U.S. patent application number 10/842766 was filed with the patent office on 2004-10-21 for system and method for providing complete non-judical dispute resolution management and operation.
This patent application is currently assigned to CLICKNSETTLE.COM, INC.. Invention is credited to Israel, Roy, Specht, Willem F..
Application Number | 20040210540 10/842766 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 32719763 |
Filed Date | 2004-10-21 |
United States Patent
Application |
20040210540 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Israel, Roy ; et
al. |
October 21, 2004 |
System and method for providing complete non-judical dispute
resolution management and operation
Abstract
A system and method for providing complete non-judicial dispute
resolution management and operation. The system includes an
electronic architecture which receives, sorts, and stores data
related to non-judicial dispute resolution. The architecture
enables implementation and management of a full range of
non-judicial dispute resolution procedures between two or more
adverse parties to a dispute. The system is accessible
electronically by wired and/or wireless communications. The
architecture includes a management module which is configured to
receive, sort and store dispute resolution data and to provide an
internal continuous compilation of such data and new data generated
during non-judicial dispute resolution procedures. The architecture
also includes a reckoning module connected to the management module
for receipt of dispute resolution data. The reckoning module is
designed to implement a selected resolution procedure and to
transmit to the management new data generated during the resolution
procedure.
Inventors: |
Israel, Roy; (Roslyn
Heights, NY) ; Specht, Willem F.; (Merrick,
NY) |
Correspondence
Address: |
HOFFMANN & BARON, LLP
6900 JERICHO TURNPIKE
SYOSSET
NY
11791
US
|
Assignee: |
CLICKNSETTLE.COM, INC.
|
Family ID: |
32719763 |
Appl. No.: |
10/842766 |
Filed: |
May 11, 2004 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
10842766 |
May 11, 2004 |
|
|
|
09568674 |
May 11, 2000 |
|
|
|
6766307 |
|
|
|
|
60133441 |
May 11, 1999 |
|
|
|
60141650 |
Jun 29, 1999 |
|
|
|
60145158 |
Jul 22, 1999 |
|
|
|
60146677 |
Aug 2, 1999 |
|
|
|
60156169 |
Sep 27, 1999 |
|
|
|
60177133 |
Jan 20, 2000 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
705/80 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06Q 40/04 20130101;
G06Q 50/188 20130101; G06Q 50/182 20130101; G06Q 10/10
20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
705/080 |
International
Class: |
H04L 009/00; G06F
017/60 |
Claims
1-62. (Cancelled)
63. An on-line real-time updated database comprising: a management
module configured to receive, sort and store dispute resolution
data and to provide an internal continuous compilation of said data
into searchable records, said management module updating said
searchable records in response to changes or additions to said
compilation of data.
64. A storage and retrieval system comprising: a claims-data
storage and retrieval database, said database configured to
receive, sort, compile, store, and make available for retrieval by
categories, dispute resolution data requested to be forwarded to
said database by users of said storage and retrieval system; and
wherein only said users forwarding said data are given access to
retrieve said data.
65. A system as described in claim 64 wherein said storage and
retrieval system data is sorted, compiled, arranged and stored such
that said data is confidential.
66-185. (Cancelled)
186. An on-line updated database comprising: a management module
configured to receive, sort and store dispute resolution data and
to provide an internal continuous compilation of said data into
searchable records, said management module updating said searchable
records in response to changes or additions to said compilation of
data.
187. A database as described in claim 186, wherein dispute
resolution data is received from at least one of a receiving and
submitting party to a dispute, the at least one of the receiving
and submitting party accessing and managing the dispute resolution
data.
188. A database as described in claim 186, wherein said dispute
resolution date includes user registration information.
189. A database as describe in claim 186, wherein said database is
accessible via the Internet.
190. A database as described in claim 189, said database being
accessible via a hot link embedded within a web site operated by a
web site entity.
191. A database as described in claim 190, wherein said management
module is configured to track, store, and report disputes related
to one of a purchaser, a vendor and the web site entity providing
access to the hot link.
192. A database as described in claim 186, wherein said database is
accessible electronically.
193. A database as described in claim 186, wherein said system is
accessible via wireless communication.
194. A database as described in claim 193, wherein said wireless
communication operates at at least one of a radio frequency, a
microwave frequency, a UHF and other frequencies selected from the
electromagnetic spectrum.
195. A database as described in claim 186, wherein said management
module retrieves, sorts and transmits data from the updated
database in response to a query.
196. A database as described in claim 186, wherein said management
module is configured to sort said dispute resolution data by at
least one category.
197. A database as described in claim 196, wherein the at least one
category is one of a type of dispute, caption, status of dispute,
claimant and defendant.
198. A database as described in claim 196, wherein said management
module is configured to generate a report of said dispute
resolution data sorted by the at least one category.
199. A database as described in claim 186, wherein said management
module is configured to search said searchable records by at least
one field.
200. A database as described in claim 199, wherein the at least one
field is one of a type of dispute, caption, status of dispute,
claimant and defendant.
201. A storage and retrieval system comprising: a claims-data
storage and retrieval database, said database configured to
receive, sort, compile, store, and make available for retrieval by
categories, dispute resolution data.
202. A system as described in claim 201, wherein said storage and
retrieval system data is sorted, compiled, arranged and stored such
that identity of a user entering said data is kept
confidential.
203. A system as described in claim 201, wherein said storage and
retrieval system is accessible only to a user who is agreeing to
provide data which relate to all disputes associated with said
user, in exchange for gaining access to data in said claims-data
storage and retrieval database.
204. A system as described in claim 201, further comprising: a
management module configured to receive, sort and store said
dispute resolution data and to provide an internal continuous
compilation of said dispute resolution data into searchable
records, said management module updating said searchable records in
response to changes or additions to said compilation of dispute
resolution data; and wherein said storage and retrieval system is
accessible through said management module to a user who agrees to
provide data from said management module to said storage and
retrieval system which relate to all disputes associated with said
user.
205. A system as described in claim 201, wherein said storage and
retrieval system is accessible electronically.
206. A system as described in claim 201, wherein said system is
accessible via the Internet.
207. A system as described in claim 206, wherein said system is
accessed via a link embedded within a web site of another
entity.
208. A system as described in claim 201, wherein said system is
accessible via wireless communication.
209. A system as described in claim 208, wherein said wireless
communication operates at at least one of a radio frequency, a
microwave frequency, a UHF and other frequencies selected from the
electromagnetic spectrum.
210. A system as described in claim 201, wherein said categories
include at least one of a descriptive nature of the dispute,
settlement amount, venue, relevant criteria of the dispute, sex,
age, occupation, and any combination of one or more of said
categories.
211. A system as described in claim 210, wherein relevant criteria
of the dispute include at least one of type of injury and body part
injured, the dispute being a personal injury dispute.
212. A method of maintaining an on-line database for managing
non-judicial dispute resolutions, comprising the steps of
receiving, sorting, and storing dispute resolution data.
213. The method of claim 212, further comprising receiving at least
one of modifications and additions to the dispute resolution data
and continuously compiling dispute resolution data into searchable
records.
214. The method of claim 212, wherein the dispute resolution data
includes user registration information.
215. The method of claim 212, further comprising accessing said
database via the Internet.
216. The method of claim 215, comprising accessing said database
via a hot link embedded within a web site operated by a web site
entity.
217. The method of claim 216, the method including at least one of
tracking, storing, and reporting disputes related to one of a
purchaser, a vendor, and the web site entity providing access to
the hot link.
218. The method of claim 212, further comprising accessing said
database electronically.
219. The method of claim 212, further comprising accessing said
database via wireless communication.
220. The method of claim 219, further comprising operating said
wireless communication at at least one of a radio frequency, a
microwave, a UHF and other frequencies selected from the
electromagnetic spectrum.
221. The method of claim 212, wherein the steps of retrieving and
sorting data are performed in response to a query.
222. The method of claim 212, further comprising sorting said
dispute resolution data by at least one category.
223. The method of claim 222, wherein the at least one category is
at least one of a type of dispute, caption, status of dispute,
claimant and defendant.
224. The method of claim 222, further comprising generating a
report of said dispute resolution data sorted by the at least one
category.
225. The method of claim 212, further comprising searching said
searchable records by at least one field.
226. The method of claim 225, wherein the at least one field is at
least one of a type of dispute, caption, status of dispute,
claimant and defendant.
227. A method of maintaining a storage and retrieval system,
wherein said system comprises a claims-data storage and retrieval
database, the method comprising the steps of configuring said
database to receive, sort, compile, store, and make available for
retrieval by categories, dispute resolution data.
228. The method of claim 227, further comprising providing access
to said system only to users forwarding said dispute resolution
data to said database.
229. The method of claim 227, wherein said categories include at
least one of descriptive nature of the dispute, settlement amount,
venue, relevant criteria of the dispute, sex, age, occupation, and
any combination of one or more of said categories.
230. The method of claim 229, wherein said relevant criteria of the
dispute include at least one of type of injury and body part
injured, the dispute being a personal injury dispute.
231. The method of claim 227, said storage and retrieval system
being accessible electronically.
232. The method of claim 227, further comprising accessing said
system via the Internet.
233. The method of claim 232, further comprising accessing said
system via a link embedded within a web site of another entity.
234. The method of claim 227, further comprising accessing said
system via wireless communication.
235. The method of claim 234, further comprising operating said
wireless communication at at least one of a radio frequency, a
microwave frequency, a UHF and other frequencies selected from the
electromagnetic spectrum.
236. The method of claim 227, further comprising maintaining
confidentiality of users entering said dispute resolution data.
237. A method of maintaining a storage and retrieval system
comprising a claims-data storage and retrieval database of a
plurality of disputes, the method comprising receiving, storing,
and compiling dispute resolution data from the plurality of
disputes and sorting and making available said dispute resolution
data by quantifying criteria.
238. The method of claim 237, further comprising continuously
compiling said dispute resolution data into searchable records and
generating reports in response to changes or additions to said
dispute resolution data.
239. The method of claim 238, wherein the quantifying criteria
include at least one of a number of disputes, a number of disputes
settled, and an average monetary value of disputes settled, and a
total monetary value of disputes settled.
240. The method of claim 238, further comprising sorting said
dispute resolution data by qualifying criteria and configuring said
storage and retrieval system to generate a report thereto.
241. The method of claim 240, wherein the qualifying criteria
include at least one of an opposing party, a user, a dispute
resolution type, and a venue.
242. The method of claim 237, further comprising accessing said
system via the Internet.
243. The method of claim 242, further comprising accessing said
system via a link embedded within a web site of another entity.
244. The method of claim 237, further comprising accessing said
system electronically.
245. A method of maintaining a storage and retrieval system
comprising a claims-data storage and retrieval database of a
plurality of disputes, the method comprising receiving, sorting,
storing, and compiling dispute resolution data from the plurality
of disputes, and continuously compiling said dispute resolution
data into searchable records in response to changes or additions to
said dispute resolution data, wherein said dispute resolution data
is sorted by quantifying criteria selected by a user.
246. The method of claim 245, further comprising configuring said
storage and retrieval system to generate a report of the plurality
of disputes in accordance with said quantifying criteria.
247. The method of claim 245, wherein said quantifying criteria
include at least one of a number of disputes, a number of disputes
settled, an average monetary value of dispute settled, and a total
monetary value of dispute settled.
