WO2008130397A1 - Système de commentaire basé sur des notes de propriété intellectuelle - Google Patents

Système de commentaire basé sur des notes de propriété intellectuelle Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2008130397A1
WO2008130397A1 PCT/US2007/066687 US2007066687W WO2008130397A1 WO 2008130397 A1 WO2008130397 A1 WO 2008130397A1 US 2007066687 W US2007066687 W US 2007066687W WO 2008130397 A1 WO2008130397 A1 WO 2008130397A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
patent application
prior
art
end user
notes
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/US2007/066687
Other languages
English (en)
Inventor
Andrew Van Luchene
Ray J. Mueller
Dean Alderucci
Original Assignee
Leviathan Entertainment
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Leviathan Entertainment filed Critical Leviathan Entertainment
Priority to PCT/US2007/066687 priority Critical patent/WO2008130397A1/fr
Publication of WO2008130397A1 publication Critical patent/WO2008130397A1/fr

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/10—Office automation; Time management
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F40/00—Handling natural language data
    • G06F40/10—Text processing
    • G06F40/12—Use of codes for handling textual entities
    • G06F40/134—Hyperlinking
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F40/00—Handling natural language data
    • G06F40/10—Text processing
    • G06F40/166—Editing, e.g. inserting or deleting
    • G06F40/169—Annotation, e.g. comment data or footnotes

Definitions

  • MMOGs massive multi-player online games
  • MMORPGs massive multi- player online role playing games
  • MMOGs massive multi-player online games
  • MMORPGs massive multi- player online role playing games
  • Players of these games customarily access a game repeatedly (for durations typically ranging from a few minutes to several days) over a given period of time, which may be days, weeks, months or even years.
  • Many of these games purport to give intellectual property rights to the players in their virtual creations.
  • these games lack a structured system for evaluating and granting such rights.
  • FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a general system 100 according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a system 100' according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • Fig. 3 is a block diagram of a system 300 according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • Fig. 4 is a block diagram of a system 400 according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 5 is a block diagram of a system 500 according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 6 is a block diagram of a system 600 according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 7 is a block diagram of a system 700 according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 8 is a block diagram of a system 800 according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 9 is a block diagram of a system 900 according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • the present disclosure provides systems and methods that may be used alone or in combination to provide a notes-based commenting system configured to allow users to submit notes and/or comments into a public or private record.
  • a notes-based commenting system configured to allow users to submit notes and/or comments into a public or private record.
  • the notes/comments are typically submitted with respect to the public record, the notes themselves may or may not be publicly available.
  • Advertisement - includes any communication via any medium to any one or more end users or any person or third party. Advertisements may include text, audio, video, icons, graphics, images, etc. Advertisements may include an offer for sale, for profit or not, and may or may not include a discount, for any services, products, financial instruments, e.g., insurance, annuities, securities, e.g., stocks, bonds, options, etc. and/or any other good or service, and/or may provide information about any of the forgoing or anything, such as a request for donations to political or charitable or any other entity or organization.
  • financial instruments e.g., insurance, annuities
  • securities e.g., stocks, bonds, options, etc. and/or any other good or service
  • Alert - includes the transfer, delivery or storage of information or otherwise communicating with, by, between or among any two or more of the following, including, but not limited to any real or virtual: a) end user, b) game owners, c) game or other servers, d) player or player characters, e) NPCs, f) exchanges, g) game devices or controllers, h) cell phone or other communications hardware and/or networks, i) databases, j) software applications, k) legal agencies, 1) governing bodies, m) software interfaces, n) any person, o) and/or any combination of any of the above, which may be initiated by and/or based upon an alert event or other action. Exemplary methods to determine alert events and/or to send alerts are disclosed for example
  • Alert Event - includes any change in, of or to any condition or state, and includes any action, opposite action, unexpected action, desire for action, or failure to act, and thus Alert Event includes, but is not limited to any one or more of:
  • Approval Queue- includes a queue of documents and or prior art associated with those documents that is awaiting an approval mark from an entity such as a patent examiner
  • Boilerplate - includes any text, word, words, or phrases and/or part or all of a document which may be readily or otherwise reused with little or no modification and/or to serve as the basis of a new phrase or document, which use may save time and effort in the creation of said phrase or document. Boilerplate may include standard documents, terms, conditions, words, phases, etc., that can be incorporated or reused in multiple applications.
  • Blog - includes a user-generated website or other system where entries may be made in journal or other style and may be displayed in a reverse chronological or other order. Blogs often provide commentary or news on a particular subject, such as food, politics, or local news; some function as more personal online diaries.
  • Blogs may include and/or combine or use text, images, and may include links, including hyperlinks to other blogs, web pages, documents, words, and other media related to its topic or subject matter.
  • the term “blog” is derived from the term “Web log.”
  • “Blog” can also be used as a verb, meaning to maintain or add content to a blog.
  • Certified Plug-in-in includes any software module that can be inserted into a larger software program and used to perform a sub function of the total function of the total system that is approved by a certification party such as the USPTO
  • Certified Shape-shall include any visual shape that can be used to identify a component in a patent or other drawing that is approved by a central entity such as the patent office for use in a figure associated with an invention disclosure
  • Certified Template-shall include a group of certified shapes, certified Icons, and or certified fonts that can be used in a figure associated with an invention disclosure and that is approved by a central entity such as the patent office.
  • Class in the context of a patent application, -includes a class of patents or other digital documents in an electronic database
  • Click-through - includes the process of an end user selecting or otherwise activating a hyperlink
  • Document Map or Map - includes a visual representation of a group of documents or other items or objects, such as patents that shows the relationship of those documents, objects or items to one another.
  • a map might be of a group of documents and their relevancy to each other.
  • a map might include a visual representation.
  • End User - includes any person or entity, real or virtual that makes use of or otherwise practices any part or all of the disclosed invention and/or any software application or tool disclosed herein or otherwise.
  • End users include, for example, patent applicants, patent examiners, patent attorneys, patent examiner supervisors, document review specialists, diagram or figure design engineers, survey respondents, search tool users, and other persons.
  • an end user may be an application, application program interface, reporting or other tool or automated process.
  • Genetic Algorithm - includes any software application or module that can improve results with use.
  • Hyperlink or link - includes a set of instructions or code, which may be embedded, or otherwise associated with or connected to, an element, word, object, icon, document, figure, map, file attachment, or other displayed area within a document which, when selected, clicked or otherwise activated by an end user, may cause a computer to perform one or more functions. Examples of functions that might be performed include, but are not limited to, displaying new or additional information, redirecting to a different area of the same or a new document, displaying an advertisement, soliciting and/or capturing information, opening a form that requires end user input, and/or displaying new information that is generally associated with and/or related to the hyperlinked element.
  • New or additional information and/or webpage(s) may or may not be displayed using a separate or new web browser page or popup window or interstitial.
