System and method for identity and reputation score based on transaction history

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 11790061
  • Patent Number
    11,790,061
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, June 10, 2021
    2 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, October 17, 2023
    7 months ago
Abstract
Techniques for electronic signature process management are described. Some embodiments provide an electronic signature service (“ESS”) configured to manage electronic identity cards. In some embodiments, the ESS generates and manages an electronic identity card for a user, based on personal information of the user, activity information related to the user's actions with respect to the ESS, and/or social networking information related to the user. The electronic identity card of a signer may be associated with an electronic document signed via the ESS, so that users may obtain information about the signer of the document. The ESS may also generate a trust score for the user based on activity information related to the user's actions with respect to the ESS and/or other factors. The trust score may be used to recommend authentication mechanisms to use with respect to electronic signature transactions.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present disclosure relates to methods and systems for electronic signatures and, more particularly, to methods and systems for managing electronic signature identity cards.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Preferred and alternative examples of the present invention are described in detail below with reference to the following drawings:



FIG. 1 illustrates an example block diagram of an example embodiment of an electronic signature service that provides an electronic identity card;



FIGS. 2A-2F illustrate example electronic identity cards and related user interface aspects according to example embodiments;



FIGS. 3A-3C illustrate example user interfaces of an electronic signature service with trust scores of users according to example embodiments;



FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of an example electronic identity card management process;



FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of an example electronic signature trust score process; and



FIG. 6 is a block diagram of an example computing system for implementing an electronic signature service according to an example embodiment.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Embodiments described herein provide enhanced computer- and network-based methods and systems for electronic identity/identification (“EID”) cards. Example embodiments provide an electronic signature service (“ESS”) configured to facilitate management of electronic identity cards. In some embodiments, an EID card is associated with a user (or “signer”) and includes, aggregates, links, or otherwise combines information about the user obtained from multiple sources and of multiple distinct types to form or represent a “social signature” associated with the user. Example information may include personal information about the user (e.g., name, address, occupation, picture), electronic signature service usage/statistical information (e.g., number and types of documents signed using the ESS, number and types of authentication challenges passed), and/or social networking information (e.g., links to identities on one or mom social networking or messaging services).


The described EID card adds a new depth of personalization to an electronic signature. In some embodiments, the EID card displays a signer's information, how often the signer has signed and sent documents for signature, and authentication history. In further embodiments, geo-location features are provided. For example, the EID card may capture or otherwise represent the exact (or approximate) geo-location of where a signer signed for added security. As another example, users may be provided with the ability to view the location of the last document signed from any signer through a geo-location subsystem of the ESS. Also, “badges” may be associated with an EID card to indicate one or more qualities or characteristics about the associated signer, such as environmental/ecological commitment or achievement (e.g., based on the number of times the signer has signed a document electronically instead of on paper), travel profiles (e.g., the number of different countries from which the signer has signed documents), and the like.


The described techniques provide an EID card that is much more than a signature. More particularly, an EID card provides additional information about a signer and validates or further authenticates the identity of the signer. Using EID cards, senders (e.g., parties who provide documents for signature) and signers can see how often the signer has authenticated, how often they use the ESS, a picture of the signer, the signer's contact information, and the like.


In some embodiments, the ESS determines a “trust graph,” which reflects or otherwise identifies a network of trust connecting two or more persons who are in some way related via the ESS or other related systems. For example, a trust graph may be based on relationships such as those that are formed when a first user signs a document provided by a second user. Once that occurs, a trust relationship between the first and second user can be represented and stored by the ESS. Such a relationship may be further strengthened when additional signature events take place between the first and second user. Furthermore, relationships can be specified by a user, such as by identifying other persons that are trusted by the user. Users may specify relationships manually or by importing such information from various electronic sources, including address books, chat logs, social networks, and the like. In addition, the EID card can be used as a vehicle for surfacing or otherwise presenting information about a signer's trust graph. The ESS, via the use of EID cards, can thus provide a wide-ranging network within which trusted transactions can be performed.



FIG. 1 illustrates an example block diagram of an example embodiment of an electronic signature service that provides an electronic identity card. In particular, FIG. 1 depicts an electronic signature service 110 utilized by a sender user 10 and a signer user 11 to generate an electronic signature card and to associate the generated card with an electronic signature document.


The ESS 110 facilitates the creation of electronic signature documents and the association of electronic signatures therewith. For example, the sender 10 may operate a sender client device 160 to provide (e.g., transmit, upload, send) a document 20 to be electronically signed to the ESS 110, where it is securely stored. The document 20 may be or include a contract, agreement, purchase order, or the like. The signer 11 operates a signer client device 161 to access, review, and/or sign the document 20 stored by the ESS 110. In some embodiments, the ESS 110 transmits images or some other representation of the document 20 to the signer client device 161, which in turn transmits an indication of the signer's signature (or intent to sign) to the ESS 110. The ESS 110 then securely stores the signer's signature in association with the document 20.


The ESS 110 also performs electronic identity card-related functions for or on behalf of the users 10 and 11. For example, the signer 11, operating the signer client device 161, may interact with the ESS 110 to create an ETD card 21 that is stored and managed by the ESS 110. To create the ETD card 21, the signer 11 may provide one or more personal information items, including name, address, occupation, telephone number, picture, or the like.


The ESS 110 may augment the EID card 21 with social networking information related to the signer 11. For example, when creating the EID card 21, the signer 11 may provide credentials (e.g., username and password) associated with a social network maintained by some third-party social networking system. Using the provided credentials, the ESS 110 may then obtain social network information 30 about the signer and his social network via an API or other facility provided by the social networking system. The obtained information 30 may be stored as part of (or in association with) the signer's EID card 21.


The ESS 110 may further augment the EID card 21 with activity information 31. The activity information 31 may include information about the activities of the signer 11 with respect to the ESS 110 and/or other systems or services. For example, the ESS 110 may track the number of documents signed by the signer 11, and store that number as part of (or in association with) the EID card 21. The ESS 110 may also include (or otherwise access) a geo-location facility, used to track the location of the signer 1I as he engages in activities with the ESS 110. The geo-location facility may access or otherwise obtain information from the client device 161, such as fine-grained position information provided by a GPS receiver. Coarser-grained information may also or instead by used, such as may be provided by a communication system used by the client device 161 (e.g., carrier system for a mobile phone or other device).


In addition, the ESS 110 may track authentication activities engaged in by the signer 11, such as the number and type of authentication challenges met by the signer 11, in order to generate a score or other measure (e.g., history) reflecting a level or degree of the signer's authentication and/or experience. Information about such activities may then be presented or provided as part of the signer's EID card 21.


Upon creating the EID card 21, a reference to the created EID card 21 may be included as part of a document signed by a signer 11. For example, when the ESS 110 provides (e.g., transmits) a representation of a signed document to the sender 10, it may include information that directly or indirectly (e.g., via a URL) represents the signer's EID card 21. For example, the signed document may include an image that resembles a physical identity card and that includes at least some of the information of the EID card 21. The image or other representation may be active (e.g., clickable), such that additional information may be provided when selected or activated by the sender 10 or other user. In some embodiments, the EID card 21 is assigned or associated with a unique uniform resource locator (URL). The URL may be used by the card holder and/or other users to access, view, and/or modify the details of the EID card 21.


The EID card 21 may be made available in other contexts besides electronic signature documents. For example, the signer 11 may include a URL or other link to the EID card 21 on his social networking profile page, as part of his email signature, or the like.



FIGS. 2A-2E illustrate example electronic identity cards and related user interface aspects according to example embodiments.



