two application recipients, each set comprising one or more decision criteria, and each decision criterion having a respective value, boundary or range;

(b) determining respective unions of the values, boundaries or ranges of respective same decision criterion present in the at least two sets of decision criteria by analyzing the data value, boundary or range boundary requirements of each same decision criteria in the at least two sets of decision criteria;

(c) generating a superset of decision criteria which comprises at least one decision criterion from the at least two sets of decision criteria with the determined respective union of values, boundary or ranges;

(d) storing or accessing the superset of decision criteria;

(e) ranking decision criteria according to level of dependency;

(f) optimizing a questioning sequence to reduce or minimize a total number of queries;

(g) presenting the applicant with a request for application information constituting the application for the two or more of the plurality of application recipients, said application information being requested by queries associated with said superset of decision criteria for the two or more of the plurality of application recipients, said queries presented according to said questioning sequence;

(h) receiving the application information;

(i) accessing said decision criteria of said application recipients;

(j) accessing said application according to said decision criteria of each of said application recipients; and

(k) forming a respective separate assessment of said application for each of said application recipients, each respective separate assessment being an approval or a rejection of the application.

2. The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor is further for executing instruction for:

(a) requesting application information for the two or more of the plurality of application recipients by presenting a number of questions or a number of sets of questions in sequence to said applicant; and

(b) receiving responses to said questions from said applicant, wherein said application information constitutes or is determined from said responses.

3. The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, further comprising:

an input device for said applicant to input said application to said computer memory; and

a communication device for communicating or sending said assessments of said application to said applicant.

4. The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein said processor is further for executing instruction for:

(a) presenting to the applicant a first selected form and receiving the first selected form containing first information after completion by the applicant,

(b) constructing and immediately presenting to said applicant a second form pertaining to a respective selection from said decision criteria where said respective selection is made by said processor from said all application decision criteria on the basis of the first information provided by said applicant in said completed and received first selected form and receiving, via an input device, the second form containing second information after completion by the applicant, and then to progressively construct and immediately present to said applicant one or more subsequent forms pertaining to a respective selection from said superset of decision criteria where said respective selection is made by said processor from all decision criteria on the basis of some of the information previously provided by said applicant in previously completed and received forms and receiving the one or more subsequent forms after completion by the applicant,

(c) wherein sufficient data entry fields are ultimately presented to said applicant in said second and the one or more subsequent forms to constitute the completed application, and

(d) wherein the requesting of unnecessary information in said second and the one or more subsequent forms, which unnecessary information being information rendered redundant by the information provided by the applicant in an already completed form, can be avoided.

5. The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor is further for executing instruction for:

(a) promoting in said sequence, and thereby presenting sooner, those questions whose responses render a high, or the greatest possible, number of later questions redundant, and

(b) omitting any questions thereby rendered redundant.

6. The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor is further for executing instruction for:

requesting the application information by presenting a number of questions or a number of sets of questions in sequence to said applicant, said questions comprising groups of questions pertaining to respective types of application information; and

including an introductory question in at least one of said groups of questions to reduce ambiguity in the respective group of questions.

7. The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor is further for executing instruction for:

adjusting the sequence of questions yet to be presented to the applicant in response to application information supplied by the applicant in response to questions previously presented to the applicant.

8. The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor is further for executing instruction for ignoring one or more defects in application information returned by the applicant on the basis of preset tolerances for decision certainty.

9. The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor is further for executing instruction for refraining from requesting certain application information deemed non-critical in some or all circumstances.

10. The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor is further for executing instruction for forming the superset of decision criteria from the respective sets of decision criteria.

11. The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor is further for executing instruction for determining what application information is required to assess the application against the superset of decision criteria.

12. A method for receiving an application made by an applicant and for accessing the application by a plurality of application recipients, the method comprising the steps of:

a) collecting in a computer memory at least two sets of decision criteria from at least two application recipients, each set comprising one or more decision criteria, and each decision criterion having a respective value, boundary or range;

b) determining with a processor a respective union of the values, boundaries or ranges for each respective same decision criterion present in the at least two sets of decision criteria by analyzing the data value, boundary or range boundary requirements of each decision criteria in the at least two sets of decision criteria;

c) generating with said processor a superset of decision criteria which comprises at least one decision criterion from the at least two sets of decision criteria with the determined respective union of values, boundary or ranges;

d) determining with said processor application information which is required from the applicant to assess the application against the superset of decision criteria for the two or more of the plurality of application recipients;

e) ranking decision criteria according to level of dependency, using the processor;

f) optimizing a questioning sequence to reduce or minimize a total number of queries using the processor;

g) presenting the applicant with a request for the application information constituting the application for the two or more of the plurality of application recipients with said processor, the application information being requested by queries associated with the superset of decision criteria for the two or more of the plurality of application recipients, said queries being presented according to said questioning sequence;

h) electronically receiving the application information from said applicant;

i) electronically assessing the application with said processor according to the decision criteria of each of said application recipients; and

j) electronically forming a respective separate assessment for each of said application recipients with said processor, wherein each respective separate assessment formed is an approval or a rejection of the application.