  • Hyperlinks are commonly identified through the use of an underline and/or color coding, e.g., HYPERLINK, but this is not necessarily required or desired. Hyperlinks may be activated by any applicable means, including, but not limited to, left or right clicking on or near the link, placing a pointer on or near the link (briefly, temporarily or not), touching the area, e.g., via use of a touch screen or other pointing mechanism, and/or automatically, e.g., based upon date or time, or other action or inaction of the end user.
  • a hyperlink may be associated with other hyperlinks, e.g., hyperlinks within hyperlinks, documents, programs, words, phrases, or other information or actions. For example, if an end user right clicks on a hyperlink, one or more options may appear, permitting the end user some degree of flexibility in the action or actions taken.
  • link and hyperlink shall have corollary meanings.
  • Improvement Module includes a sub module that is embedded in a total system that is used to improve upon the total system or other sub modules embedded in that system.
  • Keyword - includes any word or words that are identified as being "of interest.”
  • a keyword may be of interest because it is a word that generally helps to describe the content of the document in which it is used, or for other reasons.
  • Merchant - includes any person that desires to sell a good or service or desires to have one or more end users to review, select, or click a hyperlink in a document and/or receive other information and/or perform other tasks and/or receive information associated with one or more keywords selected by such merchant.
  • Notes - includes any computer file or data or any free form or other text, graphics, figures and/or any files such as any audio, video, e.g., JPEG or MPEG, pictures, e.g., GIF, or other files, such as, PDF, XLS, XML, TXT, DOC, RTF, or any other known files such as those described on the websites: http://filext.com/ and http://www.computeruser.com/resources/dictionary/filetypes.html, which are incorporated herein by reference. Notes may be attached or associated with any one or more of the following, any electronic element, word or words, phrase, document, figure, hyperlink, webpage, database, table, file, or any other electronic media.
  • notes may include any description, hyperlink, figure, document or file associated or attached to any of the forgoing and/or any combination of the forgoing.
  • notes may contain or refer or reference other notes, e.g., notes within notes.
  • Exemplary methods to provide attachment of notes into documents and/or associate notes with documents, or words, or other data are disclosed in US Patent Application Nos. 11/690,095 "Facilitating Certified Prior Art Note Taking and Method for Using Same," filed March 22, 2007; 11/697,480 entitled “Note Overlay System,” filed April 6, 2007; and 11/697,486 entitled “Document Examiner Comment System,” filed April 6, 2007; each of which is incorporated herein by reference.
  • Patent Application Drafting Tool includes a web based software program that assists in the drafting and filing of patent applications with a registration entity such as the USPTO.
  • An exemplary patent application drafting tool is described in U.S. Patent Application No. 11/627,263, which is hereby incorporated by reference.
  • Patent Drafting Engine includes a software module that can partially or completely draft and/or modify an existing draft patent application and/or file those applications with a registration entity such as the USPTO.
  • Plug-in - includes any software application or module or one or more computer instructions, which may or may not be in communication with other software applications or modules, and may include any file, image, graphic, icon, audio, video or any other attachment. Plug-ins may be comprised of any one or more set of computer instructions using any computer programming language.
  • Rules - includes computer instructions that can provide application direction and/or decision making and includes both inference and reactive rules. Rules may include permissions, limitations, method steps, alert event conditions, alert contents, workflow instructions, security measures, business process management instructions, if/then/else instructions and/or any supporting data, variables, or computing instructions and/or logic.
  • Rules Based - includes any system or application or module that uses or relies on one or more rules.
  • Search Relevancy includes how relevant sections of a document are to a word, phrase, patent section, patent figure, or document are when producing search results for a query.
  • the abstract of a patent document can have higher search relevancy than the background of a patent document when conducting prior art searches using a prior art search software tool.
  • Search Weight-shall mean the score that one section of a document has to other sections of a document when conducting searches against a database of documents in which that document is included.
  • Synonym - is any word or group of words that have the same or similar meaning of another word or group of words and/or that may be interchangeable.
  • the opposite of synonym is antonym.
  • Thesaurus includes an electronic database of words that have been mapped to indicate similarities in word definitions.
  • the thesaurus may be broken into classes and subclasses that relate to the classes and subclasses of documents stored in an electronic database and/or accessed via such database
  • Virtual - includes anything that is not real, in whole or in part, and/or anything real, in whole or in part; which may be simulated, represented, presented or depicted in a virtual environment, video game or displayed on a screen.
  • Virtual Environment any technology that permits one or more end users to interact with a real, imaginary or virtual computer simulated environment.
  • Virtual World - includes a world created in an online game such as World of Warcraft, or a virtual community such as Second Life, Eve or There.com
  • Video Game-shall mean any massive multi online player game such as World of Warcraft and any virtual world such as Second Life
  • Web page - includes any resource, form, or any information that is accessible via the Internet and that is suitable or exists on the world wide web.
  • a web page usually includes information in any applicable format, e.g., HTML or XHTML.
  • Web pages may include hyperlinks or provide other means of navigation to other web pages.
  • Web pages may be accessed by any applicable means, including, but not limited to: any computing or internet enabled devices, e.g., personal computers, laptops, PDAs, cell phones, video game controllers, or any other communications device, which may be local or remote to the computer or server where such web page(s) may exist or reside.
  • Word - includes one or more groups of letters including titles, indices, text, headings, descriptions, diagrams, etc., and documents (in whole or in part), phrases (i.e., groups of two or more words), synonyms, antonyms, icons, graphics, drawings, schematics, blueprints, pictures, audio and/or video, and/or any combination of the forgoing,
  • phrases i.e., groups of two or more words
  • synonyms i.e., groups of two or more words
  • antonyms icons
  • a general system 100 is shown.
  • the system includes one or more program modules 10, which are in electronic communication with one or more databases 20.
  • Databases 20 may be hosted on the same server as program modules 20 (which themselves may or may not be hosted on the same server). Alternatively, some or all of databases 20 may be hosted on other or remote locations/servers.
  • the present invention provides an automated web-based patent application preparation and submission tool.
  • an end user can draft a patent application using an online tool.
  • the document can be submitted to: (i) a researcher for further research, (ii) a patent attorney for further drafting, or (iii) the patent office.
  • the information submitted into the tool may be analyzed automatically and/or in real time by the system in order to perform various functions. For example, based on the information submitted, the system can recommend alternate language for sections or draft missing parts of the total patent application.
  • information is considered to be analyzed automatically any time it is analyzed by the system with the system having to receive additional input, such as a request or command, from the user.
  • computer implemented systems are subject to various operating constraints, such as server loads, processing speeds, and the like, with which those of skill in the art will be familiar and, accordingly, "real time" analysis may not necessarily be instantaneous, but is rather intended to mean that results are automatically provided to the user as soon as they are available, given the various system operating constraints.
  • the system can perform real time prior art search based on the disclosure as the end user types words into the tool.