FIG. 2A illustrates an example electronic identity card 200 for a user. The card 200 is a graphical representation of a user's electronic identity card information. The card 200 may be displayed in various contexts, such as in association with a signed electronic document being viewed by the sender 10, as described with respect to FIG. 1, above. The card 200 includes personal information about the signer/card holder, including the card holder's name, age, address, email, phone number, image, identification number, and voice print. Access to some or all of the signer information may be restricted. In this example, the card holder's address is shown in association with a padlock icon, indicating that the card older does not want others to be able to view this information. In some embodiments, a viewer having appropriate credentials (e.g., a password) may access restricted information such as the card holder's address in this example. The voice print is an audio recording created by the card holder when the card was created. A user may access the voice print to hear the voice of the card holder, which may provide additional assurance that the card is legitimate or otherwise actually associated with the indicated person.


The illustrated card 200 also includes signature information. The signature information includes signature authority level, signature date (e.g., the date the signature was applied by the card holder to the associated signature document), signature pages signed (e.g., a total number of pages signed by the card holder), an authentication level, and a signature image (the text “Regina P. Brown” represented in cursive). Clicking on the signature image will cause the ESS to validate the signature and/or card 200, such as by indicating that the card holder does not have (or no longer has) a valid or active account with the service. The authentication level indicates what level and/or type of authentication has been used to verify the identity of the card holder. Authentication levels are discussed in more detail with respect to FIG. 2D, below.


The illustrated signature authority level represents the card holder's authority level with respect to a particular organization. In some embodiments, an administrative user of a company or other organization may select users from a list and set their signature authority. For some users, this signature authority may be none or zero, meaning that they may not sign for any company-related purposes. If so, a reference to an alternative person who does have signatory authority with respect to matters handled by the user may be included. In such cases, when asked to sign a document, the card holder may reassign the document to the alternative person (and no other person) for signature. For some users it may be defined as or based on a monetary value (e.g., up to $10,000) or as a text string describing the type of contract or document. For other users, the signature authority may be total or complete. The signature authority levels may be enforced by the ESS, such as by refusing to allow users with limited signatory authority (e.g., under $1,000) to sign certain documents (e.g., a purchase order in excess of $1,000).


The card 200 further includes social networking information. The card holder has the option of associating one or more social networking services with her card. In this example, the card 200 includes icons (or other user selectable controls, such as buttons) of various associated social networking websites at the bottom of the card 200. The illustrated icons can be used to further validate the card holder's identity. A user who is viewing the card 200 may click on any of these icons to access the card holder's profile on the corresponding social networking website. The card holder may also integrate the card with her social networks, such as by including a link to the card on her profile page of a social network.



FIG. 2B illustrates an example electronic identity card 210 for a document. The card 210 is a graphical representation of a document's identity and signature information. The card 210 may be displayed in various contexts, such as via a link embedded within or associated with a signed electronic document. The card 210 may be used to validate the associated document's authenticity.


The card 210 includes document specifications, including document name, document identifier, number of pages, date sent, and date signed. The card 210 further includes signer information, including signer name, signer email address, authentication level, and signature image. The electronic identity card for the signer may be accessed via a link or other control. For example, upon clicking the signature image, the electronic identity card 200 described with respect to FIG. 2A may be displayed.


The card 210 further includes a validation section. The validation section includes controls that may be used to validate the associated document. For example, using the illustrated controls, a user can upload the original document and check if the document matches. The hash of both the documents will be compared by the ESS, which will then return an indication of whether or not the document is valid. The user may then also have the option to delete the document and/or upload it again (e.g., at a later date) to validate.


The card 210 further includes a download section. Using controls in the download section, a user can download a copy of the document (with or without a certificate of completion) from the ESS.



FIG. 2C illustrates an electronic identity card management screen 220. The screen 200 includes controls that can be used by an account holder or other user to manage their electronic identity card, such as that described with respect to FIG. 2A, above. The screen 200 includes and displays card information, including personal information (e.g., name, address, signature, email, image) and activity information (e.g., document signature history, document/envelope sender history).


The user may interact with the screen 220 in order to edit or modify the card information and/or properties. In this example, the user has clicked on the “Edit Display Settings” link, which causes the display settings control 225 to be displayed. The control 225 enables the user to select what portions or elements of his electronic identity card to display, such as the entire card, company/title information, address/phone information, and/or usage history information. In this manner, the user can restrict access to some or all information that is part of his electronic identity card.



FIG. 2D illustrates an example electronic identity card 230 according to another embodiment. The card 230 is similar to the card 200 describe above. However, the card 230 also displays an authentication history 231. The history 231 displays one or more authentication events and associated dates and mechanisms (e.g., email, phone, password). The authentication history 231 may be expanded to display a history browser/viewer 235 that provides a more comprehensive view of the user's authentication history.


The illustrated card 230 also includes badges 232. In some embodiments, badges may be associated with users (and displayed on their identity cards), in order to indicate properties of the user. In this example, one of the badges 232 (labeled “green profile badge”) iconically indicates a level of environmental/ecological commitment or impact associated with the user, based on the number of documents electronically processed or signed via the ESS, thereby reducing the amount of paper, printer, and energy resources used in association with paper-based signatures. Badges may have different shades and/or colors to indicate a level. For example, a darker shade of green used in a green profile badge may indicate a larger number of electronic signature events than a lighter shade.


The badges 232 also include an authentication level badge. The authentication level badge iconically indicates an authentication level associated with the user. Some embodiments have a hierarchy of authentication levels, based on the number and/or type of authentication mechanisms used to verify user identity, including based on one or more of email, short message service (SMS), access code, age, third-party verification, phone, and the like. The corresponding badge may have different colors, such as gold to indicate the highest level, silver to indicate the next highest level, and bronze to indicate the lowest level.



FIG. 2E illustrates authentication mechanisms provided by one embodiment. In particular, FIG. 2E illustrates three distinct selection scenarios 240, 243, and 246 in which one or more authentication mechanisms are selected for association with a document and/or electronic identity card provided by an example embodiment. For example, a sender may select and associate one or more authentication mechanisms with a document that is to be signed by one or more signers. Similarly, one or more of the illustrated authentication mechanisms may be used by a signer to verify their identity when signing a document and/or creating an electronic identity card.


In scenario 240, a user has selected email identification and phone authentication. In some embodiments, email authentication is the default identification/authentication method. Email authentication provides a baseline level of authentication, in that the user operating the identified email account is quite likely the intended recipient or signer of a document.


The phone authentication option asks the user to select or type a phone number to use for authentication. The recipient is provided with a validation code (e.g., in email or other more secure communication). Later, during a signature transaction, the ESS places a call to the number. After answering the phone, the recipient is prompted to enter the validation code and speak their name. The illustrated phone numbers may be automatically obtained from an address book associated with the sender and/or the recipient. Phone authentication may be considered to be a more rigorous authentication method than email authentication.


Also shown, but not selected in this scenario, is access code authentication. In this mechanism, the user types an access code (e.g., upper case or lower case letters, numbers, and special characters) that is also provided to the intended recipient. Later, when the recipient reviews and/or signs a document, he must provide the access code (e.g., via a Web form entry) in order to complete the transaction.


In scenario 243, a user has selected identity check authentication. The identity check option asks the recipient to provide some initial personal information (current address is required, but there may be other optional information the recipient can enter) and then answer a set of questions before the recipient can access a signature document. The questions are based on data available in public records, such as past or present residence addresses of the recipient. In some embodiments, the identity check mechanism may be provided by a third party, such as RSA.


In scenario 246, a user has selected social identity check authentication. The social identity check option asks the recipient to login to a specified (or any) social identity service provider including Facebook, Yahoo, Google, Twitter, OpenID, LiveID, LinkedIn, Salesforce or the like. Once the recipient successfully logs into the specified social identity provider, the recipient will be permitted to view/sign the signature document.