248. The method of claim 245, further comprising sorting said
dispute resolution by qualifying criteria and configuring the
storage and retrieval system to generate a report thereto.
249. The method of claim 248, wherein the qualifying criteria
include at least one of an opposing party, a user, a dispute
resolution type, and a venue.
250. The method of claim 245, further comprising accessing said
system via the Internet.
251. The method of claim 250, further comprising accessing said
system via a link embedded within a web site of another entity.
252. The method of claim 245, further comprising accessing said
system electronically.
253. The method of claim 245, further comprising accessing said
system via wireless communication.
254. The method of claim 253, further comprising operating said
wireless communication at at least one of a radio frequency, a
microwave frequency, a UHF and other frequencies selected from the
electromagnetic spectrum.
Description
[0001] The present application claims priority to six (6)
provisional applications identified as follows: U.S. application
Ser. No. 60/133,441, filed May 11, 1999; U.S. application Ser. No.
60/141,650, filed Jun. 29, 1999; U.S. application Ser. No.
60/145,158, filed Jul. 22, 1999; U.S. application Ser. No.
60/146,677, filed Aug. 2, 1999; U.S. application Ser. No.
60/156,169, filed Sep. 27, 1999; and U.S. application Ser. No.
60/177,133, filed Jan. 20, 2000. Each of these earlier filed
provisional applications are incorporated herein by reference.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0002] The present invention relates generally to dispute
resolution and more specifically relates to a system for providing
complete non-judicial dispute resolution management and
procedures.
[0003] There are numerous conventional means whereby parties
involved in a legal dispute may attempt to resolve such dispute, or
settle the case. These means include, for example, using the public
court system (including small claims court), or non-judicial
dispute resolution. However, the public's confidence in the court
system seems to have deteriorated over the years. Moreover, the
time required to bring a dispute to resolution has become
inordinately long. Finally, and perhaps most import of all, the
costs associated with a litigation are very high and, in many
cases, discourage a legitimate complainant from seeking redress.
Consequently, parties and, thus, the legal community have
continuously sought to find "a better way" to resolve disputes than
through the courts.
[0004] In the age of computerization, attempts have been made
within the legal community to streamline handling of disputes on
behalf of claimants. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,956,687 to
Wamsley, et al. discloses a technique for computerized management
of a plaintiffs personal injury case. The technique includes
establishing works reflective of each phase of a personal injury
claim, including a pre-negotiation phase, a technique to generate a
demand letter and calculate settlement amounts based on information
gathered in the record during handling of the claim. However, the
Wamsley, et al. "Personal Injury Claim Management System" does not
provide an architecture for operation and management of
non-judicially handled claims, and, thus, is sorely bereft of the
capacity to service a significant number of disputes arising in our
society. (In the context of the present invention, "non-judicial"
means originated and/or handled outside of the court
system--although a court may be involved at some point in the
dispute, e.g., to sign a document, order implementation, etc).
[0005] In recent years the attempt to bypass the judicial system
has resulted in systems and organizations to settle cases without
going to court. As part of procedures developed to carry out
settlement, parties have been offered the ability to have a dispute
mediated, usually by a third party who can be referred to as a
mediator. Mediation permits each party to tell its story and even
propose a settlement figure when appropriate (which can be made
known or kept secret by the mediator).
[0006] Another method of resolving a dispute outside the courts is
by arbitration. Arbitration can be carried out by a single
arbitrator or by a panel of arbitrators. The procedure used for
arbitration can be somewhat complex, depending on the rules of
arbitration agreed to by the parties. The level of participation by
a mediator or an arbitrator (or panel of arbitrators) can vary
widely depending on the scenario selected by the parties.
Generally, this rather wide range of unspecified possibilities has
been referred to as alternative dispute resolution (ADR).
[0007] As part of ADR, or adjunct thereto, parties have, from time
to time, participated in blind-bid scenarios which mean that each
party to a dispute submits a bid without the other party(ies)
knowing its bid. The bids are evaluated with a view to settling the
dispute. If the bids are sufficiently close or fall within a
pre-arranged relationship, the dispute can be settled. If not,
additional bidding can be provoked. Bid reception and evaluation
can be effected by a judge, a mediator, an arbitrator, or even
electronically. See, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,7615,269 to
Micali, which describes an electronic communications method for
resolving a transaction when bids from at least two parties come
within a predetermined relationship. Similarly, an on-line dispute
resolution company, CyberSettle.Com Inc., has made available a web
site which accepts three (3) bids from each party, compares the
bids to determine whether they are within an agreed-upon range, and
reports settlement or provokes a "last chance" bid.
[0008] In any event, even use of the extensive array of
non-judicial dispute resolution techniques can prove to be unwieldy
and/or cost-ineffective, especially from the perspective of an
organization such as an insurance company and/or claims department
and/or law firm which handles many (and varied) disputes on behalf
of one or more parties. Non-judicial dispute resolution includes so
many possible procedural schemes that it unduly complicates
standard claim handling in a traditional judicial agency such as
those enumerated in the previous sentence. Thus, there is a
tremendous need for providing a system whereby a complete array of
non-judicial dispute resolution techniques are simultaneously made
available and managed.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0009] The present invention is a unique system which enables
adverse parties to conduct and manage a full array of non-judicial
dispute resolution. The present invention includes an electronic
architecture which receives, sorts, and stores data related to
non-judicial dispute resolution. This architecture enables
implementation and management of a full range of non-judicial
dispute resolution procedures between two or more adverse parties
to a dispute. "Full range of non-judicial dispute resolution
procedures" includes bid-style negotiations, mediation, and
arbitration.
[0010] The system can be accessible electronically via wired and/or
wireless communications, and is preferably accessible via the
internet. In one particular embodiment, the system is accessible
over the internet via a link provided in a web site of another
entity. When wireless communications is used for access, any viable
frequencies available from the electromagnetic spectrum can be
used, e.g., radio frequency, microwave, UHF, and other
frequencies.
[0011] The architecture itself includes a management module,
configured to receive, sort and store dispute resolution data and
to provide internal continuous compilation of such data and new
data generated during non-judicial dispute resolution
procedures.
[0012] The architecture also includes a reckoning module connected
to and/or electronically associated with (e.g., including a
computerized relationship) the management module for receipt of
dispute resolution data, and is designed to implement a selected
resolution procedure and to transmit to the management module new
data generated during a resolution procedure.
[0013] The system can be accessed in response to the biographical
data input by at least one of the parties. The biographical data
can include personal and/or organization-identification information
and/or one or more of an account number, username, a password,
etc., and can be verified by the system.
[0014] In one embodiment, the access is a tiered leveled access
having at least a program manager access and a program user access.
The program manager access can include a plurality of selectable
actions such as, for example and not limited hereby, adding users,
modifying existing user data, transferring active cases from one
user to another, activating users, modifying account registration
data, browsing all disputes, generating detailed dispute reports,
generating summary reports of disputes, browsing dispute resolution
cases, as well as other actions which are used by a manager of
non-judicial dispute resolutions, and any combination of one or
more of the foregoing. The management module can provide relevant
data to a program manager in response to an appropriate signal
selected by the program manager.
[0015] In the case of program user access, a plurality of
selectable options can be made available such as, e.g., adding a
dispute, responding to a dispute, browsing disputes, generating
dispute reports, generating summary reports, as well as any other
options required by a case manager of a dispute and any
combinations of one or more of such options. Other options can be
included and the possibilities are not limited by those set forth
above. The management module provides relevant data to the program
user in response to the options selected by the user.
[0016] A further aspect of the present architecture is an
administrative personnel access which enables required
administrative personnel to select from one of a plurality of
selectable choices. Such choices can include, but is not limited
to, informing the parties of disputes submitted to the system which
request their response, informing users of settled disputes,
marking disputes active, generating prior dispute lists, generating
activity reports for the system, providing billing information,
generating summary reports for any or all accounts within the
system, generating audit reports to ensure that the system is
functioning properly, and any other choices required of an
administrative personnel, and any combination of the foregoing. The
management module provides relevant data to the administrative
personnel in response to one or more of the choices selected by
such personnel.
[0017] The management module of the present invention can also
provide operational support to be used in connection the non
judicial proceeding(s). For example, the system can provide
reporting services in the event the proceedings require such
services, e.g., in the event mediation or arbitration proceedings
requiring a "record" are used. The reporting services can be called
upon for both on-line and off-line proceedings, and can include
stenographic services, and all types of electronic reporting
services such as audio, video, etc.
[0018] Another operational support available in the present
invention is translation services and/or interpretation services.
This support can also be rendered on-line or off-line, and can be
made available for all types of non-judicial proceedings and
possible in the present system.
[0019] Yet another operational support provided in the management
module of the present invention is a vast array of structure
settlement arrangements. For example, and are not limited hereby, a
settlement arrangement can be structured for a pay out over time
and/or fully funded by a third party (e.g., lending institution,
factor, etc.). Moreover, the structured settlement feature of the
invention can be made available at any time before, during, and/or
after the non-judicial resolution proceeding(s).
[0020] The architecture also provides to the user a "settle-only"
access. "Settle-only" access enables a party to a dispute to access
the system for purposes of only attempting to resolve that dispute
via the system and does not allow access to the management
capabilities of the system. However, all data input by a
"settle-only" user is routed through the management module for
proper storage of data. Therefore, in response to settle-only
access by a user, the management module provides relevant data to
the reckoning module. Moreover, the system displays only the
relevant data to a settle-only access user.
[0021] The architecture of the present invention further includes a
claims-data storage and retrieval system which retains data
relating to non-judicial dispute resolution and enables retrieval
of data by category. The categories in the retrieval system
include, but are not limited to, description of the nature of the
dispute, settlement amount, venue, type of injury, body part
injured, sex, age, occupation, geographical data, and any
combination of one or more of the foregoing categories, and any
other information capable of being stored in a data bank in an
electronic system, e.g., computer system. Preferably the storage
and retrieval system data is confidential.
[0022] Once the mode of non-judicial dispute resolution is
selected, the management module provides relevant data to the
reckoning module in response to the selection by one or both of the
parties. When the resolution procedure is a bid-style negotiation,
one or both of the parties can select either a "blind bid" or an
"open bid" type of negotiation.
[0023] A profile prompter prompts a party selecting a dispute
resolution procedure to indicate whether or not it is a plaintiff
and/or defendant. The responding party also provides information in
response to a prompt indicating the profile of the responding
party. Depending on who the party is, i.e., plaintiff or defendant,
the party then provides either a demand (as a plaintiff) or an
offer (as a defendant).
[0024] "Demands" and "offers" and "bids" as used herein can include
any matter which can be construed as "consideration" sufficient to
support a promise or a contract. Consideration is something of
value, e.g., an advantage, however slight, to one party, or an
inconvenience, even though trifling, to one party. Consideration
(considered as a proffer synonymously herein with "bid," demand,"
and "offer") can be, but is not limited to, monetary and
non-monetary assets, ownership rights, personal rights, custody
rights, liability and percentages thereof, etc.
[0025] Furthermore, the reckoning module preferably provides a
pre-selected criteria for comparing the demand and the offer to
determine whether or not the dispute can be resolved. If the
pre-selected criteria is satisfied, the system can send a
notification to the plaintiff and/or defendant of resolution.