  • the system could be configured to dynamically display the most relevant prior art choices based on the words and letters being typed.
  • the prior art being displayed would then change in real time as the end user types in more words to describe the invention. It will be appreciated that such real time searching could be used for any type of searching and not just searching for prior art for inventions.
  • the system may utilize a genetic algorithm to specify a class and subclass for a patent application.
  • the system may analyze an application in real time, or after it has been submitted, and determine the appropriate class and subclass.
  • the genetic algorithm may or may not allow for the incorporation of classification data from previously submitted applications which are identified by the system or the end user as being similar to the current application.
  • the system may track and/or identify information that is missing from the patent application that is required for filing the patent application with the patent office.
  • the end user can review missing parts for a particular patent application and fill them in as desired.
  • the end user can also leave missing information fields open for subsequent completion, for example, by researchers and/or patent practitioners.
  • one or more notes could be submitted by an end user or other individual in connection with a document, including, for example, an application as it is being drafted, a submitted or filed application, a patent publication, an issued patent, a non-patent reference, an office action, a examiner or practitioner communication, a judicial or review-board decision, or the like.
  • These notes may or may not be viewable to other users and may or may not be used by the system for any suitable purpose, including, for example, preparation or examination of the present application, preparation or examination of other applications, system maintenance, and the collection and dissemination of statistical information.
  • notes may or may not be submitted in response to additions, suggestions, or notes from the system or other individuals.
  • Any suitable type of file including, but not limited to a jpg, digital video, recording, voice message, or textual document could be added to or associated with a document as a note.
  • an end user may add notes to the alternate language and missing portion suggestions provided to or by the system. These notes can be used by the genetic algorithm to generate improved alternate language and missing portion suggestions for later invention submissions by the same and/or other end users. Moreover, these notes could be readable by subsequent end users and could be used to assist in the drafting of later patent applications.
  • the present disclosure provides for a system in which a practitioner can elect from between multiple post-drafting processing options.
  • the system may or may not require that the application have been drafted using a web-based drafting tool such as that described above.
  • the end-user can select whether he wants to:
  • the system can recommend one of the previous three choices to an end user based on the current status of an application.
  • the system analyzes the patent application document and compares it to previously filed patent applications. The patent application is scored and the system determines whether the application should be sent to a researcher, an attorney, or to the patent office.
  • the system can select or suggest an optimal researcher from its database of researchers based on inventions researched by those researchers and the relevance of those inventions to the invention currently being submitted by the end user.
  • the system could select or suggest a researcher based on whether a particular researcher has capacity to conduct research on the patent application. If the end user is allowed to select a researcher, a list of applicable researchers could be provided to the user by the system. The list could be sorted or sortable based on relevancy, expected timeframe for research completion, cost, location, or other factors.
  • Bids could include any number of relevant factors including but not limited to, cost for research, type of fee rate (i.e. flat fee, hourly, etc.), type and extent of results provided, and timeframe for returning results.
  • the system could be configured to provide to the end user contact information for each selected or suggested researcher.
  • the end user could then contact the selected or suggested researcher via the system interface and submit the patent application to the researcher for review.
  • a contract can be set up, i.e., drafted and executed automatically, between the end user and the patent researcher using the system.
  • the researcher receives the patent application, creates a research report, and submits the research report to the end user.
  • the research report may be submitted to the end user via the central system.
  • the end user can review the prior art cited in the research report and rate its relevance to the invention disclosed. The relevance rankings can be used to match that researcher to subsequent patent applications.
  • the end user can also submit notes distinguishing the application over the prior art cited and/or alter the application, such as to include distinguishing language.
  • the system may be configured to facilitate fee transactions between the end user and the researcher.
  • the system may or may not impose a surcharge for facilitating the fee transactions. For example, once an application has been submitted to a researcher, the system may charge the researcher with a finder's fee. The system could also charge the end user with a researcher finder fee, or, the two parties could split a single fee. Alternatively the system could charge the researcher, who, in turn could charge the end user some, or all, of the fee amount. Alternatively or additionally, once the report has been received by the end user, a research report fee can be charged to the end user and some or all of the fee can be remitted to the researcher.
  • the system may be configured to submit the application to an automated searching program configured to produce search results using, for example, a genetic algorithm search program.
  • a genetic algorithm search program is described, for example, previously incorporated U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/462/621, and U.S. Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 60/727,191.
  • the system can determine an optimal attorney from its database of attorneys. The determination may be based on any number of factors including, for example, estimated fee, past applications filed by the attorney, attorney's capacity, estimated turn-around, etc.
  • the system may be configured to identify past inventions/applications filed and prosecuted by attorneys in the database and further determine the relevance of those inventions to the invention currently being submitted by the end user.
  • attorneys may be asked or required to provide the system with information regarding their fees for preparation including billing rates and fees for past applications, current availability, estimated turn-around time, contact information, etc. Accordingly, the system can select or suggest an attorney based on such information. For example, a given attorney may be selected or suggested based on whether or not the system determines that attorney has capacity to assist the inventor in enhancing the application.
  • the system can provide the attorneys' contact information to the end user using any suitable method.
  • the end user may receive an attorney's contact information via the web-based form.
  • the end user may be able to automatically submit the patent application to the attorney via the web-based service.
  • the attorney may then review the application for further refinement. Changes, additions, and alterations made by the attorney may be tracked by the system.
  • the end user may be able to log in or otherwise access the completed application via the system to order to review and approve changes made by the attorney to the application.
  • the application may be submitted to a second attorney and such process repeated until the end-user is satisfied with the application.
  • the patent application can be submitted to the patent office by the system.
  • the determination of an appropriate attorney may be made at the time the end user opts to submit the draft application to an attorney or while the end user is drafting the application. Moreover, rather than waiting until the end user believes he has "finished” the application, the end user may be able to contact the attorney via the system while drafting the application. For example, while the end user is entering the patent application data into the system, the system can determine an appropriate attorney and offer the opportunity to provide the end user with real time chat with the attorney, if the end user accepts, a chat window is opened between the end user and attorney via the central system. The end user can provide patent application data and the attorney can add and edit the data. When the session is complete, the system can charge a fee to the end user and submit a portion of that fee to the attorney. The recorded chat session is attached to the patent application file.
  • the system may be configured to facilitate fee transactions and contract formation between the attorney and the end-user.
  • the system may or may not impose a surcharge for such facilitation. For example, when an end user contacts an attorney, a finder's fee can be charged to both the attorney and the end user.
  • the system may facilitate with the drafting and execution of a contract between the end user and attorney specifying terms and conditions so that the attorney can complete the application.
  • the system may or may not utilize a standard contract which may or may not be modifiable by the end user and/or the attorney. Once the attorney's changes are made, the system may be configured to charge the fee specified by the contract to the end user for enhancing the patent application and submit some or all of the fee to the attorney.