Some embodiments provide a scoring mechanism that may be used to indicate a level of trust or experience associated with a card holder. The score may be based on one more of the following: whether the user is validated/authenticated or not, the level or type of validation/authentication used, the date of the last signature, the date of the last login, the number of pages signed, and the like. The score may be graphically represented on an electronic identity card, by way of color, icons, numerals, letter grades, badges, or the like.


In one embodiment, the score is based on points that are awarded for actions undertaken by a user during signing, sending, authentication, signing authority, connections to other trusted networks, and the like.


Points based on document sending may include points for the first envelope sent by the user, points for subsequent documents (e.g., the next 100), and/or points for reaching milestones (e.g., every 100th document). The number of points may vary based on the total number of sending events (e.g., one point per document for documents 1-100, 0.1 point per document for documents 100-500). Points may also be based on the number of total pages sent by the user (e.g., 0.01 points per page). Points may also be based on the number of unique or distinct recipients (e.g., 1 points for each distinct recipient, 5 points for each recipient that has not previously received a document). Points may also be based on frequency or recency of use (e.g., deduct one point for every 30 days that a document is not sent). Other factors may include the number and type of authentication methods used (e.g., one point for sending a document that uses an authentication method other than email address); use of a system API; and/or use of a particular system feature (e.g., bulk sending, mobile device interface).


Points based on document signature may include or be based on: signature adoption; hand drawing a signature rather than using a preselected signature; selecting a different system signature than the default signature; acceptance of the terms and conditions; the number of documents signed; signing milestones (e.g., for the 500th document); number of pages signed; frequency or recency of signature (e.g., subtract one point if no signature in the last 90 days); and/or special features used (e.g., document reassignment, carbon copy request, acknowledgement receipt).


Points based on authentication actions or events may include or be based on: initial authentication (e.g., for the first authentication event); use of email authentication; total number of authentications; authentication failures; use of access code authentication; use of identity check authentication; use of phone authentication; use of age verification; use of social network identification; or the like. As different authentication mechanisms are regarded as more secure or rigorous, use of different mechanisms may be rewarded differently to reflect this hierarchy or ordering. For example, phone authentication may be awarded five points, whereas email authentication may be awarded one point, thereby reflecting the actual or perceived security levels associated with each of those mechanisms.



FIG. 2F illustrates an example electronic identity card 250 for a user. The card 250 is a graphical representation of a user's electronic identity. The card 250 includes various information about an electronic signature service user, such as, but not limited to name, email address, account owner, trust score, or the like. In some embodiments, the card 250 may be an electronic identity card, as described herein (e.g., electronic identity card 200).


The card 250 shows the trust score 252 for the user. The trust score, or identity and repudiation score, provides an indication or likelihood that a user is actually the individual or business represented. A trust score can be represented in various ways, such as by number (e.g., on a scale of 0 to 100), by color (e.g., green means high trust, yellow means above average trust, orange means below average trust, red means low trust), by letter grade (e.g., A-F), or the like. Each user can have one or more trust scores. They may have a single trust score, as illustrated. But in other embodiments, they may have a trust score as a sender of documents and a trust score as a signer of documents.


The trust score may be determined by a variety of different mechanisms associated with the user's actions in conjunction with the electronic signature service. For example, the trust score may be determined from points acquired by performing various actions in conjunction with electronic signature transactions, as described above. In various embodiments, the score may be determined from a number of successfully completed transactions as a signer or sender, a number of successfully completed transactions in any role associated with the transaction, the trust scores of other users associated with successfully completing transactions, a time to sign a document of the transaction (e.g., the passage of time between sending/receipt/review of the document and the eventual signature of the document), a number of sent documents that were declined (e.g., a signer refused to sign), a verified identity via offline documents (e.g., verification of a government issued identification), linked social media accounts (e.g., amount of trust may be based on the authentication verification mechanisms of the social media host), linked cloud storage, payment account of file (e.g., a credit card), another electronic signature service account as part of a reputable organization (e.g., user has a personal account and a professional account that is managed by the organization), or the like, or any combination thereof.


It should be recognized that the amount of trust may be different for different actions. For example, linking a social media account may increase the trust score more than rapidly signing a document. In another example, a high number of completed transactions may result in a trust score that is higher than if the user also has a professional account with an organization that has a lower trust score. Furthermore, it should be recognized that various combinations of actions, various thresholds, and the like may be employed to generate the trust score 252.


In some embodiments, the card 250 may include information or hints for how the user can improve their trust score 252. Such information can be, but not limited to, “provide a valid email address,” “link to a third party social network,” or the like. In some embodiments, gamification techniques can be used to prompt users to improve their trust score. However, the hints/information for improving a trust score may be limited so that users cannot artificially inflate their trust score. In some embodiments, the electronic signature service may place limits on how quickly or how much a user can increase their trust score, so as to inhibit artificial inflation or other types of abuse of trust scoring.



FIG. 3A illustrates an example electronic signature service interface 310. The interface 310 enables a user to initiate an electronic signature transaction via the electronic signature service. The interface 310 provides a mechanisms for a user (i.e., a sender) to attach one or more documents 312 for one or more other users (i.e., signers) to electronically sign.


The interface 310 enables the user to provide the email addresses of one or more other users to be recipients (or signers) of the documents. As the user enters the email address, the service recognizes and auto-completes the email address based on previously used email addresses and/or other sources (e.g., the user's address book, an address book associated with the user's organization). A dropdown window opens showing candidate email addresses. Each candidate email address also includes trust score 314 for that particular user. It should be recognized that other forms of identification may also be entered, such as names or aliases, phone numbers, social security numbers, and the like.



FIG. 3B illustrates an example electronic signature service interface 320. The interface 320 is an embodiment of interface 310, but showing an authentication mechanisms control 322 for the selected user (i.e., the recipient or signer). The authentication mechanisms control 322 includes a list of different authentication mechanisms that the selected user must perform before the document is electronically signed or for the electronically signed document to be validly signed by an authentic user. The illustrated mechanisms include none (e.g., no additional verification required), access-code verification (e.g., signer must provide an access code provided by the sender, the electronic signature service, or other source), short message verification (e.g., signer must provide access code sent by the electronic signature service via SMS to the signer's phone), knowledge-based authentication (e.g., mother's maiden name). These authentication mechanisms provide additional degrees of protection to verify the identity of a user. Such identity verification could include references from verified parties of the electronic signature service who have previously completed transactions with the electronic signature service. Similarly, other identity verification can be conducted, such as, for example, matching the user's name to the name on a credit card on file, allowing users to take a photo or scan government provided identification, asking knowledge-based questions (e.g., mother's maiden name, name of school attended), linking to social network accounts, providing access codes or passwords, or the like.


The authentication mechanisms control 322 automatically recommends an authentication mechanism to the sender based on the trust score of the selected user (e.g., trust score 312 of the signer). The sender can adjust the authentication mechanism accordingly. In some embodiments, the control 322 may disable adjustment of the authentication mechanism, such as if the trust score (of the signer and/or the sender) is below a predetermined threshold, thereby enforcing use of a particular authentication mechanism in the presence of user's having low trust scores. The trust score of the signer helps to reduce the likelihood that an individual signs a document for someone other than her/himself.


In some embodiments, the electronic signature service can provide transaction insurance to the sender based on the trust score of the signer(s). Various levels of trust scores may provide various amounts of transaction insurance. Alternatively, or in addition, a trust score may be used to establish a price for a given amount of transaction insurance, such that insurance for a lower-trust user will be priced higher than insurance for a higher-trust user. This insurance provides a guarantee that the signer is the actual user represented, rather than an imposter.



