Systems and methods for document management transformation and security

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 8239496
  • Patent Number
    8,239,496
  • Date Filed
    Monday, March 15, 2010
    15 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, August 7, 2012
    13 years ago
Abstract
The present invention provides systems and methods for dynamically rendering documents during a signing ceremony (instead of validating that signature tasks are placed appropriately on all documents). The invention establishes a visibility policy that governs how documents are rendered, based on the state of system Tabs (instructions) placed on the documents.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Today, there is no programmatic way to ensure the contract signing process happens in any particular controllable fashion. Contracts are printed out and physically distributed. Signers sign where they see fit, and may or may not complete the signing correctly. Contract pages may be lost or not returned to the proper person. Using electronic systems, contracts can be routed using workflow, but these systems are complicated, hard to setup and manage, and usually do not involve the end-user signing process. The existence of a variety of pre-established document formats requires dynamic evaluation and verification of documents for signature. In addition, there is no system to readily restrict access of documents for signature to only those parties that are authorized to review and execute.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides systems and methods for dynamically rendering documents during a signing ceremony (instead of validating that signature tasks are placed appropriately on all documents). The invention establishes a visibility policy that governs how documents are rendered, based on the state of system Tabs (instructions) placed on the documents.





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 is a schematic diagram of an example system formed in accordance with the present invention;



FIG. 2 is a flow diagram of an example process performed by the system shown in FIG. 1; and



FIG. 3 is a combined flow and system diagram.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

The present invention provides enhanced document management systems and methods for evaluating and transforming portable document format (PDF) documents and security restrictions on electronic document review and execution. FIG. 1 illustrates an example system 20 having an advisor computer system 30, an advisor Customer Relationship Management (CRM) server 32, a user services server 36 and a plurality of user systems 42.



FIG. 2 illustrates an example transform process performed by the system 20. FIG. 3 illustrates a combined system/process diagram.


PDF Document Transformation


The evaluation and transformation of PDF documents include both input and output transformations. For Static Extensible Markup Language (XML) Forms Architecture (XFA) forms and AcroForms (aka Acrobat Forms), the system 20 correlates the form fields from an input form to fields in a system template. The form field data and attributes are then reflected in a system signing ceremony in accordance with the rules defined in a system template (e.g., Editable vs. Read-Only, Required vs. Optional, Assignment to individual Recipients, placement on the signed document, etc.) One function that this process enables is for the system 20 to render data that was collected from a sender-provided input form to signing parties in an editable format. Without this transformation process, all form data from input forms is imposed on the documents in a non-editable format during the signing ceremony.


The following items are currently transferred from the input PDF into the system process:

  • Field data
  • On/Off values for Radio Buttons (Distinct from Display Values)


The following items are currently specified in the template, but may alternatively be included as optional characteristics or extensions of the transform process:

  • Field placement
  • Field rules
    • Optional vs. Required
    • Editable vs. Read-only
    • Edit masks
  • List items in drop-down fields
  • Display value vs. Stored value for drop-down fields
  • Signature fields


The following items are currently transferred from the output PDF into the system process. The system provides the form data that is collected during the signing ceremony in the same (XML) structure that it came in. This allows the systems that consume system data (post-execution) to process the data as if it was extracted from the forms that they provided to the system.


Document Security Restrictions


Business rules currently enforced through validation by the system ensures the following behaviors:

  • If any Recipient has a signature/initial task on a document, every Recipient must have a signature/initial task on the document. If there is an Envelope Recipient without a signature/initial task on a document that contains some signature/initial task, system will reject the Envelope upon creation.
  • If a document does not have any signature/initial tasks for any Envelope Recipient, the document is perceived to be viewable by all Recipients, and the Envelope is allowed to be created.


The present invention dynamically renders the documents during a signing ceremony (instead of validating that signature tasks are placed appropriately on all documents). The invention establishes a visibility policy that governs how documents are rendered, based on the state of system Tabs (instructions) placed on the documents contained within the Envelope. Preferably, the system behavior is as follows:

  • If a document has a system Tab for a Recipient, the document will be visible for the Recipient.
  • If a document has a system Tab for one Recipient but not another, the document will not be visible to the Recipient that lacks the system Tab.
  • If the document does not have any system Tabs, the document will be visible to all Recipients.
  • If a Recipient chooses to download a copy of their documents through the system web interface, only the documents that were viewable during the signing ceremony will be downloaded.
  • Predetermined CertifiedDelivery and CarbonCopy Recipients will see all documents in the Envelope.


The system preferably allows the following additional configuration options:

  • Dynamically suppress access to the Certificate of Completion and Envelope History for all Signers, Certified Delivery, and Carbon Copy Recipients. (These documents/screens display a list of all signers).
  • Ability to specify system behavior as an Account-level setting or on an Envelope-basis. In one embodiment, the setting is not available for Account Administrators to manage; i.e., the Account-level setting could be specified for system users who would themselves not have the ability to change the setting.
  • Ability to reflect in the Envelope History the system visibility setting. This information is available for human readability as well as programmatic access.
  • Ability to make all documents visible to the Envelope Sender.
  • Ability to designate whether Members of the sending Account can see all documents, or whether they are subject to the visibility policy.


The invention methodology is better understood by reference to the following example. In this scenario, there are two signers, S1 and S2, and four documents subject to the system process, D1, D2, D3 and D4. S1 is asked to sign D1 and D2. S2 is asked to sign D1 and enter data on D4. The resulting behavior in this scenario, according to one embodiment of the present invention, is that S1 will see documents D1, D2 and D3, while S2 will see documents D1, D3 and D4.