[0026] Of the pre-selected criteria, the system can resolve the
dispute for the value of the demand if the value of the demand is
less than or equal to the offer, or, for the average between the
demand and the offer if the demand is within a pre-selected
percentage of the offer. For example, a pre-selected percentage
range can be from about 5% to about 35%.
[0027] The system can also ask that the defendant provide a high
value and low value to establish a resolution range. In this case,
the dispute can be resolved for the value of the demand if the
demand is between the high value and the low value of the range,
or, for the low value of the resolution range if the demand is
equal to or less than the low value. In this case, the low value
can be a fixed value whereas the high value can be a changing
value.
[0028] Other non-judicial dispute resolution procedures include
on-line mediation and arbitration and off-line mediation and
arbitration. On-line proceedings can be real time such that all
parties and a mediator(s) or arbitrator(s) are in communication
simultaneously. On-line proceedings are not limited to a real time
scenario, and can be conducted via a format which permits delayed
responses. Such formats can include, but are not limited to, chat
room(s), bulletin board(s), etc. Off-line proceedings can be
"in-person" and "not-in-person." In all of the aforementioned
proceedings relevant material, such as evidence, can be transmitted
electronically, again via wire and/or wireless communication (each
party can also submit material via mail, delivery service, courier,
etc.). Moreover, all or even a portion of the proceedings can be
conducted via video transmission.
[0029] As the resolution procedure progresses, the reckoning module
transmits new dated generated to the management module for
compiling, sorting and storing. When the non-judicial dispute
resolution procedure is a mediation, the management module provides
relevant data to a mediator in response to a mediation selection.
The mediation can be real-time on-line mediation wherein
information (evidence or otherwise ) can be transmitted to the
mediator electronically, e.g., by fax, by phone, video, and by
computer (e-mail) when available, etc. When the mediation is
off-line, at least some of the necessary information can be
transmitted on-line by the same modes set forth above.
[0030] Similarly, when the non-judicial dispute resolution
procedure is an arbitration, the management module provides
relevant data to an arbitrator, or a board of arbitrators, in
response to the selection to arbitrate. When the arbitration is
real-time on-line arbitration, information (which can include
evidence) can be sent electronically by telephone, fax, video and
via computer (e-mail) when available, etc. When the arbitration is
off-line, at least some of the information can be sent on-line by
electronic communications.
[0031] It should be fully noted, that the system provides the
ability of the non-judicial dispute resolution in the present case
to respond to an election by one or more of the parties to move to
a different non-judicial dispute resolution procedure regardless of
the one which is chosen first. The election to go to a different
resolution procedure can be made, for example, because the first
method chosen has not succeeded.
[0032] Thus, one or more of the parties can enter into a bid-style
negotiation which may not succeed; advance to a mediated (on or
off-line); and/or move to an on or off-line arbitration proceeding.
This entire procedure can be conducted seamlessly, that is to say
without re-entry of data previously provided. Moreover, by command
of the parties, information relating to value of demands and bids
can be kept confidential as the parties proceed from one resolution
procedure to another. Consequently, a case manager can take
advantage of a full range of non-judicial dispute resolution
techniques and have the ability to fully manage the case in each,
and in all, of the different procedures selected.
[0033] While any fee structure can be provided for accessing and
using the present invention, a preferred embodiment contemplates a
fee structure which financially encourages each of the parties to
resolve the dispute. One such structure requires each party to pay
a certain amount to participate in the resolution proceeding(s).
Thus, the plaintiff must pay a fee for submission of each demand
and the defendant must pay a fee for submission of each offer.
These fees can also be graduated to correspond to the financial
magnitude of the dispute, e.g., a "dog bite" case to a serious
injury or even a death case. A variety of schemes can be employed,
but this feature of the invention financially rewards resolution
and financially penalizes non-resolution by fee structure.
[0034] The present invention also includes separate aspects of the
system which are unique to managing and conducting non-judicial
dispute resolution, such as the system for managing the
non-judicial dispute resolution separately (another aspect of it is
the electronic architecture for managing non-judicial dispute
resolution). Furthermore, the present invention includes the
concept of maintaining an on-line real-time updated database for
managing non-judicial dispute resolutions which includes the
management module configured as described above, e.g., to receive,
sort and store dispute resolution data and to provide internal
continuous compilation of the data into searchable records. This
management module can be updated in response to changes or
additions to said compilation of data.
[0035] Other aspects of the present invention include, separately,
a system for managing non-judicial dispute resolution which
includes an electronic interface along with multiple types of
access to an electronic architecture as described hereinabove.
[0036] The present invention also includes a method of managing
non-judicial dispute resolution by providing and maintaining an
electronic interface having multiple types of access to an
electronic architecture as fully described hereinbefore.
[0037] Another aspect of the method of the present invention
includes managing non-judicial disputes by providing an accessible
architecture set forth above, receiving dispute resolution data
from one or more of the parties, storing the data and prompting the
parties to implement the full range of non-judicial dispute
resolution procedures as also described hereinbefore.
[0038] The present invention also includes a method of managing
non-judicial dispute resolutions by accessing an architecture
having non-judicial dispute resolution data stored therein and
retrieving data relating to the dispute, reviewing the stored data
to determine if an action is needed, and selecting a plurality of
selectable choices and action to be performed with respect to the
data.
[0039] As a result of the present invention, disputants are able to
call upon a full range of dispute resolution techniques without the
necessity of engaging in the judicial process. Tremendous
advantages are available as a result of this new innovation.
[0040] For example, parties no longer are required to avail
themselves of the services of counsel. This advantage reduces
significantly the cost associated with resolving disputes.
Furthermore, in the event the parties do not retain attorneys, at
least two additional personalities to the emotional and
psychological mix of a dispute would be eliminated, thereby
reducing the time usually associated with resolving a dispute.
[0041] Another advantage realized as a result of the present
invention is that organizations charged with the duty of resolving
disputes, e.g., insurance companies, claims departments, law firms,
etc. are now able to manage and conduct non-judicial dispute
resolution without the necessity of having to provide a complete
on-site installation of a non-judicial case management
infrastructure. Such infrastructure usually includes docketing
systems, electronic (e.g., computer) tracking and reminder systems,
etc. The present invention also reduces the need for personal
communication between advocates which are required in the absence
of such a non-judicial dispute resolution system.
[0042] Another advantage of the present invention is the ability to
actively negotiate a high volume of cases in a short period of
time. the present invention virtually eliminates the need to
retrieve and review individual "hard copy" files of cases.
[0043] Thus, applicants have described what are believed to be some
of the advantages of the present invention, but other advantages
will be realized in view of the following detailed description and
drawings provided hereto. The scope of the invention is set forth
in the claims which follow the detailed description.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0044] These and other features and advantages of the present
invention will now be described with reference to the drawings of
certain preferred embodiments, which are intended to illustrate and
not to limit the invention, and in which:
[0045] FIG. 1 is a block diagram of the system of the present
invention;
[0046] FIG. 2 is a block diagram of the architecture of the system
of the present invention;
[0047] FIG. 3 is a flow chart of the steps for accessing the system
of the present invention and various management options available
to a user accessing the system; and
[0048] FIG. 4 is a flow chart of the process for adding a dispute,
and the data related thereto, into the system of the present
invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0049] The present system enables a party to avail itself of a
complete system for managing and engaging in non-judicial dispute
resolution. In a preferred embodiment, a party can even enhance its
ability to successfully settle a dispute in a non-judicial setting
by accessing dispute-settlement information made available by the
present invention.
[0050] A party can access the inventive system by connecting with
it electronically such as, for example, through a web site
maintained on the internet. In order to initialize participation in
system, biographical information is provided by the user (party)
which the system identifies by category, verifies, when
appropriate, records as part of its management function, and
correlates, when appropriate, to a user code identifying such
party. The system, in turn, issues identifying indicia, e.g.,
account number, user name, password, etc.
[0051] Although the purposes of description herein the English
language is used at the interface for directions, instructions,
prompts, results, etc., the present system is not limited by
language and can be adapted to be in any language and/or dialect.
Furthermore, the description herein relies on U.S. dollars in its
examples, but the present invention is not constrained in scope to
a single currency, and can be adapted for use with any
currency.
[0052] When the party is an organization such as a company, a law
firm, municipality, and individual, the system can, as a part of
its management function, provide different levels of identification
and use.
[0053] Thus, a party inputs data corresponding to a non-judicial
dispute resolution, the system sorts, organizes and compiles the
data, and enables the party to avail itself of a full range of
non-judicial dispute resolution procedures. The system also allows
users of the system to organize data corresponding to multiple
disputes, manage that data into a form selected by the user, and
generate reports based on the data from one or more disputes that
have been input into the system to which they are a party. In a
preferred embodiment, the present system allows parties to disputes
to effectively and efficiently input, sort, organize and manage the
data corresponding to disputes, and resolve disputes via the
internet.
[0054] A dispute, as defined in the present invention, relates to a
disagreement or other adversarial relationship between two or more
parties. As referred to herein, the parties to a dispute are
divided into two main classifications, a submitting party, which is
the party who initiates the dispute, and the responding party,
which is the party against whom the dispute is directed and is
invited to participate in the non-judicial dispute resolution
process. Either the submitting or responding party can be plaintiff
or defendant.
[0055] In one management aspect of the present invention, the
submitting party and the responding party access the system and
manage all data records which are related to any and all disputes,
whether settled or not settled, in which they are parties.
[0056] In an operational aspect of the present system, the
submitting party and the responding party to a particular dispute
can take part in a bid style negotiation by entering consideration
into the system for the purpose of reaching a settlement of the
dispute. If and when the bidding process does not resolve the
dispute, the parties can continue without interruption to other
non-judicial dispute resolution procedures, e.g., on or off-line
mediation, arbitration, etc. Alternatively, a party can initiate
the process using another technique and subsequently engage the
bid-style, if desired. These and other aspects of the present
invention will be described in greater detail below.
[0057] The present invention is hereinafter described for use as an
internet web-based system. It will be evident to one skilled in the
art that, given the following detailed description, that the
present invention can be modified for use with any interconnected
network which is linked together by a standard set of protocols
(such as TCP/IP and HTTP) to form a distributed network. While this
type of network is commonly referred to as the Internet, the
present invention is contemplated for use with all variations which
may be made to the internet in the future, including changes and
additions to standard protocols.
[0058] Preferably, the present system is accessed by the user via a
web browser, such as that described above, which is capable of
communicating with the web site or home page which supports and
provides access to the architecture of the present system.
Typically, the web browser of the user is resident within a user
terminal which has a CPU, monitor, keyboard and mouse. The user
instructs the web browser to seek out and display the web site of
the present system. When the web server is accessed, the web site
for the present system is displayed.
[0059] Further, the system of the present invention can be accessed
by providing a "hot link" embedded within the web site of another
entity. With this arrangement, a user, who is actively viewing the
web site of another entity, can easily select the "hot link"
corresponding to the present system. A "hot link" as defined in the
present invention can be an embedded URL code or other indication
means which, with its selection, instructs the web browser of the
user to seek out a specified web page(s) which interact with the
present system. This "hot link" feature is especially useful when
the web site of another entity is engaged in a business where
disputes may occur, such as, for example, a web site which sells
goods or services. The purchaser, vendor or web site entity itself
may wish to provide access to the present system via a "hot link"
as an avenue for submitting, organizing and managing the data
related to the dispute, and for possibly conducting an on-line
settlement of that dispute. The management capabilities of the
present system with relation to organizing, sorting and compiling
the data relating to disputes will be useful for web site entities
in tracking and reporting the disputes that have arisen out of
activities originating from their web site. The reporting and
organizing of this data will enable the web sites to determine if
problems exist with any one particular customer or vendor and their
goods or services.