FIG. 3C illustrates an example electronic signature service interface 330. The interface 330 shows a signing user that a sender user has sent them a document associated with an electronic signature transaction to sign. The interface 300 enables the signing user to access and sign the document.


The interface 330 shows the trust score 332 of the sender. In this way, the signing user can determine if the document was sent by a reputable individual or business. The trust score helps to reduce the likelihood that an individual provides personally identifiable information to an unknown party (i.e., the sender) representing themselves inaccurately. For example, if a sender's trust score is low, then a signer can contact the sender to determine if the transaction is legitimate.


In some embodiments, the interface 330 also includes instructions 334 to the signing user regarding the use of personal information. The interface 330 may warn the signing user about providing personal information based on the sending user's trust score.


For example, if the sender's trust score is above a first threshold, then the interface 330 may identify the sender as a trusted electronic signature transaction sender, which is illustrated by instructions 334. But if the sender's trust score is below the first threshold and above a second threshold, then the interface 330 may warn the signer about providing select personal information, such as their social security number or credit card number. Similarly, if the sender's trust score is below the second threshold, then the interface 330 may warn the signer about providing additional selected personal information, such as their phone number or home address in addition to their social security number or credit card number. It should be recognized that various levels or thresholds of trust score may be used for various warnings about providing select personal information while signing a document.



FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of an example electronic identity card management process. The illustrated process may be performed by one or more modules of the ESS 110 described herein. Other embodiments may perform fewer or additional operations than those illustrated here.


The process begins at block 402, where it receives personal information about a user. Personal information may include one or more of name, address, telephone number, email address, photo, or the like.


At block 404, the process receives activity information about actions of the user. Activity information may include actions performed with respect to the electronic signature service, such as signature events, document sending, authentication events, or the like.


At block 406, the process generates an electronic identity card based on the personal information and the activity information. Generating the electronic identity card may include creating or updating a card based on the information received. In some cases, such as with the user's address, it may be included in the card directly. In other cases, the process may aggregate or analyze the received information. For example, the process may determine a score or other aggregate information based on the user's activities (e.g., types or number of authentication challenges met). The determined score may then be included in the card to indicate a level of trust, history, or experience with the electronic signature service.


At block 408, the process provides information about the generated electronic identity card. Providing information about the generated card may include providing (e.g., transmitting, sending) a textual or graphical representation of the card, or a reference thereto. In some cases, the card may be associated along with an electronic signature document, such as by including a URL or other reference to the card in the document.



FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of an example electronic signature trust score process. The illustrated process may be performed by one or more modules of the ESS 110 described herein to enable initiation of a transaction and to provide a user with trust score of other users associated with the transaction. Other embodiments may perform fewer or additional operations than those illustrated here.


The process begins at block 502, where it initiates and/or otherwise generates an electronic signature transaction for a user (e.g., the sender or sending user).


At block 504, the process attaches one or more documents to the transaction. The user can add documents to the transaction by uploading them to the electronic signature service.


At block 506, the process selects one or more users associated with the transaction. These users may be the signing users of the transaction. The sending user can select the signing users by providing identifying information about the signing users, such as an email address.


At block 508, the process provides the trust score of the one or more signing users to the sending user. In some embodiments, the sender is provided with recommendations for the authentication mechanism for each of the signing users based on their corresponding trust score. The document is then sent to the signing users for electronic signature.



FIG. 6 is a block diagram of an example computing system for implementing an electronic signature service according to an example embodiment. In particular, FIG. 6 shows a computing system 100 that may be utilized to implement an electronic signature service 110.


Note that one or more general purpose or special purpose computing systems/devices may be used to implement the electronic signature service 110. In addition, the computing system 100 may comprise one or more distinct computing systems/devices and may span distributed locations. Furthermore, each block shown may represent one or more such blocks as appropriate to a specific embodiment or may be combined with other blocks. Also, the electronic signature service 110 may be implemented in software, hardware, firmware, or in some combination to achieve the capabilities described herein.


In the embodiment shown, computing system 100 comprises a computer memory (“memory”) 101, a display 102, one or more Central Processing Units (“CPU”) 103, Input/Output devices 104 (e.g., keyboard, mouse, CRT or LCD display, and the like), other computer-readable media 105, and network connections 106 connected to a network 150. The electronic signature service 110 is shown residing in memory 101. In other embodiments, some portion of the contents, some or all of the components of the electronic signature service 110 may be stored on and/or transmitted over the other computer-readable media 105. The components of the electronic signature service 110 preferably execute on one or more CPUs 103 and manage electronic signature processes and EID cards as described herein. Other code or programs 130 (e.g., an administrative interface, a Web server, and the like) and potentially other data repositories, such as data repository 120, also reside in the memory 101, and preferably execute on one or more CPUs 103. Of note, one or more of the components in FIG. 6 may not be present in any specific implementation. For example, some embodiments may not provide other computer readable media 105 or a display 102.


The electronic signature service 110 includes an electronic identity (“EID”) card manager 111, a user interface (“Un”) manager 112, an electronic signature service application program interface (“APP”) 113, and an electronic signature service data store 115.


The EID manager 111 includes logic configured to perform identity card management functions of the ESS 110, as described above. Functions of the EID manager 111 may include generating new identity cards, managing or modifying existing identity cards, authenticating users (or providing access to related authentication services), identity card use/activity tracking, scoring, and the like.


The UI manager 112 provides a view and a controller that facilitate user interaction with the electronic signature service 110 and its various components. For example, the UI manager 112 may provide interactive access to the electronic signature service 110, such that users can upload or download documents for signature, create and manage EID cards, and the like. In some embodiments, access to the functionality of the UI manager 112 may be provided via a Web server, possibly executing as one of the other programs 130. In such embodiments, a user operating a Web browser (or other client) executing on one of the client devices 160 or 161 can interact with the electronic signature service 110 via the UI manager 112.


The API 113 provides programmatic access to one or more functions of the electronic signature service 110. For example, the API 113 may provide a programmatic interface to one or more functions of the electronic signature service 110 that may be invoked by one of the other programs 130 or some other module. In this manner, the API 113 facilitates the development of third-party software, such as user interfaces, plug-ins, news feeds, adapters (e.g., for integrating functions of the electronic signature service 110 into Web applications), and the like. In addition, the API 113 may be in at least some embodiments invoked or otherwise accessed via remote entities, such as the third-party system 165, to access various functions of the electronic signature service 110. For example, a social networking service executing on the system 165 may obtain information about EID cards managed by the ESS 110 via the API 113.


The data store 115 is used by the other modules of the electronic signature service 110 to store and/or communicate information. The components of the ESS 110 use the data store 115 to securely store or record various types of information, including documents, signatures. EID cards, activity information, and the like. Although the components of the ESS 110 are described as communicating primarily through the data store 115, other communication mechanisms are contemplated, including message passing, function calls, pipes, sockets, shared memory, and the like.


The electronic signature service 110 interacts via the network 150 with client devices 160 and 161, and third-party systems 165. The third-party systems 165 may include social networking systems, third-party authentication or identity services, identity information providers (e.g., credit bureaus), or the like. The network 150 may be any combination of one or more media (e.g., twisted pair, coaxial, fiber optic, radio frequency), hardware (e.g., routers, switches, repeaters, transceivers), and one or more protocols (e.g., TCP/IP, UDP, Ethernet, Wi-Fi, WiMAX) that facilitate communication between remotely situated humans and/or devices. In some embodiments, the network 150 may be or include multiple distinct communication channels or mechanisms (e.g., cable-based and wireless). The client devices 160 and 161 include personal computers, laptop computers, smart phones, personal digital assistants, tablet computers, and the like.