  • the system may be configured to determine if all information fields have been completed. Once the system has determined that all information fields have been completed, the system generates the appropriate forms, and submits the patent application, along with the appropriate forms to the patent office. An electronic receipt confirmation is received from the patent office and stored by the central system as well as being transmitted to the end user. The central system charges a filing fee to the end user and remits a portion of that fee to the patent office. If all fields have not been completed, the system steps the applicant through each open field, providing examples and information about each field, its use, etc.
  • the system may be configured to time stamp the patent application file as additions are made by the various parties who can access it. Moreover, the system could time and date stamp and store all files that are entered into the system and so that a record of the invention is maintained.
  • the end user may be allowed to determine whether or not an application filed with the system is to be treated as public or private data. If the filed application is be treated as public data, and thus useful as prior art against other inventions, the end user may further be allowed to identify the application as an invention registration rather than as an application.
  • an invention registration can be assigned a filing date and used as prior art against later filed applications, but may not be subjected to further examination.
  • An end user preparing a patent application may desire to get into contact with other end users that are preparing or have prepared other similar patent applications.
  • the system of the present disclosure may be configured to facilitate communication between end users who are or have worked on similar patent applications.
  • the system may perform a search to find other end users that are working or have worked on similar patent applications and allow the end users to communicate with one another. Such communication may or may not be anonymous.
  • the system receives patent application data from an end user and then uses that patent application data to search against other end user profiles in the system.
  • the system generates a list of end user profiles that are relevant to the patent application data and scores them based on relevance.
  • the system then outputs the list of relevant end users to the end user submitting the patent application data.
  • end users may be able to opt in to or out of being a member of this service.
  • the system may require the use of a user ID and password associated with a specific log in profile or other mechanism to protect privacy and ensure that end users are accessing only the information they are entitled to access. For example, a given user may only be given access to or receive help from applications written by himself, other members of his firm or corporation, other applications for the same inventor or assignee, or other practioners who have opted in to a program. In cases where an end user is an entity with multiple individuals who access the system, each individual may have the same or a separate log in profile.
  • the system may incorporate a smaller interface, like a toolbar on a browser or a freestanding toolbar / text field that floats, and/or is hidden but present as an icon (e.g., in the bottom right hand corner in Windows XP).
  • a text field may be ever present on the screen.
  • a user may be able to type a patent number, application number, attorney docket number, etc (along with any necessary password, confirmation number or the like), hit enter and be automatically directed to a search results screen, draft history screen, prosecution history screen, or some other desirable location.
  • system may be configured to make new matter added as part of a continuation in part (CIP) or other application easily identifiable. For example, new matter could be red-lined, highlighted, or otherwise identified by altering the font or in some other recognizable manner as the application is being prepared, or at the time of submission or filing.
  • CIP continuation in part
  • any of the processes described above, such as generation of suggested language, suggested researchers, and suggested attorneys could be performed for the new material.
  • a new search request or automated research report could be automatically generated for the new subject matter in the CIP.
  • the system may be configured to ensure that all submissions for filing comply with any formalities requirements. For example, the system may ensure that all submitted figures fall within the current guidelines for margins size, line thickness, font size, etc. Such compliance may be determined each time a submission is made, whether an initial filing, response to an office action, filing of a continuation, divisional, continuation-in-part of the like.
  • the system could generate a clarity score for the patent application. An AI system could be trained to identify patent applications that clearly define an invention vs. applications that do not. End Users and patent examiners could provide a clarity rating for prior art. Based on the ratings assigned, an AI system can analyze newly filed patent applications and assign clarity scores to them.
  • the system can be built using any suitable architectural method.
  • suitable architectural methods include, but are not necessarily limited to: 1) a simple, table based method 2) a rules based system or 3) an artificial intelligence (AI) system such as Neural Net, or Bayesian Algorithm.
  • AI artificial intelligence
  • a typical data processing system generally includes one or more of a system unit housing, a video display device, memory, processors, operating systems, drivers, graphical user interfaces, and application programs, interaction devices such as a touch pad or screen, and/or control systems including feedback loops and control motors.
  • a typical data processing system may be implemented utilizing any suitable commercially available components to create the gaming environment described herein.
  • the presently described system may comprise a plurality of various hardware and/or software components.
  • An exemplary system 100' is shown in Fig. 2 and described below. However, it will be understood that a nearly unlimited number of variations are possible and that such description is intended to provide a non-limiting example of an implementation that could be utilized but should not be used to define the entire scope of the invention.
  • a system 100' configured to perform the various functions described above may incorporate a number of software modules configured to perform various tasks.
  • Exemplary software modules useful for the presently- described system include:
  • User interface 102 this program allows the end user to interface with system 100'.
  • Patent Words and Phrases Dictionary Program 104 this program generates like words and word phrases based on patent application text entered by an end user. These words and phrases may then be stored in a database such as Patent Words and Phrases Database 124, described below.
  • Patent Application Text Enhancement Program 106 this program identifies words and phrases in an end user's patent application and associates these words and phrases with alternative words and phrases from the patent words and phrases dictionary program 104.
  • Profile Score Generation Program 110 this program scores the relevance of end users to one another and to patent applications and prior art.
  • System 100' may further include a number of databases configured to store and associate the various types of data that are used by the system to perform the functions described above.
  • Exemplary databases useful for the presently-described system include: [0105] End User Database 112, which may store and associate data such as:
  • Patent Application Database 114 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Patent Application Status Database 116 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Attorney Database 118 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Prior Art Database 120 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Prior Art Search Score 23 Published/Unpublished Flag
  • Prior Art Note Database 122 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Patent Words and Phrases Dictionary Database 124 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Researcher Database 126 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Researcher Queue 128, which may store and associate data such as:
  • Certified Search Database 130 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Profile Database 132 which may store and associate data such as:
  • End User Profile 134 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Profile Type Database 136 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Transaction Database 138 which may store and associate data such as:
  • Transaction Type and Fee Database 140 which may store and associate data such as: 1.
  • Transaction Type and Fee Database 140, which may store and associate data such as: 1.
  • the present disclosure provides a system and method for providing certified third party searches.
  • an end user may create a patent application. Either the system or an end user determines a class and subclass for the patent application. Based on the patent class and subclass, a list of potential researchers is generated. The system selects a researcher from the list based on any number of factors, including, for example, the queue of patent applications each researcher has, the class and sub class of the patent being filed, and the class and subclasses for which the researcher is considered an expert. According to one aspect, a researcher can be selected based on keywords in the patent application. [0131] According to one embodiment, the invention is submitted to the researcher to be researched.
  • the system does not disclose the end user or assignee to the researcher.
  • the researcher conducts a prior art search and attaches relevant digital prior art to the patent application record.
  • the researcher can highlight sections of the prior art and site the specific sections of the prior art as relevant to specific sections of the patent application.