[0060] After the user accesses the web site and it is displayed, if
the user is a new user to the system, they are directed to register
with the system to obtain an account number, a username and a
password. During the registration process, the user is requested to
input relevant biographical information such as, name, address,
phone number, e-mail, etc. Once the registration data has been
submitted to the system, the system reviews the information and
confirms the validity of the entered data. Review of the
registration data can be effectuated by the system itself, by an
additional dedicated physically distinct computer system, or by an
actual system staff member. As will be appreciated by those skilled
in the art, other forms of registration may be used, including but
not limited to regular mail and electronic mail.
[0061] If an invalid registration is detected, for example, one
which was entered solely out of curiosity, the registration may be
deleted from the system so as to free-up system resources. Once the
information submitted to the system is verified, the username and
password are activated for that user and that user can then access
the system.
[0062] If a user accessing the system already has a username and
password, they can proceed to sign-in. A user attempting to sign-in
to the system is prompted to enter a valid username and password.
When a valid username and password are entered, the user is given
access to the system's management and dispute resolution
capabilities.
[0063] Referring now to the drawings, FIG. 1 shows one embodiment
of the system of the present invention. The system, generally
referred to as 1, is configured for access by one or more user
terminals (UT.sub.1, UT.sub.2, UT.sub.3 . . . UT.sub.n). The user
terminals can be directly linked to the system, or, preferably are
linked to the system via the Internet 2. Preferably, the present
invention resides on a state of the art, high-performance computer
server connected to the Internet via a high speed communications
line. However, it is contemplated that the present system can be
configured for access via other forms of electronic or wireless
communication, such as, radio frequency, microwave, UHF and other
frequencies selected from the electromagnetic spectrum.
[0064] The system of the present invention includes an electronic,
preferably a computer-based, architecture 3 for managing data
relevant to non-judicial dispute resolution, for conducting
non-judicial dispute resolution and/or for transmitting dispute
resolution data for use in any of the non-judicial dispute
resolution procedures. The architecture 3 allows the parties to a
dispute to input the data relevant to the dispute, organize,
compile and store the data, query the data, update the data with
any additional data generated during a resolution procedure via the
system, and generate detailed reports for any and all cases with
which the party requesting the report is a party.
[0065] Management Module
[0066] As is seen with reference to FIG. 2, the architecture 3 of
the present invention includes a management module 5 configured to
receive, sort and retrievably store dispute resolution data and
provide an internal continuous compilation of that data. In
response to received data, the management module 5 identifies,
sorts, compiles, organizes and stores the data in a queryable,
retrievable and transmittable form. In response to received
queries, the management module 5 retrieves, sorts and transmits the
results of the query to the requestor of the data.
[0067] Additionally, the management module 5 is configured to
transmit notices to each party to a dispute regarding a change in
the status of the dispute, the input of additional data in relation
to the dispute, the results of a query of the data contained within
management module, or any other information relating to the dispute
and/or for transmitting the dispute resolution data to the
appropriate entity for mediation and/or arbitration.
[0068] The management module 5 is prompted to send the
notices/information by an appropriate signal generated in response
to receipt of a new dispute, new data for an existing dispute, a
query, or a request for the transmission of the data for mediation
and/or arbitration. The management module 5 preferably, and as
shown in FIG. 2, communicates with the relevant parties to a
dispute by sending an e-mail containing the relevant information.
It is contemplated, however, that the management module may be
configured to send the appropriate notices/information via channels
8 other than, or in addition to e-mail, such as facsimile or
regular mail.
[0069] For example, in context with the preferred embodiment of the
present invention, a dispute is marked as INACTIVE by default upon
entry into the system. If a dispute was submitted by a defendant
the status of the dispute is set to OPEN by default, indicating
that no demands have been placed on it by the plaintiff. If the
dispute was submitted by a plaintiff, the status of the dispute is
set to NO OFFER by default, indicating that no offers have been
placed on it by the defendant.
[0070] Further, upon successful retrieval of the dispute, the
dispute is marked ACTIVE and the status of the dispute is changed
from NO OFFER to OPEN, indicating to the user that demands or
offers may be entered on the dispute.
[0071] In an effort to provide users of the system with the most
up-to-date and pertinent information, the status of the dispute may
be changed to Contacted, Initial Offer, Initial Demand, New Offer,
New Demand, Final Offer, or Final Demand, to name a few.
[0072] The system may also utilize secondary dispute status codes
to provide users with a greater level of detailed information. The
following secondary dispute status codes may be utilized: Letter
Faxed, Left Message, Will Participate, Awaiting Approval, Manual
Submit, No Internet, Negotiate Direct, Seeking Policy Limit, Prior
Negotiation Failed, Going To Trial, Party Declined, Party Treating,
Referred to Mediation, Referred to Arbitration, Limit Reached,
Dispute Change, Settled By Parties, Settled by Mediation, Settled
by Arbitration, or any other applicable identifying terminology.
When a secondary dispute code is changed, the parties are
notified.
[0073] The use of primary and secondary dispute status codes will
allow the users of the system to more efficiently and effectively
obtain detailed reporting information because they can sort the
dispute data by both primary and secondary dispute status
codes.
[0074] The management module of the present invention can also
provide operational support 7 to be used in connection the
non-judicial proceeding(s). For example, the system can provide
reporting services in the event the proceedings require such
services, e.g., in the event mediation or arbitration proceedings
requiring a "record" are used. The reporting services can be called
upon for both on-line and off-line proceedings, and can include
stenographic services, and all types of electronic reporting
services such as audio, video, etc.
[0075] Another operational support available in the present
invention is translation services and/or interpretation services.
This support can also be rendered on-line or off-line, and can be
made available for all types of non-judicial proceedings possible
in the present system.
[0076] Yet another operational support provided in the management
module of the present invention is a vast array of structure
settlement arrangements. For example, and not limited hereby, a
settlement arrangement can be structured for a pay out over time
and/or fully funded by a third party (e.g., lending institution,
factor, etc.). Moreover, the structured settlement feature of the
invention can be made available at any time before, during, and/or
after the non-judicial resolution proceeding(s).
[0077] To enable the desired operational support, the user selects
the appropriate support needed when accessing the system's
management module.
[0078] With the continuous compilation, organization and
retrievable storage of data by the management module 5, a user can
easily access the present system to manage all dispute related
data, to facilitate an organized transmission of the data for
mediation and/or arbitration, or to actually conduct non-judicial
dispute resolution.
[0079] There are many types of access to the present system.
Preferably, access to the system is a tiered level access
comprising at least a program manager access and a program user
access. The authority given to each type of access will be
discussed in greater detail below.
[0080] It should be noted that the Program Managers and the Program
Users access the system typically for the same account. Generally,
the Program Managers are individuals at a company, law firm,
municipality, etc. (which can be referred to, along with an
individual, herein as an "account") who are responsible for
maintaining the account with the present system, such as an office
manager or information systems personnel. The Program Users are
individuals within those companies, law firms, municipalities,
etc., who have authority to settle the disputes, such as attorneys
or insurance company representatives. Although this is generally
the hierarchy within the system, this does not mean that any one
individual can not be both a Program Manager and a Program
User.
[0081] Program Manager Access
[0082] Program Managers manage the Program Users and have access to
view and prepare reports for each separate dispute or all disputes
submitted for their particular account.
[0083] As seen in FIG. 3, when granted access to the system as a
Program Manager, the system prompts the user to select from a
plurality of selectable actions 24 from a Program Manager Page of
the web site. Depending upon the authority given to the Program
Manager, the information and selectable actions provided on the
Program Manager Page will vary. These selectable actions may
include, for example, add additional users 26, modify the existing
user data 27, transfer active cases from one user to another user
28, deactivate users 29, modify any account registration data 30,
browse all disputes 31, generate detailed dispute reports for all
disputes 32, generate summary reports 33, browse all dispute
resolution cases 34, send the system an e-mail 35, and log-off the
system 36, and any combination of these actions, or any additional
actions which may be provided.
[0084] When an action is selected at 25, an appropriate signal is
sent to the management module of the system. Upon receipt of the
signal, the management module will search the dispute resolution
data stored therein for the relevant information, gather that
information, sort it into an appropriate form and transmit it to
the Program Manager. The relevant information retrieved by the
management module will be dependent upon the signal sent by the
Program Manager. In other words, each action chosen will be
associated with a different query of the dispute resolution data
stored within the management module and therefore, retrieve
different amounts, quantities and types of information.
[0085] In the preferred embodiment of the present system, and as
shown in FIG. 3, the Program Manager Page offers the following
selectable actions to a Program Manager:
[0086] Adding Program Users
[0087] Before any Program User may begin to enter disputes into the
system, they must be given access to the system by the Program
Manager. The Program Manager clicks on the "Add User" icon 26 on
the Program Manager Page to access the Add User Form. The Add User
Form prompts the Program Manager for the input of relevant Program
User information such as name of the user, department, telephone
number, e-mail address, etc.
[0088] After entering all relevant user information, the Program
Manager clicks on the "Submit" icon in the Add User Form. After
submitting the information, a confirmation screen appears
indicating that the individual has been added to the system as a
Program User and displays their user name and password. The
password may be randomly generated by the system itself, or it may
be selected by the Program Manager. This information is then
provided to the Program User so that he or she may access the
system.
[0089] Modifying Program Users
[0090] The Program Manager may update Program User data at any
time. The Program Manager clicks on the "Modify User" icon 27 on
the Program Manager Page to access a Program User List, sorted by
User Last Name and User First Name. By clicking on any Program User
listed, an Update User Form appears. Within this form, the Program
Manager may update and change any and all data previously entered
for a Program User. After the appropriate changes have been made,
the Program Manager may save those changes by clicking on the
"Submit" icon within the form. Thereafter, the Program Manager is
notified that the changes have been saved.
[0091] Transferring Active Disputes from one Program User to
Another
[0092] It may be necessary at some point to transfer active
disputes from one Program User to another Program User. This may be
because the Program User has been terminated or is no longer with
the account, or that the Program User is no longer handling dispute
activities. Active disputes are those disputes which are either
entered by or assigned to a Program User wherein the status does
not indicate that the dispute has expired, settled or did not
settle. A more detailed discussion of the status of a dispute will
be provided below.
[0093] Transferring disputes from one Program User to another may
also be used when a Program User has changed from one department to
another within the company, or firm. When a person changes
departments, they may be added to the system as a "new" Program
User with all of their original data, except with a different
listed department. All disputes may then be transferred from the
"old" Program User to the "new" Program User, even though they are
the same User. The "old" User may then be deactivated (discussed in
greater detail below). This procedure allows for the movement of
Program Users from one department to another while, at the same
time, retaining historical data on the disputes assigned to the
"old" User and department.
[0094] To transfer disputes, the Program Manager clicks on the
"Transfer Cases" icon 28 on the Program Manager Page to access the
Transfer Disputes List. The Program Manager then clicks on the
Program User from whom they wish to transfer a dispute(s). If there
are no cases to transfer, a message will appear indicating such. If
there are disputes which can be transferred, a Program User to
Transfer Disputes To List appears. To avoid improper selection of a
Program User to transfer disputes to, the identical Program User
selected is not displayed on this list. The Program Manager then
clicks on the -applicable Program User to transfer the dispute.