In an example embodiment, components/modules of the electronic signature service 110 are implemented using standard programming techniques. For example, the electronic signature service 110 may be implemented as a “native” executable running on the CPU 103, along with one or more static or dynamic libraries. In other embodiments, the electronic signature service 110 may be implemented as instructions processed by a virtual machine that executes as one of the other programs 130. In general, a range of programming languages known in the art may be employed for implementing such example embodiments, including representative implementations of various programming language paradigms, including but not limited to, object-oriented (e.g., Java, C-++, C#, Visual Basic.NET, Smalltalk, and the like), functional (e.g., ML, Lisp, Scheme, and the like), procedural (e.g., C, Pascal, Ada, Modula, and the like), scripting (e.g., Perl, Ruby, Python, JavaScript, VBScript, and the like), and declarative (e.g., SQL, Prolog, and the like).


The embodiments described above may also use either well-known or proprietary synchronous or asynchronous client-server computing techniques. Also, the various components may be implemented using more monolithic programming techniques, for example, as an executable running on a single CPU computer system, or alternatively decomposed using a variety of structuring techniques known in the art, including but not limited to, multiprogramming, multithreading, client-server, or peer-to-peer, running on one or more computer systems each having one or more CPUs. Some embodiments may execute concurrently and asynchronously, and communicate using message passing techniques. Equivalent synchronous embodiments are also supported. Also, other functions could be implemented and/or performed by each component/module, and in different orders, and by different components/modules, yet still achieve the described functions.


In addition, programming interfaces to the data stored as part of the electronic signature service 110, such as in the data store 115, can be available by standard mechanisms such as through C, C++, C#, and Java APIs; libraries for accessing files, databases, or other data repositories; through scripting languages such as XML; or through Web servers, FTP servers, or other types of servers providing access to stored data. The data store 118 may be implemented as one or more database systems, file systems, or any other technique for storing such information, or any combination of the above, including implementations using distributed computing techniques.


Different configurations and locations of programs and data are contemplated for use with techniques of described herein. A variety of distributed computing techniques are appropriate for implementing the components of the illustrated embodiments in a distributed manner including but not limited to TCP/IP sockets, RPC, RMI, HTTP, Web Services (XML-RPC, JAX-RPC, SOAP, and the like). Other variations are possible. Also, other functionality could be provided by each component/module, or existing functionality could be distributed amongst the components/modules in different ways, yet still achieve the functions described herein.


Furthermore, in some embodiments, some or all of the components of the electronic signature service 110 may be implemented or provided in other manners, such as at least partially in firmware and/or hardware, including, but not limited to one or more application-specific integrated circuits (“ASIC's”), standard integrated circuits, controllers executing appropriate instructions, and including microcontrollers and/or embedded controllers, field-programmable gate arrays (“FPGAs”), complex programmable logic devices (“CPLDs”), and the like. Some or all of the system components and/or data structures may also be stored as contents (e.g., as executable or other machine-readable software instructions or structured data) on a computer-readable medium (e.g., as a hard disk; a memory; a computer network or cellular wireless network or other data transmission medium; or a portable media article to be read by an appropriate drive or via an appropriate connection, such as a DVD or flash memory device) so as to enable or configure the computer-readable medium and/or one or more associated computing systems or devices to execute or otherwise use or provide the contents to perform at least some of the described techniques. Some or all of the system components and data structures may also be stored as data signals (e.g., by being encoded as part of a carrier wave or included as part of an analog or digital propagated signal) on a variety of computer-readable transmission mediums, which are then transmitted, including across wireless-based and wired/cable-based mediums, and may take a variety of forms (e.g., as part of a single or multiplexed analog signal, or as multiple discrete digital packets or frames). Such computer program products may also take other forms in other embodiments. Accordingly, embodiments of this disclosure may be practiced with other computer system configurations.


It should be apparent to those skilled in the art that many more modifications besides those already described are possible without departing from the inventive concepts herein. The inventive subject matter, therefore, is not to be restricted except in the spirit of the appended claims. Moreover, in interpreting both the specification and the claims, all terms should be interpreted in the broadest possible manner consistent with the context. In particular, the terms “includes,” “including,” “comprises,” and “comprising” should be interpreted as referring to elements, components, or steps in a non-exclusive manner, indicating that the referenced elements, components, or steps may be present, or utilized, or combined with other elements, components, or steps that are not expressly referenced. Where the specification claims refers to at least one of something selected from the group consisting of A, B, C . . . and N, the text should be interpreted as requiring only one element from the group, not A plus N, or B plus N, etc.


While the preferred embodiment of the invention has been illustrated and described, as noted above, many changes can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Accordingly, the scope of the invention is not limited by the disclosure of the preferred embodiment. Instead, the invention should be determined entirely by reference to the claims that follow.

Claims
  • 1. A method comprising: accessing, by an electronic signature server, document information describing one or more documents with which a user has historically interacted;determining, by the electronic signature server, a trust score for the user based on the document information describing the one or more documents; andin response to the trust score being above a trust score threshold, causing display, by the electronic signature server on a display communicatively coupled to a client device of the user, an indication that the user is a trusted user in association with a new electronic signature transaction associated with the user via the electronic signature server, the new electronic signature transaction associated with an authentication method selected based on the determined trust score.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the trust score is determined further based on one or more of: a type of signature used by the user to sign the one or more documents, a number of the one or more documents signed by the user, and a frequency of signing operations conducted by the user.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the trust score is determined further based on one or more of: a number of sending events in which the user is a sender, a type of sending events in which the user is a sender, a frequency of sending events in which the user is a sender, a number of authentication methods used by the user in sending a document, and a type of authentication methods used by the user in sending a document.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the document information includes one or more of: documents uploaded by the user to the electronic signature server, documents sent by the user via the electronic signature server, documents signed by the user via the electronic signature server, documents viewed by the user, and documents sent to the user via the electronic signature server.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the trust score can be increased by the user providing a valid email address to the electronic signature server, by linking a social network account associated with the user with the electronic signature server, and by verifying an identity of the user with the electronic signature server.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the new electronic signature transaction is associated with a warning selected based on the determined trust score to a second user associated with the new electronic signature transaction.
  • 7. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing executable instructions that, when executed by a hardware processor of an electronic signature server, cause the hardware processor to perform steps comprising: accessing, by the electronic signature server, document information describing one or more documents with which a user has historically interacted;determining, by the electronic signature server, a trust score for the user based on the document information describing the one or more documents; andin response to the trust score being above a trust score threshold, causing display, by the electronic signature server on a display communicatively coupled to a client device of the user, an indication that the user is a trusted user in association with a new electronic signature transaction associated with the user via the electronic signature server, the new electronic signature transaction associated with an authentication method selected based on the determined trust score.
  • 8. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 7, wherein the trust score is determined further based on one or more of: a type of signature used by the user to sign the one or more documents, a number of the one or more documents signed by the user, and a frequency of signing operations conducted by the user.
  • 9. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 7, wherein the trust score is determined further based on one or more of: a number of sending events in which the user is a sender, a type of sending events in which the user is a sender, a frequency of sending events in which the user is a sender, a number of authentication methods used by the user in sending a document, and a type of authentication methods used by the user in sending a document.
  • 10. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 7, wherein the document information includes one or more of: documents uploaded by the user to the electronic signature server, documents sent by the user via the electronic signature server, documents signed by the user via the electronic signature server, documents viewed by the user, and documents sent to the user via the electronic signature server.
  • 11. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 7, wherein the trust score can be increased by the user providing a valid email address to the electronic signature server, by linking a social network account associated with the user with the electronic signature server, and by verifying an identity of the user with the electronic signature server.
  • 12. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 7, wherein the new electronic signature transaction is associated with a warning selected based on the determined trust score to a second user associated with the new electronic signature transaction.
  • 13. An electronic signature server comprising a hardware processor and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing executable instructions that, when executed by the hardware processor, cause the hardware processor to perform steps comprising: accessing document information describing one or more documents with which a user has historically interacted;determining a trust score for the user based on the document information describing the one or more documents; andin response to the trust score being above a trust score threshold, causing display on a display communicatively coupled to a client device of the user, an indication that the user is a trusted user in association with a new electronic signature transaction associated with the user via the electronic signature server, wherein the new electronic signature transaction is associated with an authentication method selected based on the determined trust score.
  • 14. The electronic signature server of claim 13, wherein the trust score is determined further based on one or more of: a type of signature used by the user to sign the one or more documents, a number of the one or more documents signed by the user, and a frequency of signing operations conducted by the user.
  • 15. The electronic signature server of claim 13, wherein the trust score is determined further based on one or more of: a number of sending events in which the user is a sender, a type of sending events in which the user is a sender, a frequency of sending events in which the user is a sender, a number of authentication methods used by the user in sending a document, and a type of authentication methods used by the user in sending a document.
  • 16. The electronic signature server of claim 13, wherein the document information includes one or more of: documents uploaded by the user to the electronic signature server, documents sent by the user via the electronic signature server, documents signed by the user via the electronic signature server, documents viewed by the user, and documents sent to the user via the electronic signature server.
  • 17. The electronic signature server of claim 13, wherein the trust score can be increased by the user providing a valid email address to the electronic signature server, by linking a social network account associated with the user with the electronic signature server, and by verifying an identity of the user with the electronic signature server.
  • 18. The electronic signature server of claim 13, wherein the new electronic signature transaction is associated with a warning selected based on the determined trust score to a second user associated with the new electronic signature transaction.
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 16/586,907, filed Sep. 28, 2019, now U.S. Pat. No. 11,055,387, which application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 15/792,027, filed Oct. 24, 2017, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,430,570, which application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/611,073, filed Jan. 30, 2015, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,824,198, which application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/537,803 filed on Nov. 10, 2014, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,628,462, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/549,801, filed on Jul. 16, 2012, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,910,258, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/507,892 filed Jul. 14, 2011, the contents of which are incorporated by reference.