  • a researcher can embed specific section of prior art as notes into a patent application.
  • an end user may receive a notice indicating that the researcher has completed a certified search for the submitted patent application.
  • the end user can log in to the system and retrieve the patent application along with the certified search data.
  • the end user can then provide distinguishing language over the prior art and submit the patent application, the certified search, and the distinguishing language to the central system to be filed and reviewed.
  • the system can determine an appropriate researcher and offer the opportunity to provide the end user with real time chat with a researcher. If the end user accepts, a chat window, or equivalent communication method/portal may be opened between the end user and researcher via the central system.
  • the end user can provide patent application data and the researcher can provide relevant prior art.
  • the system can charge a fee to the end user and submit a portion of that fee to the researcher.
  • the recorded chat session may be attached to the patent application file.
  • system 100 can be configured to perform various functions, such as those described above, by performing various method steps in order to accomplish one or more given tasks.
  • programs or modules that may be employed by a system 300 according to the present disclosure are shown in Fig. 3 and include the following programs which may have the following architectures and/or capabilities: [0136] Central Server 302
  • System 300 may further include a number of databases configured to store and associate the various types of data that are used by the system to perform the functions described above.
  • Exemplary database architectures useful for the presently- described system include:
  • End User Database 322 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Patent Application Database 323, which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Prior Art Database 324 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Researcher Schedule Database 325 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Patent Application ID 1 -N Patent Application Research Target Date 1-N
  • Research Report Database 326 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • a system such as that described herein will be configured to perform various functions, such as those described above, by performing various method steps in order to accomplish one or more given tasks.
  • methods that may be performed by a system according to the present disclosure include the following: [0145] Select Researcher
  • a system wherein prior art searches for patent-related document are automatically generated.
  • An end user can submit a patent application to a central system, for example via the web-based form described in U.S. Patent Application Nos. 11/668,596, 11/668,586, 11/611,024, 11/462,621 and 60/727,191 each of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety, and as described in greater detail below.
  • this system could be implemented using any standard mechanism for submitting a patent application and that known methods, such as scanning and OCR, can be used to turn applications submitted in paper form into electronic applications which can then be entered into the presently described system.
  • the system uses a genetic algorithm or other similar mechanism to automatically identify relevant prior art.
  • the system may output the prior art in order of its relevancy. Relative relevancy may be determined based on a score generated by the system.
  • the end user may also be able to review the identified prior art and rate its relevance to the patent application submitted.
  • the end user can also submit notes about or related to the identified prior art.
  • the submitted notes and relevance ratings are stored with the prior art and may be used as criteria on subsequent patent application searches. Over time prior art is given a stand-alone relevance score and a relevance score for each patent application in which it was cited. Relevance may be based on any number of suitable factors which may be determined solely by the system and/or may be determined by the end-user's and/or other reviewer's actions. For example, if the end-user ultimately includes a prior art reference found and presented by the system, that particular piece of prior art may be assumed to have been relevant. If the end-user decides not to include a particular prior art reference that has been found by the system, that piece of prior art may or may not be considered to be relevant.
  • the end user can elect to save some or all of the search results with the patent application.
  • the end user can also write language to distinguish the patent application over the prior art search results and/or amend the claims of the patent application to distinguish over the prior art cited.
  • Any language in the patent application that is added, altered, or deleted by the end user in response to the automated search results may be identified by the system as an "amendment" to the application.
  • Such amendment may be stored with a time and date stamp.
  • the central system can certify the search results as being unaltered by the end user, and the patent application and any "amendments" can be submitted along with the certified search results to the patent office for filing.
  • the system can be used to generate the first office action for a patent application.
  • the automated search results are treated as the first office action.
  • the "amendments" submitted by the end user in response to the automated prior art search can be treated as a response to the first office action.
  • the automated search results along with the end user's "amendments," notes, and comments can then be submitted to an examiner, who can then develop a second office action.
  • the system could therefore be used to automate an entire step of the patent filing and issuance process.
  • the system could then display the patent application, prior art or search results, and/or end user's notes to future applicants, whose applications include the same or similar prior art, i.e., to assist them in distinguishing their invention over the same or similar prior art.
  • an end user's notes may identify that a particular invention is not or only partially enabled or a particular combination is or is not obvious.
  • the automated search tool described herein can also be used to find prior art on issued patents.
  • the end user submits the issued patent title or number to the system and the system finds the most relevant prior art with a date prior to the filing date of the submitted issued patent.
  • the system can assemble the prior art on each issued patent in real time, i.e. when the prior art request is submitted.
  • the system can classify issued patents with prior art all the time, i.e. on an on-going basis, and have pre-assembled search results and/or reports available on demand or request for issued patents.
  • the central system can certify the search results so that they can be used by multiple parties who can use them as the basis for invalidating a patent, one or more of its claims, or determining the novelty of an issued patent and/or one or more of its claims.
  • the system maintains a database of all searches, notes and search results for any issued patents, and for any new searches for the pending application. This information helps the system to determine a relevancy score, i.e., if another applicant uses the same or similar search, the results, prior art, notes, etc., from the first application could be available to any subsequent application(s).
  • the system can generate a novelty score of the document over the prior art it cites and/or that the system determines as relevant.
  • the novelty score can be generated by the system based on how close the prior art cited comes to disclosing the invention disclosed in the document submitted by the end user.
  • end users can submit prior art and/or hyperlinks to prior art to a confidential database where it can be stored, certified or otherwise used as prior art for submitted, yet unpublished, patent applications.
  • Patent examiners or any other authorized end users can access such prior art and use it to distinguish over submitted patent applications.
  • the search system can use the unpublished or other prior art and cite is as references to newly submitted patent applications.
  • the search system can additionally generate novelty scores for the newly submitted patent applications based on the unpublished prior art and/or end user submitted novelty scores. Should an examiner cite unpublished prior art as a reason for not issuing a patent or one or more of its claims, the end user can request at least one second opinion from another examiner.
  • End users can also submit unpublished prior art as prior art for an issued patent.
  • the system can use the unpublished prior art to generate a novelty score for the issued patent.
  • Patent examiners can review the issued patent in light of the unpublished prior art and determine if the patent and/or one or more of its claims should be invalidated.
  • file wrappers for issued patents can continue to expand after a patent has issued.
  • the ever-expanding file wrapper can be used, in whole or in part, to determine the value of a patent for licensing purposes.
  • An issued patent with a low novelty score can have a generally lower or different licensing value then an issued patent with a generally higher novelty score.
  • the system can search both public and unpublished prior art.
  • the system can cite references and output them to the end user. (And can, optionally, insert references and/or hyperlinks in the end user's application).
  • the system can generate a novelty score and certify the search results. The end user can elect to continue filing or prosecuting the patent based on the novelty score.
  • the unpublished, certified results can be reviewed by a patent examiner in determining whether or not to issue a patent on the claimed invention.