Thereafter, the Program Manager will be notified that the
dispute(s) have been successfully transferred from one Program User
to another.
[0095] Deactivating Program Users
[0096] The Program Manager may deactivate a Program User at any
time. For example, a Program User who has no active disputes may be
deactivated. To deactivate a Program User, the Program Manager
clicks on the "Deactivate User" icon 29 on the Program Manager Page
to access the Deactivate User List. From this list, the Program
Manager clicks on the Program User they wish to deactivate. If the
Program User selected still has an active dispute a message will
appear indicating such, and no action will be allowed to be taken.
If the Program User has no active disputes within the system, a
message will be shown to the Program Manager indicating that the
Program User has been deactivated.
[0097] Modifying Account Registration Data
[0098] The Program Manager may, at any time, update the account
registration data. This may be necessary if address, telephone, fax
number, Program Manager, billing contacts, etc., have changed. The
Program Manager clicks on the "Account Data" icon 30 on the Program
Manager Page to access the Update Registration Form. After the
appropriate changes are made, they are saved by clicking on the
"Submit" icon within the form. Thereafter, a message will appear
indicating that the changes have been saved.
[0099] Browsing Account Disputes
[0100] This feature allows the Program Manager to browse and sort
all disputes that have been submitted to the system by all Program
Users within an account. To browse the account data, the Program
Manager clicks on the "Browse Disputes" icon 31 on the Program
Manager Page to access the Browse Disputes List. Preferably, the
Browse Disputes List is displayed to the Program Manager as sorted
by Dispute Status. The system, however, can be configured to have
the list sorted by any desired criteria.
[0101] To display the dispute list by another category, the Program
Manager can simply click on the "Sort By" icon. Thereafter, the
list can be sorted by any category available, such as dispute,
caption, status, claimant, defendant, etc. Additionally, the
Program Manager can sort the list by multiple categories
simultaneously, if desired. After choosing the sort order, the list
will be sorted and displayed accordingly.
[0102] Additionally, the Program Manager may also click on the
"Find Dispute" icon to find a particular dispute. Thereafter, a
Find Dispute Form will appear. The Program Manager then inputs
characters in any or all of the fields in the Find Dispute Form so
that the system can locate the dispute. The fields displayed for
searching are, for example, dispute, caption, claimant, defendant,
etc. By clicking on the "Submit" icon within the form, the system
is prompted to search for any matching disputes and display only
those disputes which match the entered characters.
[0103] Further, at any time the Browse Dispute List is displayed,
detailed data on any particular dispute may be displayed by
clicking on that particular dispute.
[0104] Generating Detailed Account Reports
[0105] Program Managers can also create a viewable and printable
detailed account report on all disputes submitted by all users
within the account. Clicking on the "Reports" icon 32 causes the
Report Form to be displayed. By selecting various criteria and sort
orders, virtually any variation of a report may be generated.
[0106] The criteria used to generate the account reports may
include, in a bodily injury dispute for example, the following: all
departments/one particular department, all Program Users/one
particular Program User, all opposing parties/one particular
opposing party, all dispute types/one particular dispute type, all
venues/one particular venue, all injury types/one particular injury
type, all primary body parts injured/one particular primary body
part injured, all disputes/only active disputes, etc. For other
types of disputes, other relevant criteria may be used to generate
account reports.
[0107] Further, the sort order may be arranged in any desired
manner, such as, for example, department/Program User/dispute;
Program User/dispute; department/Program User/status; Program
User/status; department/Program User/dispute type; Program
User/dispute type; opposing party/claim; and opposing party/status.
The system, however, enables the requested information to be
arranged and displayed in any desired order. After the Report is
generated, the Program Manager can print the Report.
[0108] Generating Summary Account Case Reports
[0109] Program Managers may further elect to create viewable and
printable summary reports on all cases submitted by all users
within the account. Clicking on the "Summaries" icon 33 causes the
Summary Report Menu to be displayed.
[0110] The Program Manager may elect to view summary statistics
sorted, subtotaled and totaled by any of the following qualifying
criteria including, but not limited to: user within department,
user, dispute type, primary injury, primary body part injured,
venue, opposing party, or any other qualifying criteria within the
system. The Program Manager may also elect to view summary
statistics based on any combination of the following quantifying
criteria including, but not limited to: number of disputes, number
of disputes activated, number of disputes engaged, number of
disputes settled, percentage of disputes settled, total monetary
value of disputes settled, average monetary value of disputes
settled, or any other quantifying criteria within the system.
[0111] Browsing All Dispute Resolution Cases
[0112] As stated above, dispute resolution data can be entered into
the system, organized, sorted, compiled and transmitted to the
appropriate personnel for use in mediation and/or arbitration
proceedings.
[0113] To browse the mediation and arbitration cases, the Program
Manager clicks on the "All Cases" icon 34 on the Program Manager
Page to access the All Cases List. By default, the list is sorted
by Case Status. The sorting criteria, however, may be changed to
provide a display customized to the Program Manager's particular
needs.
[0114] Similar to the browsing of account disputes, the Program
Manager clicks on the "Sort By" icon to sort the list. Thereafter,
the system displays the information requested in the sort order
requested. Further, the Program Manager can sort the list by
multiple categories simultaneously, if desired. After choosing the
sort order, the list will be sorted and displayed accordingly.
[0115] Additionally, the Program Manager may also click on the
"Find Case" icon to find a particular case. Thereafter, a Find Case
Form will appear. The Program Manager then inputs characters in any
or all of the fields in the Find Case Form so that the system can
locate any mediation or arbitration cases which match the input
characters. The fields displayed for searching are, for example,
case type, caption, claimant, defendant, etc. By clicking on the
"Submit" icon within the form, a signal is sent to the management
module instructing it to retrieve any matching mediation or
arbitration cases and transmit those cases to the Program
Manager.
[0116] Further, at any time the All Case List is displayed,
detailed data on any particular case may be displayed by clicking
on that particular case.
[0117] Analyzing Hearing Officers for Mediation(s) and/or
Arbitration(s)
[0118] The Program Manager may select to analyze settlement data
for all mediation and/or arbitration cases for a particular Hearing
Officer. The data analyzed may include settlement amounts, award
data, case status, case type, etc. This will allow program managers
to analyze the performance of particular Hearing Officers with
respect to particular case types, or any other information
available.
[0119] Sending an E-Mail
[0120] The Program Manager may click on the E-Mail icon 35 from the
Program Manager Page at any time to send an E-Mail to the system
administrative department. When the E-Mail icon is selected, the
system will automatically set the "Send To" field in users E-Mail
program to the assigned e-mail address for the system
administrative department.
[0121] Logging Off
[0122] The Program Manager may also choose to "Log Off" the system
from the Program Manager Page. To do this, the Program Manager
simply clicks on the Log Off icon 36.
[0123] Preferably, the present system is designed to automatically
log off any Program Manager who has not clicked the mouse or
pressed any key on the keyboard for a pre-set period of time, e.g.,
30 minutes. This automatic log off is setup in order to free
resources to other Program Managers (or Program Users) who may be
actively using the system. When automatically logged-off, a Program
Manager simply needs to log-in again in order to continue working
with the system.
[0124] Program Manager as Program User
[0125] Additionally, and as shown in FIG. 3, the Program Manager
may be provided with access to the system as a Program User 37.
When given such authorization, the Program Manager may access the
Program User Page and all actions 38 given to a Program User. Use
of the system as a Program User is described in detail below.
[0126] Program User Access
[0127] Those persons who are given access to the system as a
Program User are typically the persons who submit disputes and the
data related thereto into the system. However, and as stated above,
a Program Manager may also be given access to the system as a
Program User.
[0128] Program Users are provided with access codes comprising a
user name and a password. Once provided, a Program User can then
log-on to the system. As seen in FIG. 3, when granted access to the
system as a Program User, the user is presented with various
selectable options 38 from a Program User Page of the web site.
Depending upon the authority given to the Program User, the
information and selectable options provided on the Program User
Page will vary. These selectable options may include, for example,
add a dispute 40, respond to a dispute 41, browse disputes 42,
generate summary reports 43, generate dispute reports 44, send the
system an E-Mail 45, log off 46, or any other options with which
the Program User may be allowed to utilize.
[0129] When an option is selected at 39, an appropriate message is
sent to the management module of the system. Upon receipt of the
message, the management module will search the dispute resolution
data stored therein for the relevant information, gather that
information, sort it into an appropriate form and transmit the same
to the Program User. The relevant information retrieved by the
management module will be dependant upon the message sent to it by
the Program User. In other words, each option chosen will be
associated with a different query of the dispute resolution data
stored within the management module and therefore, retrieve
different amounts, quantities and types of information.
[0130] In the preferred embodiment of the present system as shown
in FIG. 3, the Program User Page offers the following selectable
options to a Program User.
[0131] Add and Negotiate a Dispute
[0132] Adding (or submitting) disputes to the system is the primary
activity for a Program User. Program Users begin the process of
adding a dispute by clicking on the Add Dispute icon 40 from the
Program User Page.
[0133] As shown in FIG. 4, after a Program User selects to add a
dispute 40, they are then prompted to select a profile
classification 58 as either a plaintiff or a defendant.
[0134] After selecting the appropriate profile, the user is then
prompted to select at 60, from a displayed general list 59, the
nature of the dispute. The general nature of the dispute can be a
general dispute, a bad loan, a business transaction, construction,
contract, credit card, foreclosure, labor and employment,
landlord/tenant, lender liability, partnership agreement, personal
injury, professional liability, purchase and sale transaction,
rental agreement, intellectual property, subrogation, worker
compensation, or any other cause of action recognized by a judicial
system, whether in the United States or abroad.
[0135] Thereafter the Program User is prompted by the system to
select an Opposing Party at 61 from a list generated from the data
stored in the management module, or a new Opposing Party whose data
is not yet entered into the system.
[0136] Opposing Parties are those individuals, firms or companies
who have accounts with the system or who have been users of the
system. The present system is designed such that every time a
Program User within a particular account adds a new dispute to the
system, data on both the Opposing Party and an individual person
representing that Opposing Party is retained within the management
module of the system. This retaining of information is done for a
number of reasons.
[0137] First, if an additional dispute is added to the system for
that Opposing Party, the data corresponding to that party or
individual will not need to be re-entered, but rather simply
selected. This process of retaining the data will save the user
time in entering disputes into the system. Further, the retained
data is made globally available to all users of the account when
entering a new dispute.
[0138] In addition, by selecting companies and firms as well as
individuals within those companies and firms from a list, reports
may be generated based on those Opposing Parties. This is
particularly advantageous in determining which Opposing Parties
respond to dispute submissions and the analysis of disputes settled
with those Opposing Parties.
[0139] Next, the Program User is prompted at 62 to enter additional
dispute information such as name of case and reference numbers,
etc. The type of dispute information requested will depend upon the
dispute type selected. For example, if the general nature of the
dispute is personal injury, then additional information requested
would be information such as injury type, venue, primary body parts
injured, etc.