US Referenced Citations (276)
Number Name Date Kind
5040142 Mori et al. Aug 1991 A
5220675 Padawer et al. Jun 1993 A
5222138 Balabon et al. Jun 1993 A
5337360 Fischer Aug 1994 A
5390247 Fischer Feb 1995 A
5465299 Matsumoto et al. Nov 1995 A
5544255 Smithies et al. Aug 1996 A
5553145 Micali Sep 1996 A
5615268 Bisbee et al. Mar 1997 A
5629982 Micali May 1997 A
5689567 Miyauchi Nov 1997 A
5748738 Bisbee et al. May 1998 A
5813009 Johnson et al. Sep 1998 A
5832499 Gustman Nov 1998 A
5872848 Romney et al. Feb 1999 A
5898156 Wilfong Apr 1999 A
6021202 Anderson et al. Feb 2000 A
6067531 Hoyt et al. May 2000 A
6085322 Romney et al. Jul 2000 A
6092080 Gustman Jul 2000 A
6119229 Martinez et al. Sep 2000 A
6128740 Curry et al. Oct 2000 A
6161139 Win et al. Dec 2000 A
6185587 Bernardo et al. Feb 2001 B1
6185683 Ginter et al. Feb 2001 B1
6199052 Milly et al. Mar 2001 B1
6210276 Mullins Apr 2001 B1
6237096 Bisbee et al. May 2001 B1
6289460 Hajmiragha Jul 2001 B1
6321333 Murray Nov 2001 B1
6327656 Zabelian Dec 2001 B2
6367010 Venkatram et al. Apr 2002 B1
6367013 Bisbee et al. Apr 2002 B1
6446115 Powers Sep 2002 B2
6470448 Kuroda et al. Oct 2002 B1
6584466 Is et al. Jun 2003 B1
6615348 Gibbs Sep 2003 B1
6658403 Kuroda et al. Dec 2003 B1
6671805 Brown et al. Dec 2003 B1
6728762 Estrada et al. Apr 2004 B1
6751632 Petrogiannis Jun 2004 B1
6754829 Butt et al. Jun 2004 B1
6796489 Slater et al. Sep 2004 B2
6807633 Pavlik Oct 2004 B1
6829635 Townshend Dec 2004 B1
6912660 Petrogiannis Jun 2005 B1
6931420 Silvester et al. Aug 2005 B1
6938157 Kaplan Aug 2005 B2
6944648 Cochran et al. Sep 2005 B2
6947911 Moritsu et al. Sep 2005 B1
6959382 Kinnis et al. Oct 2005 B1
6961854 Serret-Avila et al. Nov 2005 B2
6973569 Anderson et al. Dec 2005 B1
6990684 Futamura et al. Jan 2006 B2
7039805 Messing May 2006 B1
7059516 Matsuyama et al. Jun 2006 B2
7069443 Berringer et al. Jun 2006 B2
7093130 Kobayashi Aug 2006 B1
7100045 Yamada et al. Aug 2006 B2
7103778 Kon et al. Sep 2006 B2
7134024 Binding et al. Nov 2006 B1
7162635 Bisbee et al. Jan 2007 B2
7167844 Leong et al. Jan 2007 B1
7197644 Brewington Mar 2007 B2
7237114 Rosenberg Jun 2007 B1
7340608 Laurie et al. Mar 2008 B2
7360079 Wall Apr 2008 B2
7395436 Nemovicher Jul 2008 B1
7424543 Rice, III Sep 2008 B2
7437421 Bhogal et al. Oct 2008 B2
7523315 Hougaard Apr 2009 B2
7533268 Catoricini et al. May 2009 B1
7554576 Erol et al. Jun 2009 B2
7562053 Twining et al. Jul 2009 B2
7568101 Catoricini et al. Jul 2009 B1
7568104 Berryman et al. Jul 2009 B2
7581105 Dietl Aug 2009 B2
7657832 Lin Feb 2010 B1
7660863 Boursetty et al. Feb 2010 B2
7788259 Patterson et al. Aug 2010 B2
7934098 Hahn et al. Apr 2011 B1
7953977 Maruyama et al. May 2011 B2
8103867 Spitz Jan 2012 B2
8132013 Meier Mar 2012 B2
8286071 Zimmerman et al. Oct 2012 B1
8327131 Hardjono et al. Dec 2012 B1
8499150 Nachenberg Jul 2013 B1
8588483 Hicks et al. Nov 2013 B2
8601270 Dupre Dec 2013 B2
8612349 Ledder et al. Dec 2013 B1
8631486 Friedman Jan 2014 B1
8650649 Chen et al. Feb 2014 B1
8910258 Gonser et al. Dec 2014 B2
8949708 Peterson et al. Feb 2015 B2
9094469 Wilder et al. Jul 2015 B1
9251131 McCabe et al. Feb 2016 B2
9270467 Chen et al. Feb 2016 B1
9438619 Chan et al. Sep 2016 B1
9628462 Gonser et al. Apr 2017 B2
9628492 Buehler et al. Apr 2017 B2
9824198 Carroll et al. Nov 2017 B2
10430570 Gonser et al. Oct 2019 B2
11055387 Gonser et al. Jul 2021 B2
11263299 Gonser et al. Mar 2022 B2
11341220 Gonser et al. May 2022 B2
20010018739 Anderson et al. Aug 2001 A1
20010034739 Anecki et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010034835 Smith Oct 2001 A1
20020004800 Kikuta et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020016910 Wright et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020019937 Edstrom et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020026427 Kon et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020026582 Futamura et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020040431 Kala et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020042879 Gould et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020062441 Ooishi May 2002 A1
20020069179 Slater et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020069358 Silvester Jun 2002 A1
20020129056 Conant et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020138445 Laage et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020143711 Nassiri Oct 2002 A1
20020144149 Hanna et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020162000 Bensler Oct 2002 A1
20020178187 Rasmussen et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020184485 Dray et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020194219 Bradley et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020196478 Struble Dec 2002 A1
20030023878 Rosenberg et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030048301 Menninger Mar 2003 A1
20030051016 Miyoshi et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030070091 Loveland Apr 2003 A1
20030078880 Alley et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030120553 Williams Jun 2003 A1
20030120930 Simpson et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030131073 Lucovsky et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030140252 Lafon et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030217275 Bentley et al. Nov 2003 A1
20040054606 Broerman Mar 2004 A1
20040078337 King et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040107352 Yui et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040117627 Brewington Jun 2004 A1
20040133493 Ford et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040181756 Berringer et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040225884 Lorenzini et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040230891 Pravetz et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040250070 Wong Dec 2004 A1
20040250099 Pravetz et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040255114 Lee et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040255127 Arnouse Dec 2004 A1
20050033811 Bhogal et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050049903 Raja Mar 2005 A1
20050066172 Vorbruggen et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050076215 Dryer Apr 2005 A1
20050091143 Schmidt et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050120217 Fifield et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050125674 Nishiki Jun 2005 A1
20050138382 Hougaard et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050138430 Landsman Jun 2005 A1
20050165626 Karpf Jul 2005 A1
20050172229 Reno et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050182684 Dawson et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050182956 Ginter et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050192908 Jorimann et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050226473 Ramesh Oct 2005 A1
20050231738 Huff et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050289081 Sporny Dec 2005 A1
20060015722 Rowan et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060047600 Bodenheim et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060047605 Ahmad Mar 2006 A1
20060047725 Bramson Mar 2006 A1
20060095971 Costea et al. May 2006 A1