  • a piece of prior art may be determined to be relevant based on:
  • the system could determine relevant prior art and output results in real time via the web-based application.
  • Prior art or hyperlinks to the prior art could be incorporated into or otherwise associated with the patent application as the application is being drafted or when filed, examined or prosecuted. (Output formats could be a simple listing, sorted or unsorted in order of relevancy, tree structure, showing links, or a "web" mapping, showing links among all patents and other prior art, published or otherwise).
  • the system can retrieve prior art that is relevant to the prior art reference in real time and display it to the end user either automatically or by request.
  • the system could weight that information based upon the end-user's role (applicant, researcher, and attorney) and/or based upon their proven ability to effectively score in the past. All end-users can score each other's performance, which may also affect the system's weighting of such scores (individually and collectively).
  • the system could simultaneously: a) retrieve the relevant prior art, continuously updating the list as the search term or phrase is changed or completed and b) offer up completed terms or phrases that are similar (i.e., past searches) or relevant to the current search.
  • multiple search windows could open up on the end user desktop showing completed search phrases that might be of interest to the current searcher.
  • These searches could also be displayed based upon relevancy and/or how recent the search was submitted and/or popularity, i.e., how often it has been used.
  • the system could assemble and store a profile for each user that contributes to, or otherwise helps the system better understand the type of patent applications that a given user files, searches on, etc.
  • the system could determine that, for example, an end user generally files more process patents, e.g., software related as opposed to generally fewer device patents. This information could aid any of the online tools and search engines to place a higher priority on the generally more applicable prior art, suggestions, etc. [0167]
  • the system could highlight the more relevant sections of prior art with different colors or other font styles or attributes or other indicators to reflect the degree of potential infringement.
  • the end user and patent examiner can add feedback to the cited prior art reference to indicate whether the reference was flagged with the appropriate color or other attributes. This feedback could be used by an artificial intelligence algorithm to improve the generation of relevant prior art for subsequent searches.
  • Keyword analysis can determine the common use of rare vs. common words in two or more documents. For purposes of document comparisons, common words can then be discarded. The matching of rare words between documents could affect the relevancy score between the documents.
  • results of a search may be based both on the invention being submitted and previous inventions submitted by the end user.
  • the system can be built using any suitable architectural method.
  • suitable architectural methods include, but are not necessarily limited to: 1) a simple, table based method 2) a rules based system or 3) an artificial intelligence (AI) system such as Neural Net, or Bayesian Algorithm.
  • AI artificial intelligence
  • a typical data processing system generally includes one or more of a system unit housing, a video display device, memory, processors, operating systems, drivers, graphical user interfaces, and application programs, interaction devices such as a touch pad or screen, and/or control systems including feedback loops and control motors.
  • a typical data processing system may be implemented utilizing any suitable commercially available components to create the gaming environment described herein.
  • the presently described system may comprise a plurality of various hardware and/or software components.
  • a suitable exemplary system 200 is shown in Fig. 4. However, it will be understood that a nearly unlimited number of variations are possible and that such description is intended to provide a non-limiting example of an implementation that could be utilized but should not be used to define the entire scope of the invention.
  • a system 200 configured to perform the various functions described above may incorporate a number of software modules configured to perform various tasks.
  • Exemplary software modules useful for the presently- described system include:
  • Novelty Score Program 214 This program generates a novelty score of a patent application as they relate to the certified search results.
  • Generate End User Profile Program 216 this program generates an end user profile based on patent applications submitted by an end user.
  • System 200 may further include a number of databases configured to store and associate the various types of data that are used by the system to perform the functions described above.
  • Exemplary databases useful for the presently-described system include: [0177] End User Database 218
  • Patent Application ID Number 1.
  • Patent Application Status Database 222
  • Patent Class 1-N Patent Subclass 1-N
  • a system such as that described herein will be configured to perform various functions, such as those described above, by performing various method steps in order to accomplish one or more given tasks.
  • methods that may be performed by a system and the steps that the system may execute in order to perform these methods are described below: [0192] Submit patent application and receive relevant search results
  • the present disclosure provides a patent examination system utilizing enhanced search techniques and end user feedback on prior art data.
  • a patent application is submitted for filing with the patent office via a web-based central system. Prior to its submission, or immediately thereafter, the system performs a prior art search against its prior art database. Prior Art is scored as to its relevancy to the patent application and ranked in order of its relevance. The most relevant or all results are certified and stored with the patent application and the certified search results can be used by patent examiners to perform office actions or to conduct further review.
  • prior art is scored as relevant by a statistical, rules-based or artificial intelligence system based on any one or several criteria including:
  • a patent examiner can review the submitted patent application, the certified prior art search, any notes and the distinguishing language provided by the end user and draft an office action using the three files.
  • the office action may contain notes about the prior art, the patent application, and the distinguishing data that will be stored with both the patent application and the prior art to be used to score them against new patent applications later.
  • patent applications As patent applications are filed, they become prior art for subsequent patent applications.
  • the patent application can be published or unpublished prior art. If it is unpublished prior art, it can only be reviewed by patent examiners, who can use it as prior art on subsequent patent applications.
  • the central system can also conduct certified searches using published and/or unpublished prior art acquired in this manner.
  • the end user is optionally made aware that there may be prior art that could invalidate his patent application, but he must rely on the patent examiner to examine the application and the unpublished prior art and notify him as to whether the unpublished prior art could or does invalidate his patent. If an end user is notified by a patent examiner that unpublished prior art invalidates his patent, he can request a reexamination of the patent by another examiner or submit the matter to a review process established for such purposes.
  • the end user may be able to request that the unpublished prior art be published.
  • notes attached to prior art can also be published or unpublished by the central system. Unpublished notes would be available to patent examiners, their peers, and the central system and/or any other authorized end users for review of subsequent patent applications. Published notes can be reviewed by patent examiners and end users alike and can be used by both parties and the AI search system to consider the validity of subsequent patent application claims. [0210] As with patent applications, published notes may be reviewed by other inventors, researchers, attorneys, etc., any of whom may challenge the application or notes by submitting their notes or opinions to the system. They may also assign a weighting factor to their commentary (from low to high). These rankings can be tracked and measured to determine the relative value and weight each contributor should receive regarding any such existing and/or future commentaries.
  • the system either statistically based, manually based, rules based or AI based, can establish a track record for each critic, which can then be used to weight any future submissions.
  • a comment from critic that regularly contributes commentary and is insightful or "right” most of the time will carry more weight than critics that prove “wrong” more often. This would push comments to the top of the list that the examiner might review.
  • the system could search its own database or other databases, e.g., via the Internet to determine the credentials of the critic.
  • submissions from unknown persons might carry less weight, whereas submissions from people having a known reputation, such as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, could carry greater weight. This would provide a means to weight comments, especially early in the systems' life cycle, when there is no track record.
  • the examiners could provide the system with feedback on the relative usefulness of any given critics' commentary.