13. The method as claimed in claim 12, further comprising the steps of:

electronically receiving responses to said questions from said applicant, wherein said application information constitutes or is determined from said responses.

14. The method as claimed in claim 12, further comprising the step of electronically communicating or sending said assessments of said application to said applicant.

15. The method as claimed in claim 12, including:

promoting in said sequence, and thereby presenting sooner, those questions whose responses render a high, or the greatest possible, number of later questions redundant; and

omitting any questions thereby rendered redundant.

16. The method as claimed in claim 12, including:

requesting the application information by presenting a number of questions or a number of sets of questions in sequence to said applicant; and

receiving responses to said questions from said applicant, wherein said application information constitutes or is determined from said responses; and

17. The method as claimed in claim 12, including:

requesting the application information by presenting a number of questions or a number of sets of questions in sequence to said applicant, said questions comprising groups of questions pertaining to respective types of application information; and

reducing ambiguity in the respective group of questions by including an introductory question in at least one of said groups of questions.

18. The method as claimed in claim 12, including:

requesting the application information by presenting a number of questions or a number of sets of questions in sequence to said applicant; and

adjusting the sequence of questions yet to be presented to the applicant in response to application information supplied by the applicant in response to questions previously presented to the applicant.

19. The method as claimed in claim 12, including:

ignoring one or more defects in application information returned by the applicant on the basis of preset tolerances for decision certainty.

20. The method as claimed in claim 12, including:

refraining from requesting certain application information deemed non-critical in some or all circumstances.

21. A non-transitory computer readable medium containing executable instruction for receiving an application made by an applicant and for accessing the application by a plurality of application recipients, the executable instruction, when executed by a computing apparatus for:

, causes the computing apparatus to perform the steps of;

a) collecting at least two sets of decision criteria from at least two application recipients, each set comprising one or more decision criteria, and each decision criterion having a respective value, boundary or range;

b) determining a respective union of the values, boundaries or ranges for each respective same decision criterion present in the at least two sets of decision criteria by analyzing the data value, boundary or range boundary requirements of each decision criteria in the at least two sets of decision criteria;

c) generating a superset of decision criteria which comprises at least one decision criterion from the at least two sets of decision criteria with the determined respective union of values, boundaries or ranges;

d) determining application information which is required from the applicant to assess the application against the superset of decision criteria for the two or more of the plurality of application recipients;

e) ranking decision criteria according to level of dependency;

f) optimizing a questioning sequence to reduce or minimize a total number of queries;

g) presenting the applicant with a request for the application information, constituting the application for the two or more of the plurality of application recipients, the application information being requested by queries associated with the superset of decision criteria for the two or more of the plurality of application recipients, said queries being presented according to said questioning sequence;

h) receiving the application information from the applicant;

i) assessing the application according to the decision criteria of each of the application recipients; and

j) forming a respective separate assessment for each of the application recipients, wherein each respective separate assessment formed is an approval or a rejection of the application.

22. The computer readable medium of claim 21, wherein:

(a) collecting at least two sets of decision criteria comprises collecting the at least two sets in computer memory;

(b) determining the respective union of values comprises determining with a computer processor the respective union of the values, boundaries or ranges for each respective same decision criteria;

(c) generating the superset of decision criteria comprises generating with the computer processor the superset of decision criteria;

(d) determining the application information comprises determining with the computer processor the application information;

(e) ranking the decision criteria comprises ranking the decision criteria using the computer processor;

(f) optimizing the questioning sequence comprises optimizing the questioning sequence using the computer processor;

(g) presenting the applicant with the request for the application information comprises presenting the applicant with the request for the application information using the computer processor;

(h) receiving the application information comprises electronically receiving the application information;

(i) assessing the application comprises electronically assessing the application with the computer processor;

or

(j) forming a respective separate assessment for each of the application recipients comprises electronically forming a respective separate assessment for each of the application recipients with the computer processor.