[0140] Additionally, for certain types of disputes, computer
generated assist displays will be provided. For example, if the
general nature of the dispute chosen was personal injury as stated
above, then a body parts injured display can be selected by
clicking on an icon. This display will assist the users in
identifying the body parts injured by displaying a human skeleton
from which they may select any number of body parts involved in the
dispute.
[0141] Next, if the Program User wishes to utilize the dispute
resolution capabilities of the present system, they can begin that
procedure by selecting to settle via the system at 63, as shown in
FIG. 4. The procedure for settling a dispute via the system will be
described in greater detail below with reference to the reckoning
module directions.
[0142] When selecting to utilize the resolution capabilities of the
system, the user is prompted at 66 to enter an initial demand if
profiled as a plaintiff, or an initial offer if profiled as a
defendant.
[0143] Next, the system can display at 67, additional system
options which can be selected or entered at 68 by the party
submitting the dispute. The additional system options which may be
selected by the submitted party will be described in greater detail
throughout the present specification.
[0144] Otherwise, if the Program User submitting the dispute wishes
to use the management capabilities of the system to organize the
dispute data and submit the same for mediation and/or arbitration,
they can simply submit the above-entered information to the
management module at 64 for sorting, compiling, organization,
storing and notification 65 to the opposing party and appropriate
mediation or arbitration personnel.
[0145] Whether the Program User submitting the dispute chooses to
negotiate the dispute via the system or transmit the entered data
for mediation and/or arbitration, after all relevant data
corresponding to the dispute is entered, the Program User then
submits the data to the management module at 64 for identification,
sorting, organizing and storing by clicking on the Submit icon.
Before the dispute resolution data is finally submitted, however,
the Program User submitting the dispute (whether profiled as a
plaintiff or a defendant) is preferably prompted to review all the
entered data before it is finally submitted to the management
module. By presenting the Program User with this secondary review,
the Program User has the opportunity to review the accuracy of the
entered data and make any changes which may be required. If all of
the information is correct, the Program User then clicks on the
Submit icon to finally send the data to the management module of
the system. The Program User will then receive an indication that
the dispute has been properly saved.
[0146] Once a dispute is entered into the system, several actions
begin. As seen in FIG. 4, a notice is sent to the opposing party at
65 indicating that a dispute soliciting their response has been
entered into the system. The opposing party is contacted by letter,
e-mail or any other means available. The opposing party is provided
with a user code and dispute code so that they may access the
system via the web site. Unless the opposing party responds,
additional follow-up notices may be sent.
[0147] Optionally, the Program User submitting the dispute into the
system may also mark the dispute as a priority. This option invokes
additional notification services from the system. The system will
normally inform the opposing party of a submitted dispute via
regular mail. If a dispute is marked as a priority, administrative
personnel for the system will attempt to contact the opposing party
directly, in addition to the mailed notice, in order to actively
persuade them to activate and engage the dispute.
[0148] Additionally, the party submitting the dispute may set the
time limit the opposing party has to respond. When a party enters a
dispute into the system they can specify the maximum number of days
the dispute may be negotiated before the negotiation process is
automatically terminated. If the expiration date of the dispute is
set to 60 days from the date of entry, the dispute status will be
changed to expired if there is no response from the opposing party
within 60 days.
[0149] Responding to a Dispute
[0150] After the opposing party receives notification that a
dispute has been entered into the system, they can respond to the
submitted dispute in several ways. Before responding, however, the
opposing party must have their access code and dispute code.
Without these, the opposing party cannot access the system. The
opposing party, with access and dispute code in hand, uses the web
browser of their computer to locate and retrieve the web site for
the present system as described above. After accessing the web
site, the responding party is prompted to either utilize the
settle-only access (if not already a Program Manager/User of the
present system), register a new account with the system and
establish themselves as a Program Manager/User, or indicate that
they are not interested in utilizing the present system to conduct
negotiations of any kind. Each of the aspects to these options will
be discussed in greater detail below.
[0151] Upon entry of a valid access code and a dispute code, the
management module will send all dispute resolution data
corresponding to these input codes to the reckoning module for
application of the pre-selected criteria. The process of applying
the pre-selected criteria will be discussed in greater detail with
respect to the reckoning module below.
[0152] Further, the responding party (whether plaintiff or
defendant) may not agree to utilize the present system to resolve
the dispute. If the responding party so desires, they may click on
the "Not Interested" icon. If the responding party is not
interested, the present system will notify the submitting party via
e-mail that the responding party is not interested in negotiating
via the system.
[0153] Once all parties agree to resolve the dispute via the
present system, each may access the dispute at any time to either
enter a new demand or offer, or simply to see if your adversary has
entered a new demand or offer. Before the demand/offer is submitted
to the reckoning module, however, the responding party will be
prompted by the system for a final review of the dispute data and
demand/offer amount to ensure accuracy. If the data is accurate,
the responding party then finally submits the demand/offer. The
system will then determine if the dispute is resolved or not
resolved based upon the pre-selected criteria within the reckoning
module.
[0154] The system is designed such that either party does not need
to wait until their adversary enters a new demand or offer in order
for them to enter additional demands or offers, they can enter as
many demands or offers as they deem appropriate.
[0155] Forwarding Data for Mediation and/or Arbitration
[0156] In addition to, or instead of, utilizing the present system
to resolve a dispute via the criteria within the reckoning module,
the parties may choose to have the dispute forwarded for mediation
or arbitration. If this route is chosen, all information entered
into the system will be forwarded to the appropriate personnel by
the management module for mediation or arbitration.
[0157] If the parties mutually agree to allow their dispute to be
decided by mediation or arbitration, all parties would then have an
opportunity to submit arguments, information and proof, to a
mediator or arbitrator. In accordance with the present invention,
such information is preferably submitted to the mediator or
arbitrator via a network communication channel, such as wireless
communication, the Internet or any suitable equivalent thereof. The
mediator or arbitrator would then review the respective positions
and issue a decision to both parties.
[0158] Further, the mediation and/or arbitration can be a real-time
on-line mediation or arbitration, or can be an off-line mediation
or arbitration. Preferably, the parties submit arguments,
information, proof, and any other evidence to be considered by the
mediator or arbitrator via the Internet. The parties may also
include offers and demands with the dispute information
submitted.
[0159] When this process is done in real time, the mediator or
arbitrator can request additional information or explanation from a
party, should such further information or explanation be
required.
[0160] A full discussion of all the mediation and arbitration
variations is beyond the scope of this application and need not be
discussed in detail herein. Important to the present invention is
the ability to access the non-judicial "management and procedure"
and to move uninterrupted, i.e., seamlessly, from one technique to
another using the information previously provided while making a
fall range of procedures available to the users.
[0161] Browsing Program User Disputes
[0162] Similar to the Program Managers, Program Users, in addition
to adding and negotiating a dispute as described above, may also
manage the data entered for a dispute and the new data generated
during the dispute process. This feature allows the Program User to
browse and sort all disputes that they have submitted or that they
are a party. To browse the data, the Program User clicks on the
"Browse Disputes" icon 42 on the Program User Page to access the
Browse Disputes List. Preferably, the Browse Disputes List is
displayed to the Program User as sorted by Dispute Status. The
system, however, can be configured to have the list sorted by any
desired criteria.
[0163] To display the dispute list by another category, the Program
User can simply click on the Sort By icon. Thereafter, the list can
be sorted by any category available, such as dispute, caption,
status, claimant, defendant, etc. Additionally, the Program User
can sort the list by multiple categories simultaneously, if
desired. After choosing the sort order, the list will be sorted and
displayed accordingly.
[0164] Additionally, the Program User may also click on the "Find
Dispute" icon to find a particular dispute. Thereafter, a Find
Dispute Form will appear. The Program User then inputs characters
in any or all of the fields in the Find Dispute Form so that the
system can locate the dispute. The fields displayed for searching
are, for example, dispute, caption, claimant, defendant, etc. By
clicking on the "Submit" icon within the form, the system is
prompted to search for any matching disputes and display only those
disputes which match the entered characters.
[0165] Further, at any time the Browse Dispute List is displayed,
detailed data on any particular dispute may be displayed by
clicking on that particular dispute.
[0166] Generating Detailed Dispute Reports
[0167] Program Users can also create a viewable and printable
detailed dispute report on all disputes that they have entered or
that they are a party. Clicking on the "Reports" icon 44 causes the
Report Form to be displayed. By selecting various criteria and sort
orders, virtually any variation of a report may be generated.
[0168] The criteria used to generate the dispute reports may
include, but is not limited to, the following: all opposing
parties/one particular opposing party, all dispute types/one
particular dispute type, all venues/one particular venue, all
injury types/one particular injury type, all primary body parts
injured/one particular primary body part injured, all disputes/only
active disputes, etc.
[0169] Further, the sort order may be arranged in any desired
manner, such as, for example, claim; status; dispute type; opposing
party/claim; opposing party/status; and opposing party/dispute
type. The system, however, enables the requested information to be
arranged in any desired order. After the Report is generated, the
Program User can print the Report.
[0170] Generating Summary Dispute Reports
[0171] Program Users may further elect to create viewable and
printable summary reports on all disputes which they have submitted
or in which they are a party. Clicking on the Summaries icon 43
causes the Summary Report Menu to be displayed.
[0172] The Program User may elect to view summary statistics
sorted, subtotaled and totaled by any of the following qualifying
criteria, including, but not limited to: dispute type, primary
injury, primary body part injured, venue, opposing party, or any
other qualifying criteria within the system. The Program User may
also elect to view summary statistics based on any combination of
the following quantifying criteria, including but not limited to:
number of disputes, number of disputes activated, number of
disputes engaged, number of disputes settled, percentage of
disputes settled, total monetary value of disputes settled, average
monetary value of disputes settled, or any other quantifying
criteria within the system.
[0173] Analyzing Hearing Officers for Mediation(s) and/or
Arbitration(s)
[0174] The Program User may select to analyze settlement data for
all mediation and/or arbitration cases for a particular Hearing
Officer. The data analyzed may include settlement amounts, award
data, case status, case type, etc. This will allow program users to
analyze the performance of particular Hearing Officers with respect
to particular case types.
[0175] Sending an E-Mail
[0176] The Program User may click on the E-Mail icon 45 from the
Program User Page at any time to send an E-Mail to the system
administrative department. When the E-Mail icon is selected, the
system will automatically set the "Send To" field in users E-Mail
program to the assigned e-mail address for the system
administrative department.
[0177] Logging Off
[0178] The Program User may also choose to "Log Off" the system
from the Program User Page. To do this, the Program User simply
clicks on the Log Off icon 46.
[0179] Preferably, the present system is designed to automatically
log off any Program User who has not clicked the mouse or pressed
any key on the keyboard for a pre-set period of time, most
preferably 30 minutes. This automatic log off is set-up in order to
free resources to other Program Users (or Program Managers) who may
be actively using the system. When automatically logged-off, all
Program Users simply need to log-in again in order to continue
working with the system.
[0180] Administrative Access
[0181] Due to the nature of the present system, there is an
Administrative Personnel Access Function. When granted access as an
administrative personnel, the user is presented with a plurality of
selectable choices 47. Administrative Personnel Access and the
selectable choices are shown in FIG. 3, and include informing
opposing parties of disputes submitted to the system which request
their response 52, informing parties of settled disputes 53,
generate activity reports 49, generating priority dispute lists 54,
marking disputes active 51, providing billing information to the
system billing department 55, generating Account Summary Reports 50
and generating Audit Reports 56 to ensure that the system is
functioning properly, or any combination of these choices.