  • the database should track human and machine derived rankings on any commentary for every critic. These then can be used after the examination to determine which sources are best able to provide meaningful input as it relates to the actual / final outcome of each application.
  • the system could automatically require the examination of a patent application by two or more examiners if the prior art cited that invalidates the patent claims is unpublished. In this manner, two (or more) examiners will have reviewed the unpublished prior art data before an office action is submitted to the central system for distribution back to the end user.
  • Any such peer review might be either public or anonymous, i.e., the primary examiner may or may not be informed as to who the second (or additional) examiner is/are.
  • the system could randomly assign internal reviews, and/or the system could learn which peer to use for each type of application, using similar or dissimilar relevancy and efficiency scores.
  • the examiner could request a conference with the examiner so as to ask questions face-to-face. If the anonymous reviewer refuses, the system could, instead, arrange a time for an anonymous instant message session so that each person could "discuss" the reviewer's point of view. Alternatively, the peer reviewer might only agree to an anonymous dialog via messages (via e-mail but using an anonymous temporary alias account that is forwarded and managed between the parties).
  • the certified search submitted with the patent application can be periodically refreshed by the search system to insure that newly acquired prior art with early filing dates is included in the certified search query and subsequent scored results.
  • the end user can be notified, for example, via an alert, that new prior art has been found and included as part of the certified search. Suitable alerts are described, for example, in U.S. Patent Application No. 11/676,848, which is incorporated by reference. The end user can then be given the opportunity to distinguish over the new prior art and his distinguishing language can be included as part of the first office action notes he submits to the patent office for review. In this manner, the central system can conduct a more thorough, ongoing search of prior art for a filed patent application thereby improving the quality of the patent applications and office actions. Any third parties that may have submitted notes/commentary/argument may also be notified of any such "new prior art" to be given the same opportunity to review such additional prior art and/or to submit additional notes.
  • the end user can also conduct a manual search, i.e. one performed without using the artificial intelligence or other search program(s) of the central system. Should the examiner find relevant prior art in a manual search that was not included in the certified search, that prior art can be added to the certified search, along with notes. Such addition of prior art may be accomplished via any applicable means, including, copying or referencing the prior art using a hyperlink into the prior art database, or by listing such prior art's title, application or other identification number or means
  • the artificial intelligence program can use the prior art that is manually submitted in this manner to improve its own database of information, and/or improve its search or other rules, methods or algorithms so that later certified searches that it performs are generally more accurate.
  • the artificial intelligence system can revisit the steps taken by patent examiners on previously examined patent applications. File wrappers of previous patent applications can be analyzed by the artificial intelligence and used as a first criteria to develop or preload an initial set of rules to conduct certified searches on subsequent patent applications that are submitted to the patent office via the central web-based system.
  • existing search engine algorithms may serve as the Genetic Programming system as its base programs. These then can be subjected to normal GP techniques such as cross mutation, etc., to create a self-improving network (search tool).
  • the system can be built utilizing three different architectural methods: 1) a simple, table based method 2) a rules based system or 3) an artificial intelligence (AI) system such as Neural Net, or Bayesian or other Genetic Algorithms.
  • examiners could submit questions or requests to existing patent holders (prior art to the pending application) or others with similar patents, or researchers or attorneys, to get their input about the pending patent application. Since the application is already filed, those queried could not claim authorship, but would / may have a vested interest in the application and may have opinion as to the validity of the pending application. Such feedback could become part of the application notes. In some embodiments, end users that provide such opinions may be paid a fee for such opinions.
  • Such fees may be determined via any applicable means, including based upon any available factors, for example, such end users qualifications and/or rankings and/or based upon the frequency or extent such opinions are used or otherwise relied upon by any person, e.g., patent examiner, etc.
  • an off-line communications may be established using e-mail or recorded voice or text messages or a combination of these, for example, an email message may include a title and an attachment of a voice message.
  • a system 500 as shown in Fig. 5 may be configured to perform the various functions described above and may incorporate one or more servers capable of running any number and/or combination of software modules configured to perform various tasks.
  • Exemplary combinations of servers and software modules useful for the presently-described system include: [0224] Central Server 502, which may host or otherwise be in communication with:
  • a system according to the present disclosure may further include a number of databases configured to store and associate the various types of data that are used by the system to perform the functions described above.
  • Exemplary database architectures useful for the presently-described system include:
  • End User Database 521 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Patent Examiner Database 522 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • a system such as that described herein will be configured to perform various functions, such as those described above, by performing various method steps in order to accomplish one or more given tasks.
  • methods that may be performed by a system according to the present disclosure include the following: [0232] Conduct Certified Prior Art Search and First Office Action
  • the present disclosure provides an electronic patent file wrapper system and method for managing electronic correspondence for a patent application.
  • an end user creates a patent application by entering patent application data into a web- based system. The date that the patent application was received is time stamped and stored with the file. A fee is generated for submitting the application and the end user account is charged the fee. The system generates a notice that a fee has been charged and transmits the notice to the end user.
  • the system can determine relevant researchers to conduct prior art research on the patent application and outputs an offer to the end user to transmit the patent application to the researcher. Alternatively, the applicant can conduct and submit their own research and/or engage their own firm. The date that the request for research was received is time stamped and stored with the file. If the end user accepts the offer, the patent application is stored and a notice is sent to the researcher that a patent application needs to be researched. [0245] When the researcher has completed his research of the patent application, the prior art files can be added to a search folder linked to the patent application file along with any notes or commentary provided by the researcher. The date that search folder was completed and received and/or updated is time stamped and stored with the file. When the researcher completes the prior art file folder and submits it to the central system via a web based form or other submission tool, the end user may be notified that the prior art search is complete.
  • a fee is generated for researching the application and, for example, the end user account is charged the fee, and the researcher account is credited a portion of the fee.
  • the system generates a notice that a fee has been charged and transmits the notice to the end user.
  • the system generates a notice that a credit has been applied, and transmits the notice to the researcher.
  • the end user or other authorized end users can log in to the system to review the prior art file.
  • the end user can also retrieve the patent application and add more data to or change it. Whenever the patent application file is accessed and or amended, a time stamp is recorded along with the end user's id and the amendment and stored with the patent application file. Amendments may be recorded as "change tracking" or stored as a new file.
  • the system determines relevant attorneys to complete and enhance the patent application data and outputs an offer to the end user to transmit the patent application to the attorney. If the end user and/or attorney accepts the offer, the patent application is stored and a notice is sent to the attorney that a patent application needs to be researched. The date that the request for an attorney was received may be time stamped and stored with the file, along with the attorney's identifier code.
  • the patent application when the attorney has completed and or enhanced the patent application, the patent application can be resubmitted to the central system.
  • the date that the patent application was submitted may be time stamped and stored with the file.