20060124726 Kotovich et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060161435 Atef et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060161780 Berryman et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060161781 Rice et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060174199 Soltis et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060205476 Jubinville Sep 2006 A1
20060212931 Shull et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060259440 Leake et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060261545 Rogers Nov 2006 A1
20060294152 Kawabe et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070022162 Thayer et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070026927 Yaldoo et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070061586 Golubchik et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070079139 Kim Apr 2007 A1
20070086592 Ellison et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070088958 Qa'lm-maqami Apr 2007 A1
20070118732 Whitmore May 2007 A1
20070130186 Ramsey et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070136361 Lee et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070143085 Kimmel Jun 2007 A1
20070143629 Hardjono et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070165865 Talvitie Jul 2007 A1
20070180078 Murphy et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070198533 Foygel et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070208944 Pavlicic Sep 2007 A1
20070220260 King Sep 2007 A1
20070260738 Palekar et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070271592 Noda et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070289022 Wittkotter Dec 2007 A1
20080016357 Suarez Jan 2008 A1
20080034213 Boemker et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080097777 Rielo Apr 2008 A1
20080141033 Ginter et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080208714 Sundaresan Aug 2008 A1
20080209313 Gonser Aug 2008 A1
20080209516 Nassiri Aug 2008 A1
20080216147 Duffy Sep 2008 A1
20080235577 Veluchamy et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080260287 Berryman et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080313723 Naono et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090007102 Dadhia et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090024912 McCabe et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090025087 Peirson, Jr. et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090044019 Lee et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090099881 Hanna et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090106557 Leonard Apr 2009 A1
20090132351 Gibson May 2009 A1
20090138730 Cook et al. May 2009 A1
20090145958 Stoutenburg et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090185241 Nepomniachtchi Jul 2009 A1
20090268903 Bojinov et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090292786 McCabe et al. Nov 2009 A1
20090300720 Guo et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100005099 Goodman et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100017853 Readshaw Jan 2010 A1
20100088364 Carter et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100122094 Shima May 2010 A1
20100153011 Obrea et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100169265 Ristock et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100217987 Shevade Aug 2010 A1
20100235727 Ashton et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100274863 Foygel et al. Oct 2010 A1
20100287260 Peterson et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100293094 Kolkowitz et al. Nov 2010 A1
20110067101 Seshadri et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110093769 Dunn et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110119165 Zee May 2011 A1
20110126022 Sieberer May 2011 A1
20110179477 Starnes et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110191200 Bayer Aug 2011 A1
20110231443 Hannel et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110238510 Rowen et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110264907 Betz et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110296199 Kinghorn et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110314371 Peterson et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120072837 Triola Mar 2012 A1
20120180135 Hodges et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120198238 Rouchouze Aug 2012 A1
20120209970 Scipioni et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120210406 Camenisch et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120226701 Singh Sep 2012 A1
20120271882 Sachdeva et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120304265 Richter et al. Nov 2012 A1
20130019156 Gonser et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130050512 Gonser et al. Feb 2013 A1
20130067243 Tamayo-Rios et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130159720 Gonser et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130179676 Hamid Jun 2013 A1
20130227700 Dhillon et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130254111 Gonser et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130263283 Peterson et al. Oct 2013 A1
20140019761 Shapiro Jan 2014 A1
20140164776 Hook et al. Jun 2014 A1
20140214689 Owen Jul 2014 A1
20140283031 Eksten et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140297530 Eckel et al. Oct 2014 A1
20150007297 Grossemy Jan 2015 A1
20150026785 Soon-Shiong Jan 2015 A1
20150047003 Khan Feb 2015 A1
20150086088 King Mar 2015 A1
20150095987 Potash et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150095999 Toth Apr 2015 A1
20160148039 Potash et al. May 2016 A1
20170300679 Jach et al. Oct 2017 A1
20180060874 Kelts et al. Mar 2018 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (43)
Number Date Country
1996360 Jul 2007 CN
101299256 Nov 2008 CN
103917999 Jul 2014 CN
3935417 Oct 1989 DE
4117594 May 1991 DE
1238321 Sep 2002 EP
3507733 Jul 2019 EP
2000048072 Feb 2000 JP
2002023629 Jan 2002 JP
2003032615 Jan 2003 JP
2003509784 Mar 2003 JP
2003242455 Aug 2003 JP
2003271529 Sep 2003 JP
2003318885 Nov 2003 JP
2004248045 Sep 2004 JP
2005267438 Sep 2005 JP
2008117258 May 2008 JP
2008518335 May 2008 JP
2008225527 Sep 2008 JP
2009105518 May 2009 JP
2009212570 Sep 2009 JP
2012509526 Apr 2012 JP
20000049674 Aug 2000 KR
1020020092595 Dec 2002 KR
1020070059931 Jun 2007 KR
100929488 Dec 2009 KR
20090122657 Dec 2009 KR
2400811 Nov 2005 RU
2291491 Oct 2007 RU
2300844 Jun 2010 RU
844187 Jul 1981 SU
9220603 Nov 1992 WO
9407058 Mar 1994 WO
1996007156 Mar 1996 WO
2003091834 Nov 2003 WO
2007075235 Jul 2007 WO
2008124627 Oct 2008 WO
2009012478 Jan 2009 WO
2010034507 Apr 2010 WO
2010105262 Sep 2010 WO
2011156819 Dec 2011 WO
2013010172 Jan 2013 WO
2016076904 May 2016 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (57)
Entry
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/549,801, Examiner Interview Summary dated Mar. 6, 2014”, 3 pgs.
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/549,801, Examiner Interview Summary dated Jul. 30, 2014”, 1 pg.