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 in a server computer connected to a recipient computer system via a network connection, the method comprising: establishing a visibility policy that governs access to electronic documents associated with a signing ceremony, by: allowing a recipient to view an electronic document, if the document includes an instruction for that recipient to view the electronic document;allowing all recipients to view an electronic document, if the document does not include any viewing instructions;receiving at the server computer a request from a recipient to download a copy of the electronic documents associated with the recipient; anddownloading to the recipient computer system only electronic documents that were identified as viewable during the signing ceremony.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising disallowing a first recipient to view an electronic document, if the document includes an instruction for a second recipient to view the document but does not include an instruction for the first recipient to view the document.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, further comprising rejecting creation of an envelope for an electronic document that contains a signature/initial task for a first recipient, if the envelope includes a second recipient without a signature/initial task on the document.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, further comprising allowing creation of an envelope for an electronic document, if the document does not contain any signature/initial tasks for any recipients.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising allowing predetermined certified delivery recipients and/or carbon copy recipients to view all electronic documents in an envelope.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, further comprising dynamically suppressing access to a certificate of completion and/or envelope history for one or more of: document signers, certified delivery recipients, and carbon copy recipients.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising allowing a sender of an envelope to view all documents in the envelope.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, further comprising designating whether all members of a sending account can view all of the electronic documents associated with the signing ceremony or whether the members of the sending account are subject to the visibility policy.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein establishing the visibility policy is based on tabs placed on the electronic documents associated with the signing ceremony.
  • 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the electronic documents associated with the signing ceremony are represented in portable document format.
  • 11. The method of claim 1, wherein downloading to the recipient computer system only electronic documents that were identified as viewable during the signing ceremony includes downloading the electronic documents via a web interface.
  • 12. A system comprising: a server computer connected to a recipient computer system via a network connection, the server computer configured to establish a visibility policy that governs access to electronic documents associated with a signing ceremony, by: allowing a recipient to view an electronic document, if the document includes an instruction for that recipient to view the electronic document;allowing all recipients to view an electronic document, if the document does not include any viewing instructions;receiving at the server computer a request from a recipient to download a copy of the electronic documents associated with the recipient; anddownloading to the recipient computer system only electronic documents that were identified as viewable during the signing ceremony.
  • 13. The system of claim 12, wherein the server computer is further configured to: reject creation of an envelope for an electronic document that contains a signature/initial task for a first recipient, if the envelope includes a second recipient without a signature/initial task on the document; andallow creation of an envelope for an electronic document, if the document does not contain any signature/initial tasks for any recipients.
  • 14. The system of claim 12, wherein the server computer is further configured to based on the visibility policy, suppress access to a certificate of completion and/or envelope history for one or more of: document signers, certified delivery recipients, and carbon copy recipients.
  • 15. The system of claim 12, wherein the server computer includes a web interface for downloading the electronic documents associated with a signing ceremony, wherein the electronic documents associated with the signing ceremony are represented in portable document format, and wherein the visibility policy is based on tabs placed on the electronic documents associated with the signing ceremony.
PRIORITY CLAIM

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/160,237 filed Mar. 13, 2009; contents of which are incorporated herein.

US Referenced Citations (68)
Number Name Date Kind
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
5872848 Romney et al. Feb 1999 A
5898156 Wilfong Apr 1999 A
6021202 Anderson et al. Feb 2000 A
6085322 Romney et al. Jul 2000 A
6119229 Martinez et al. Sep 2000 A
6128740 Curry et al. Oct 2000 A
6185683 Ginter et al. Feb 2001 B1
6199052 Mitty et al. Mar 2001 B1
6210276 Mullins Apr 2001 B1
6289460 Hajmiragha Sep 2001 B1
6321333 Murray Nov 2001 B1
6327656 Zabetian Dec 2001 B2
6367010 Venkatram et al. Apr 2002 B1
6367013 Bisbee et al. Apr 2002 B1
6470448 Kuroda et al. Oct 2002 B1
6584466 Serbinis et al. Jun 2003 B1
6615348 Gibbs Sep 2003 B1
6658403 Kuroda et al. Dec 2003 B1
6671805 Brown et al. Dec 2003 B1
6751632 Petrogiannis Jun 2004 B1
6796489 Slater et al. Sep 2004 B2
6807633 Pavlik Oct 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
6961854 Serret-Avila et al. Nov 2005 B2
7069443 Berringer et al. Jun 2006 B2
7100045 Yamada et al. Aug 2006 B2
7162635 Bisbee et al. Jan 2007 B2
7237114 Rosenberg Jun 2007 B1
7340608 Laurie et al. Mar 2008 B2
7360079 Wall Apr 2008 B2
7395436 Nemovicher Jul 2008 B1
7523315 Hougaard et al. Apr 2009 B2
7533268 Catorcini et al. May 2009 B1
7554576 Erol et al. Jun 2009 B2
7562053 Twining et al. Jul 2009 B2
7568101 Catorcini et al. Jul 2009 B1
7568104 Berryman et al. Jul 2009 B2
7581105 Dietl Aug 2009 B2
20020019937 Edstrom et al. Feb 2002 A1
20030078880 Alley et al. Apr 2003 A1
20040133493 Ford et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040225884 Lorenzini et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040250070 Wong Dec 2004 A1
20060205476 Jubinville Sep 2006 A1
20060261545 Rogers Nov 2006 A1
20070026927 Yaldoo et al. Feb 2007 A1
20080034213 Boemker et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080097777 Rielo Apr 2008 A1
20080209313 Gonser Aug 2008 A1
20090024912 McCabe et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090025087 Peirson, Jr. et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090292786 McCabe et al. Nov 2009 A1
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20100287260 A1 Nov 2010 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
61160237 Mar 2009 US