[0182] These functions are performed by system personnel by logging
onto a web site designated to allow performance of the systems
administrative functions. Once properly logged on, these choices
appear.
[0183] Where appropriate, administrative personnel can select to
view the records within a specified data range. When selecting
Activity Report 49, for example, a Date Range Form appears. After
entering valid Date Range values, and clicking on the Submit icon
within the screen, a Report will be generated to the screen
listing, on separate pages, a list of new disputes submitted within
the date range with all data necessary to inform opposing parties
of those disputes, a list of all disputes settled within the date
range with all data necessary to inform parties of those disputes
settled, a list of new disputes submitted which are marked as
priority within the date range with all data necessary to inform
opposing parties of those disputes on a prioritized basis, a list
of disputes to be forwarded for mediation or arbitration that have
either not settled or expired within the date range which were
marked for forwarding for mediation or arbitration, and a list of
amounts to be billed, along with all information on parties to be
billed for disputes that have either settled, did not settle, or
expired within the date range.
[0184] When selecting Summary Statistics 50, for example, the Date
Range Form also appears. After entering valid date range values,
and clicking on the Submit icon within the screen, a report will be
generated to the screen listing, on separate pages, summary reports
indicating settlement statistics for all accounts &
disputes.
[0185] Typically, the dispute details will be absent from the
summary reports because this report is used mainly for ensuring
that disputes are settled properly from a technical
perspective.
[0186] When selecting Activate Dispute 51, an Activate Dispute Form
appears. After entering a valid dispute identification and clicking
on the Submit icon within the screen, an Activate Dispute
Confirmation Screen will appear. Upon clicking the Submit icon
within the Form, the dispute will then be marked ACTIVE in the
system and, if applicable, the expiration date of the dispute will
be set to 60 days from the activation date.
[0187] Settle Only Access
[0188] If the opposing party is not registered and only wishes to
settle the dispute with the present system, they simply enter both
the access and dispute codes for the particular dispute they wish
to negotiate and select "settle-only" access.
[0189] As can be seen in FIG. 3, upon entry of a valid access code,
dispute code and selection of "settle-only" access, the responding
party will be given access to the system for purposes of settlement
only and will not be given access to the management capabilities of
the system. All information input by the responding party, however,
will be-routed through the management module for organizing,
sorting, compiling and storing for use by the submitting party, and
possible use by the responding party should they decide to register
with the system at a later date.
[0190] Thereafter, the management module will send all dispute
resolution data corresponding to the input access and dispute codes
to the reckoning module. Since a responding party choosing to
utilize the settle-only access will not be given access to any of
the management module capabilities, the system will display only
the relevant dispute resolution data to the settle only access
user. This display will notify the settle only access user of the
present status of the dispute, any recent activity, etc. For
example, if the dispute has already expired or has been settled or
did not settle, the settle only access user will be notified of the
same by the system. Additionally, the system will list any dates
and amounts of demands/offers entered for the dispute, if any, and
the settlement date and amount in the event the dispute was
resolved. If the dispute has been resolved or has expired, no
further demands/offers will be allowed to be placed.
[0191] As opposed to merely attempting to settle the dispute via
the system, a settle only access user responding to a submitted
dispute may choose to register a new account with the present
system. The various benefits of registering an account are that the
responding party will be given the ability to perform detailed and
summary reporting, the ability to manage multiple disputes from a
single account without having to enter an access code and dispute
code for each separate dispute (aside from the initial retrieval of
a newly entered dispute to which they received notification), and
the ability to actually submit disputes onto the system.
[0192] As stated above, all information and data entered into and
generated by the reckoning module by a settle only access user is
transmitted to the management module for identification, sorting,
compiling and storage.
[0193] Reckoning Module
[0194] Returning to FIG. 2, and as stated above, the architecture 3
of the present system also includes a reckoning module 6 connected
to the management module 5 for receipt of the non-judicial dispute
resolution data in response to a request for implementing a dispute
resolution procedure via the system. The reckoning module 6
utilizes pre-selected criteria and applies that criteria to the
input dispute resolution data to effectuate a resolution of the
dispute, and thereafter transmits any new data generated during the
resolution procedure to the management module 5 for sorting,
compiling, and retrievable storage with related data stored
therein.
[0195] In response to the input of a valid access code and dispute
code, the management module sends all dispute resolution data
corresponding to the input access and dispute codes to the
reckoning module. The system will display all relevant information
regarding the dispute to the parties. For example, the display will
notify the parties of the present status of the dispute, any recent
activity, etc. For example, if the dispute has already expired or
has been settled or did not settle, the parties will be notified of
the same by the system. Additionally, the system will list any
dates and amounts of demands/offers entered for the dispute, if
any, and the settlement date and amount in the event the dispute
was resolved. If the dispute has been resolved or has expired, no
further demands/offers will be allowed to be placed.
[0196] If the dispute has not yet been resolved or has not expired,
the parties will be prompted to place a demand/offer (depending
upon their profile as either a plaintiff or a defendant). If no
previous demand/offer had been placed on the dispute, the parties
will be asked to enter their initial demand/offer. If an initial
demand/offer has already been placed for the dispute, the parties
will be prompted to enter a subsequent demand/offer. This process
will continue until the dispute is resolved according to the
pre-selected criteria within the reckoning module or the time limit
for resolving the dispute expires.
[0197] Once a demand and an offer (depending upon whether the
responding party is a plaintiff or a defendant) has been entered
for a submitted dispute, the system then applies the pre-selected
criteria within the reckoning module.
[0198] Further, each time a party enters a demand or offer into the
system, the status of the dispute will be changed accordingly. The
system employs a method for notifying the user of the status of the
dispute by organizing the disputes entered into the system into
certain color-coded categories. For example, those disputes
highlighted in yellow indicate that the user was the last person to
enter a demand or offer and that the dispute will expire within ten
(10) days if not settlement is reached; disputes listed in red
indicate that the opposing party was the last party to enter a
demand or offer into the system and that the dispute expires within
ten (10) days if no settlement is reached; and disputes listed in
blue indicate to the user that the opposing party was the last
party to enter a demand or offer into the system, but that the
dispute will not expire within ten (10) days.
[0199] The reckoning module of the present system may invoke any
number of pre-selected criteria to resolve a dispute. Preferably,
the system is setup to utilize bid-style negotiations, or, as
stated above, simply forward the input dispute resolution data to
an appropriate third party for mediation or arbitration.
[0200] Bid-style negotiations can take place either "closed" or
"open". Closed bids are not made known to the opposing party(ies),
while "open" bids are made known to the opposing party(ies). Each
of the scenarios set forth herein can be made to apply in an "open"
or "closed" condition.
[0201] During closed negotiations, the parties are not able to view
the other party's demands or offers. The parties only see the
resolution amount if and when the dispute is resolved. This option
is particularly useful so as to not give away your position to your
adversary.
[0202] During open-bid negotiations, one party will be able to view
the other party's demand or offer, but only after they first enter
a demand or an offer. For example, if the defendant submits the
dispute and enters an initial offer, the system will not disclose
the defendant's offer to the plaintiff until the plaintiff enters
an initial demand. If the dispute is resolved, the parties will be
informed of the resolution amount. If the dispute is not resolved,
the parties will be so advised. Thereafter, the defendant will not
learn the amount of the plaintiff's initial demand until he or she
enters another offer. Negotiations can continue until the dispute
is resolved or until one party decides they are no longer
interested in learning how much the other party has demanded or
offered.
[0203] The details of how the reckoning module of the system can
resolve a dispute are as follows.
[0204] Bid-Style Negotiations
[0205] The system can effectuate a settlement via bid-style
negotiations, then, after the dispute resolution data is forwarded
to the reckoning module, the reckoning module may compare the input
demand to the input offer as follows:
[0206] if Y.ltoreq.X, then the dispute will settle for Y;
[0207] if Y>X and Y.ltoreq.(X+30%), then the dispute will settle
for (X+Y)/2;
[0208] if Y>(X+30%), then the dispute will not settle;
[0209] wherein:
[0210] X=the defendant's offer, and
[0211] Y=the plaintiff's demand.
[0212] In other words, for the above example, the dispute will (1)
settle for the value of the plaintiff's demand if the plaintiff's
demand is below the value of the defendant's offer; (2) settle for
the average between the plaintiffs demand and the defendant's offer
if the plaintiff's demand is within 30% of the defendant's offer;
or (3) not settle if the plaintiff's demand is above 30% of the
defendant's offer.
[0213] The above algorithm can be varied by changing the percentage
applied to the defendant's offer. Preferably, the percentage
applied to the defendant's offer is from about 5% to about 35%.
Additionally, the percentage applied to the defendant's offer can
be set by the Program User, typically the defendant, or preferably
set as a default percentage by the system.
[0214] Further, the above bid-style negotiation may be repeated an
unlimited number of times. That is, the plaintiff and the defendant
may continue to negotiate until the dispute is resolved or
negotiations are terminated. When repeated, the above algorithm is
applied to the plaintiff's last entered demand and the defendant's
last entered offer. Take the following situations for example:
1EXAMPLE 1 Date Who Action Amount Result 01/18 Plaintiff Initial
Demand $20,000 n/a 01/25 Defendant Initial Offer $10,000 Did Not
Settle 01/28 Plaintiff New Demand $18,000 Did Not Settle 02/05
Defendant New Offer $15,000 Settled for $16,500
[0215] In Example 1, the dispute settled because the last demand
($18,000) was within 30% of the last offer ($15,000). It settled
for $16,500, the average of the last offer ($15,000) and the last
demand ($18,000).
2EXAMPLE 2 Date Who Action Amount Result 03/05 Plaintiff Initial
Demand $12,000 n/a 03/18 Defendant Initial Offer $8,000 Did Not
Settle 03/27 Plaintiff New Demand $8,500 Did Not Settle 04/05
Defendant New Offer $9,000 Settled for $8,500
[0216] In Example 2 above, the dispute settled because the last
demand ($8,500) was below te last offer ($9,000). It settled for
$8,500, the amount of the last demand.
3EXAMPLE 3 Date Who Action Amount Result 02/05 Plaintiff Initial
Demand $80,000 n/a 02/10 Defendant Initial Offer $40,000 Did Not
Settle 02/20 Plaintiff New Demand $75,000 Did Not Settle 02/25
Plaintiff New Demand $70,000 Did Not Settle 03/01 Defendant New
Offer $50,000 Did Not Settle 03/05 Defendant New Offer $60,000
Settled for $65,000
[0217] In Example 3, the dispute settled because the last demand
($70,000) was within 30% of the last offer ($60,000). It settled
for $65,000, the average of the last offer ($60,000) and the last
demand ($70,000). Please note that Example 3 above illustrates that
either a plaintiff or a defendant may enter a demand or an offer at
anytime they wish and they do not have to wait until the opposing
party responds. When a party enters consecutive offers or demands,
the system will utilize the last entered offer or demand for
comparison.
[0218] Further, bid-style negotiations can be setup to resolve a
dispute by prompting the user to input either an initial demand
(for a user profiled as a plaintiff) or a high value and a low
value to establish a resolution range (for a user profiled as a
defendant). These input amounts will be used by the system to
calculate whether the dispute is resolved.