“U.S. Appl. No. 14/537,004, Response filed Oct. 28, 2016 to Non Final Office Action dated Jul. 28, 2016”, 9 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2012283810, Non Final Office Action dated Aug. 3, 2016”, 3 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2012283810, Response filed Dec. 1, 2016 to Non Final Office Action dated Aug. 3, 2016”, 19 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2012283810, Response to Subsequent Examiners Report dated Jun. 19, 2017”, 26 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2012283810, Subsequent Examiners Report dated Jul. 17, 2017”, 5 pgs.
“Australian Application Serial No. 2012283810, Subsequent Examiners Report dated Dec. 23, 2016”, 5 pgs.
“Canadian Application Serial No. 2,841,812, Office Action dated Apr. 13, 2018”, 4 pgs.
“Canadian Application Serial No. 2,841,812, Response filed Oct. 11, 2018 to Office Action dated Apr. 13, 2018”, 28 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 201280044857.2, Office Action dated Sep. 12, 2016”, W/ English Translation, 24 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 201280044857.2, Office Action dated Jan. 20, 2017”, (English Translation), 20 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 201280044857.2, Office Action dated Apr. 25, 2016”, W/ English Translation, 30 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 201280044857.2, Response filed Aug. 24, 2016 to Office Action dated Apr. 25, 2016”, W/ English Claims, 12 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 201280044857.2, Response filed Nov. 24, 2016 to Office Action dated Sep. 12, 2016”, W/ English Claims, 12 pgs.
“Chinese Application Serial No. 201280044857.2, Response to Office Action dated Mar. 17, 2017”, W/ English claims, 14 pgs.
“eLynx Adds Workftow Management to Electronic Document Platform—new Workflow Capabilities Provide for Enhanced Electronic Loan Processing”, [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: < URL: http://www.elynx.com/news/view/82, (Jan. 2009), 2 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 12811108.5, Response filed Jan. 27, 2016 to Extended European Search Report dated Jul. 20, 2015”, 17 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 12811108.5, Communication Pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC dated Oct. 6, 2017”, 5 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 12811108.5, Extended European Search Report dated Jul. 20, 2015”, 7 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 12811108.5, Office Action dated Feb. 28, 2014”, 3 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 12811108.5, Response filed Feb. 15, 2018 to Communication Pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC dated Oct. 6, 2017”, 11 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 15858385.6, Communication Pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC dated May 22, 2018”, 4 pgs.
“European Application Serial No. 15858385.6, Extended European Search Report dated May 2, 2018”, 3 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/046934, International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated Jan. 23, 2014”, 8 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/046934, International Search Report dated Jan. 28, 2013”, 3 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2012/046934, Written Opinion dated Jan. 28, 2013”, 6 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US220121046934, International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated Jan. 23, 2014”, 8 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US20151013979, International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated May 26, 2017”, 5 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US20151013979, International Search Report dated May 21, 2015”, 2 pgs.
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US20151013979, Written Opinion dated May 21, 2015”, 3pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2014-520408, Office Action dated Aug. 17, 2016”, WI English Translation, 9 pgs.
“Japanese Application Serial No. 2014-520408, Response filed Jan. 13, 2017 to Office Action dated Aug. 17, 2016”, W/ English Claims, 15 pgs.
“Singapore Application Serial No. 2014002828, Office Action dated Jul. 27, 2015”, 12 pgs.
“Singapore Application Serial No. 2014002828, Response filed Nov. 25, 2015 to Office Action dated Jul. 9, 2015”, WI English Translation, 5 pgs.
Belleboni, et al., “Digital Identity Applied to Telematic Voting Involving European Citizens Social and Legal Implications”, (2010), 268-274 pgs.
Borozdin et al., “DocuSign Connect Service Guide,” DocuSign, Inc., pp. 1-9, 2008.
Brown, “Digital Signatures: Can They Be Accepted As Legal Signatures in EID?”, Dec. 1993, ACM, p. 86-92.
Environment, IEEE, (2005), 497-502 Laurens, Leurs, The history of PDF, Prepressure.com, (Feb. 14, 2010), 1-12.
Harold, Elliotie Rusty, XML Bible. 1OG Books Worldwide, Inc., 1999, p. 191-192.
Herzberg et al., “Surf'N'Sign: Client Signatures on Web Documents”, 1998, IEEE, vol. 37 Issue 1, p. 61-71.
Ilayat, et al., “Identity Management System for Electronic Government Processes in Pakistan”, (2008), 271-277 pgs.
Kamara et al., “Cryptographic Cloud Storage”, 2010, Financial Cryptography and Data Security, p. 136-149.
Klenk, et al., “Preventing Identity Theft with Electronic Identity Cards and the Trusted Platform Module”, (2009), 44-51 pgs.
Kwok et al., “An Automatic Electronic Contract Document Signing System in a Secure Environment”, 2005, IEEE, P. 497-502.
Laurens Leurs; The history of PDF; Feb. 14, 2010; Prepressure.com; pp. 1-12.
Mutlugun, et al., “Turkish National Electronic Identity Card”, (2009), 14-18 pgs.
Prosecution History from U.S. Appl. No. 13/549,801, now issued U.S. Pat. No. 8,910,258, dated Jun. 19, 2013 through Aug. 19, 2014, 91 pp.
Prosecution History from U.S. Appl. No. 14/537,803, now issued U.S. Pat. No. 9,628,462, dated Apr. 20, 2015, through Dec. 9, 2016, 29 pp.
Prosecution History from U.S. Appl. No. 14/611,073, now issued U.S. Pat. No. 9,824,198, dated Jun. 16, 2017 through Jul. 21, 2017, 18 pp.
Prosecution History from U.S. Appl. No. 15/792,027, now issued U.S. Pat. No. 10,430,570, dated Jan. 10, 2018 through May 6, 2019, 22 pp.
Prosecution History from U.S. Appl. No. 15/930,314, now issued U.S. Pat. No. 11,263,299, dated May 13, 2020 through Dec. 7, 2021, 25 pp.
Prosecution History from U.S. Appl. No. 16/586,907, now issued U.S. Pat. No. 11,055,387, dated Dec. 16, 2019 through Jun. 11, 2021, 26 pp.
Prosecution History from U.S. Appl. No. 16/933,924, now issued U.S. Pat. No. 11,341,220, dated Jul. 21, 2020 through Mar. 2, 2022, 19 pp.
Su et al., “Signature-In-Signature Verification Via a Secure Simple Network Protocol”, 2010, IEEE, p. 1-4.
Wheeler et al., “DocuSign Unveils new Scalable Product and Support Offerings of Electronic Signature and Electronic Contract Execution,” DocuSign The Fastest Way to Get a Signature, 2 pages, Jan. 2008.
Zefferer et al., “An Electronic-Signature Based Circular Resolution Database System,” Mar. 2010, ACM, p. 1840-1845.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20210303664 A1 Sep 2021 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
61507892 Jul 2011 US
Continuations (4)
Number Date Country
Parent 16586907 Sep 2019 US
Child 17343749 US
Parent 15792027 Oct 2017 US
Child 16586907 US
Parent 14611073 Jan 2015 US
Child 15792027 US
Parent 13549801 Jul 2012 US
Child 14537803 US
Continuation in Parts (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 14537803 Nov 2014 US
Child 14611073 US