[0219] When using the above resolution range embodiment, the
dispute will (1) settle for the amount of the plaintiff's demand if
the demand is between the high value and the low value of the
defendant's resolution range; (2) settle for the low value of the
defendant's resolution range if the plaintiff's demand is less than
or equal to the low value of the resolution range; or (3) not
settle if the plaintiff's demand if above the high value of the
defendant's resolution range.
[0220] This embodiment can also be repeated an unlimited number of
times. That is, the plaintiff and the defendant may continue to
negotiate until the dispute is resolved or negotiations are
terminated by either party. When repeated, the defendant enters a
high value and a low value for each repetition and the plaintiff
enters a demand for each repetition.
[0221] Alternatively, the system can be setup to automatically
calculate a defendant's resolution range from a single entered
value for each round. The system can either use the entered value
as a median value, low value or high value and apply an appropriate
percentage to that value to arrive at a resolution range.
[0222] Additionally, the system can be setup to keep the low value
of the resolution range at a fixed value. For example, when the
defendant enters an initial offer, the low value of the resolution
range will be set to 50% less than the initial offer entered, and
the high end will be set to the initial offer. During subsequent
repetitions, the low value of the range will not change and will be
set to the value previously calculated, however, the high end will
be changed to the offer entered for that repetition.
[0223] For example, if the defendant entered $10,000 as an initial
offer, the system would calculate the resolution range as $5,000 to
$10,000. The low end of the range will remain the same for each
subsequent repetition ($5,000) and the high end of the range will
be established as the subsequent offer entered.
[0224] Further, the user may choose an auto-negotiate option. If
the auto-negotiate option is chosen, the system will calculate the
demands/offers entered for each round based upon certain criteria.
When the user selects the auto-negotiate option, the system will
prompt the user to input certain criteria which will enable the
system to make a decision as to the demands/offers to be made. The
criteria prompted to be entered may include the following: i) the
number of offers/demands the user would like to make, ii) the
consideration they would like to increase or decrease with each
successive repetition of negotiations, iii) the time period they
would like between the submission of demands/offers, and any other
similar criteria. This option may be selected by the defendant,
plaintiff, both or neither.
[0225] For example, if the defendant selects the auto-negotiate
option, then the defendant would be prompted to enter additional
information which they would like the system to consider when
making offers. The defendant could enter a single offer and an
amount with which to increase that offer for each repetition. This
option could also be used in conjunction with the different
pre-selected criteria used to effectuate a settlement as discussed
above.
[0226] Optionally, the system may also employ the use of a "silent
mediator" feature, electronic or otherwise. This feature operates
in the last repetition of negotiations if there was a set limit to
the number of repetitions, or to demands/offers identified as final
demands/offers. With the "silent mediator" feature, the dispute
will settle for the average of the demand and the high value of the
resolution range if the demand is within a specified percentage of
the high value of the resolution range. In other words, the dispute
will only not settle if the demand is higher than the high value of
the resolution range for any repetition other than the most recent,
and above the high value of the most recent established resolution
range plus the specified percentage. With this feature, the system
assumes that the parties would truly wish to resolve the dispute if
they knew they were within the specified percentage of each other
at the end of the negotiation process.
[0227] The specified percentage is preferably from about 5% to
about 30%. Additionally, the specified percentage may be set by the
system or chosen by one or more of the parties to the dispute.
[0228] If, after application of any of the above criteria, the
dispute does not settle, the party entering the demand/offer will
be informed of such and prompted to either enter another
demand/offer (if the demand/offer entered was not a final or last
repetition demand/offer), or log-off the system. Should the user
opt to enter another demand/offer they may do so and the process as
outlined above will be repeated. If the user wishes to log-off the
system they will be returned to the home page of the web site.
[0229] Preferably, and to facilitate resolution of the dispute, the
system may require that parties profiled as defendants increase
offers for each repetition of negotiations by a minimum of a
predetermined percentage, such as 5% of the prior offer. Similarly,
the system may require that parties profiled as plaintiffs decrease
their demands by a minimum of a predetermined percentage, such as
5% of the prior demand. In other words, if you are the plaintiff,
and your last demand was $100,000, your next demand may be required
to be $95,000 or less ($100,000-5% is $95,000). Similarly, if you
are the defendant and your last offer was $90,000, your next offer
may be required to be $94,500 or higher ($90,000+5% is
$94,500).
[0230] Further, the system preferably applies a fee structure for
accessing and using the system. While any fee structure can be
provided for accessing and using the present invention, a preferred
embodiment contemplates a fee structure which financially
encourages each of the parties to resolve the dispute. One such
structure requires each party to pay a certain amount to
participate in the resolution proceeding(s). Thus, the plaintiff
must pay a fee for submission of each demand and the defendant must
pay a fee for submission of each offer. These fees can also be
graduated to correspond to the financial magnitude of the dispute,
e.g., a "dog bite" case to a serious injury or even a death case. A
variety of schemes can be employed, but this feature of the
invention financially rewards resolution and financially penalizes
non-resolution by fee structure.
[0231] Further, before either the defendant or the plaintiff enters
an offer or a demand into the system, they are preferably prompted
to review a Negotiation Agreement. If they agree to the terms of
the Agreement, they then click on the Agree icon and are thereafter
bound by the terms and conditions of the Agreement. If this option
is utilized, and the parties do not agree to the terms and
conditions, they are not allowed to enter demands or offers onto
the system. This review of a Negotiation Agreement is preferably
prompted to every party before the entering of demands or
offers.
[0232] The parties to the dispute may also have the option of
entering a maximum settlement amount (for defendants) or a minimum
settlement amount (for plaintiffs). If a maximum settlement amount
is entered, the system will prohibit a defendant from entering a
settlement offer that may result in a settlement that exceeds the
selected maximum amount. Conversely, if a minimum settlement amount
is entered, the system will prohibit the plaintiff from demanding
an amount that may result in a settlement that is less than the
selected minimum amount. If a user enters a prohibited amount, the
system will reject the amount and request the user to enter an
appropriate value or amend their maximum or minimum settlement
amount.
[0233] The system may also utilize a negotiating safeguard.
Specifically, after a user enters an offer or a demand, the system
will prompt the user inquiring as to whether or not the user wishes
to enter that particular amount, further modify the amount, or not
enter the amount at all. This safeguard further ensures that either
party has a sufficient time to contemplate and/or modify their
demand or offer before entry, thereby decreasing the possibility of
erroneous entry.
[0234] The parties to the dispute may also be given the option of
entering a "final demand" (plaintiff) or "final offer" (defendant)
at one time during the negotiation process. This is accomplished by
clicking on the "final demand" or "final offer" icon on the bid
submission screen.
[0235] If the defendant selects the "final offer" option, the
system will automatically calculate the exact amount the defendant
can offer so that the maximum settlement amount possible on the
dispute (calculated in accordance with the systems settlement
criteria) will be equal to the maximum possible settlement
amount.
[0236] If the claimant selects the "final demand" option, the
system will automatically calculate the exact amount the claimant
can enter so that the minimum settlement amount possible on the
dispute (calculated in accordance with the systems settlement
criteria) will be equal to the minimum possible settlement
amount.
[0237] Once a party (plaintiff or defendant) has selected the
"final demand" or "final offer" option, they are prevented from
entering any further offers or demands for the dispute. In
addition, the dispute status will be changed to "final offer" or
"final demand" and the other party will be notified of the
change.
[0238] After all information is entered into the system in an
attempt to resolve the dispute, the information entered and
generated by the reckoning module is transmitted to the management
module for identification, sorting, compiling and storage.
[0239] Claims-Data Storage and Retrieval System
[0240] Further, Program Managers of the present system will be
given the option of utilizing a claims-data storage and retrieval
system. If a user chooses to use the storage and retrieval system,
the data for all of the disputes for that particular user will be
forwarded by the management module to a claims-data storage and
retrieval system 20, as shown in FIG. 2. The claims-data storage
and retrieval system will further sort, compile, arrange and store
the forwarded data with the data from all other data in the system
in a queryable form. Thereafter, all users who have forwarded data
will have access to the claims-data storage and retrieval system 20
via the management module 5 of the system 1. All users who have
forwarded data will be able to enter a query to the management
module for a search of the storage and retrieval system.
[0241] For example, in personal injury cases, users of the storage
and retrieval system can query the storage and retrieval system
data to ascertain the average settlement values for all disputes
entered into the system based on venue, type of injury and/or body
part injured. To keep certain information confidential, the users
will not have access to specific dispute information, such as the
parties' names, attorneys' names or claim or dispute numbers.
[0242] The forwarding of data to this storage and retrieval system
will enable the users of the present system to better determine a
fair value for a claim based on current and past statistical data.
This feature will lead to a more efficient negotiation process
wherein defendants will be able to quickly and easily ascertain the
value of certain claims.
[0243] Software Packages
[0244] Preferably, the present invention is designed for use with
the following software packages, or their equivalent: Microsoft
Windows NT Server 4.0 with Internet Information Server 3.0 (IIS),
Allaire ColdFusion 4.0 Server and Studio, Microsoft Visual Foxpro
6.0 (alternatively, Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 Enterprise), Seagate
Crystal Reports, Expert Systems Ease Telephony System, and the
like. A full discussion of these and other related software
packages is beyond the scope of this application. However, brief
explanations as to how the above-mentioned packages are utilized by
the present system are noted below.
[0245] The Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 with Internet
Information Server 3.0 (IIS 3.0) allows the server to operate and
involves setting user access rights and monitoring system
performance. IIS 3.0 allows for the web hosting features related to
Windows NT and allows internet users to access the present
system.
[0246] Allaire ColdFusion 4.0 Server and Studio software is a web
hosting program which complements IIS 3.0. It specializes in
handling the management module features of the present system, such
as, for example, adding, updating, deleting and retrieving data in
the management module. Coldfusion processes requests from the
system and translates them into instructions that IIS 3.0 can
understand. IIS 3.0 processes those instructions and returns the
results back to Coldfusion.
[0247] Microsoft Visual Foxpro 6.0 (alternatively, Microsoft SQL
Server 7.0 Enterprise) is a relational database management system.
This, and other similar software, stores all data for to the
system. IIS 3.0 and Coldfusion communicate with this software via
the Open Database Conductivity (ODBC) services feature offered in
Windows NT.
[0248] Seagate Crystal Reports is a database report generating
software package. This software outputs information to HTML format
files utilized during communication with the internet. This
software works in tandem with the ODBC feature of Windows NT.
[0249] Expert Systems Ease Telephony System is a telephony platform
as well as a development system. This package allows for the
routing of incoming calls to the system and also communicates with
the data files via the ODBC feature of Windows NT.
[0250] The ability of the system of the present invention to manage
and compile all information related to the dispute enables the
substantially seamless progression from bid-style negotiations to
mediation to arbitration. Additionally, the sorting, compiling,
organizing and storage capabilities of the present system allow the
parties to choose between some or all of the above-outlined
resolution procedures, and in any order they desire.
[0251] Thus, while the foregoing detailed description has disclosed
what is presently believed to be the preferred embodiments of the
invention, those skilled in the art will appreciate that other and
further changes and modifications can be made without departing
from the scope or spirit of the invention, and it is intended that
all such other changes and modifications are included in and are
within the scope of the invention as described in the appended
claims.
* * * * *