  • the end user When the patent application is resubmitted by the attorney, the end user may be notified, such as via an electronic notification. Amendments may be recorded as "change tracking" or stored as a new or associated file.
  • a fee is generated for completed and or enhancing the application, for example, the end user account could be charged the fee, and the attorney and/or the examination office/system account is credited all or a portion of the fee.
  • the system may generate a notice that a fee has been charged and transmits the notice to the end user.
  • the system may further generate a notice that a credit has been applied, and transmit the notice to the attorney or any applicable parties using any suitable means.
  • the end user can then submit the patent application to the central system for a certified prior art search.
  • the request for a certified search is time stamped and stored with the patent application file.
  • the certified prior art search is conducted by the central system and the prior art file is stored with the patent application along with a time / date stamp and other relevant information.
  • the end user is notified that the certified search is complete via electronic transmission.
  • a fee may be charged to the end user account and a notice of the fee sent to the end user via, for example, electronic transmission.
  • the system could allow end users to embed notes or hyperlinks in a patent application that reference prior art.
  • the examiner can then easily read through an application, checking prior art or notes as he progresses through the document. If there is more than one note or document associated with one or more hyperlinks, any suitable method may be used to provide all the notes and/or documents to the examiner.
  • a pop up window with a listing may appear and allow the user select one, or more, of the notes or documents
  • popup window may also includes sort, select or filter options to present a list of notes or documents in a preferred order and/or by including or excluding one or more notes based on any available criteria, including, for example, date, time, alphabetically, relevancy, by provider, end user, or any combination of the forgoing.
  • sort, select or filter options to present a list of notes or documents in a preferred order and/or by including or excluding one or more notes based on any available criteria, including, for example, date, time, alphabetically, relevancy, by provider, end user, or any combination of the forgoing.
  • a user clicks a link the most relevant source appears, and a new list appears listing the other remaining documents. Instead, users might have the option to "right click" on the link to see the list and select from that point.
  • Another option provides a different color code depending of whether there is only one or multiple links.
  • the hyperlink system could automatically insert
  • an end user can review the prior art file and enter notes to distinguish the patent application over the prior art filed.
  • the notes may be attached to the file and a time stamp generated and stored with the notes and the patent application file along with information about the end user that submitted such notes.
  • the notes could be date stamped.
  • the system may be configured to track the parts of the patent application that are missing and need to be completed before the patent application can be filed with the patent office. A notice of missing parts can be electronically generated and transmitted to the appropriate end user(s) on a periodic basis or on demand via any applicable means, including via alerts.
  • End users can request sample text for each missing part and/or use a "wizard" that steps them through the process to fill out each section.
  • the end user can submit the patent application to the patent office for examination.
  • the file is time stamped with the date it was submitted to the patent office for examination.
  • a fee may be charged to the end user account to submit the patent application to the patent office.
  • the system may generate a notice that the patent application was submitted and that the appropriate fee charged and send the notice to the appropriate end user(s), for example, via electronic submission.
  • a fee structure that is based on the size, and/or complexity, and/or scope of the application, rather than a fixed fee could be used by the system.
  • fees for patent filings may be based on the number of claims, the number of images, the number of pages of text, or the number of prior art references cited for enablement.
  • a system according to the present disclosure may work as follows:
  • the system selects the appropriate examiner and notifies the examiner that they have a new patent application to examine via electronic transmission.
  • An electronic notice is sent to the end user informing him of the patent examiner assigned to the case and the position in the examination queue of the application.
  • the end user is offered the opportunity to pay to move his patent up in the queue. If the end user accepts, he is given the opportunity to pay for a different position in the examination queue.
  • the end user selects the queue position, and a fee is charged to his account.
  • An electronic notice is transmitted to the end user confirming his position in the queue (and all others currently ahead of him) and the fee charged to his credit card (alternatively the fee could be charged when the patent is examined).
  • the system could notify all end users with patent applications ahead of the patent application in the queue or that otherwise have priority over such application, e.g., based upon demonstrated need or the age of the applicant, giving the end users a "first right of refusal" to maintain their position in the queue. Maintaining such position may or may not require a payment. Such applicants could also appeal to the examiner not to move their application down in the list.
  • the end user can elect to change the position of the patent application in the examination queue at any time.
  • the system notifies the end user of any changes in the position of the patent application in the examination queue via electronic submission.
  • an electronic transmission is sent to the end user informing him that the examination has begun.
  • the notice can also include an expected date when the examination will be completed and/or any other relevant or available information, including information such as the examiner's name, qualifications, prior cases, outcome of those cases, etc.
  • the examiner and end users could communicate anonymously with one another during the examination process. All commentary in this embodiment would be time stamped and stored in the file wrapper.
  • Patent Examiners can review the certified search, add prior art documents to the certified search, and add notes to the distinguishing language to argue against the patentability of the patent application.
  • the prior art documents and any notes added by the patent examiner are filed with the central system as an office action on the patent application.
  • End Users receive notice that an office action has been received for a patent application. End Users can log in to the central system to retrieve the office action document along with any notes or other information. End Users can add notes, argument, and/or additional distinguishing language to the patent application a resubmit the application for a second examination. The central system notifies the patent examiner that the patent application was received for a second examination via electronic notification. The patent application is again placed in the examination queue.
  • the system also notifies that end user that the patent application was received with such notes, argument and/or additional distinguishing language and the patent application's position in the examination queue.
  • the system determines an appropriate draftsperson to review the figures included in the patent application using a method similar to the method it uses to select an examiner for each submitted patent application.
  • a notification is sent to the draftsperson that a patent application has received a notice of allowance.
  • the draftsperson reviews the drawings and specifies errors and/or omissions in the drawings that need to be corrected and/or attaches one or more notes.
  • the draftsperson drawing review is submitted to the central system.
  • the central system notifies the end users that the drawings submitted with a patent application have errors and omissions that need to be corrected.
  • the end user can correct the error and omissions of the drawings submitted with the patent application and resubmit the patent application to the central system.
  • the central system notifies the draftsperson that the errors and omissions to the drawings have been corrected.
  • the draftsperson can then accept the drawing revisions or submit another error and omissions report.
  • Any individual, corporation or other entities can subscribe to the "published and issued patents notification system," which will send e-mail (or other form of communications, e.g., an alert) to any interested party.
  • e-mail or other form of communications, e.g., an alert
  • subscribers indicate the types of patents, e.g., classes, sub-classes, etc., that they have interest in and/or may do so by indicating or describing the field of use and/or may cite prior art and any applications or issued patents that include such prior art are considered "of interest”.
  • End users could indicate patents applications that they are interested in via check box selection, listing of "similar patents or prior art” which a GA could use to help ID new applications that are "similar” to, e.g., use the "relevancy scoring” process.) Subscribers could indicate the relevancy score above which they have an interest. [0273] According to yet another embodiment, any time an end user or patent examiner logs in to the patent application file, corresponding search file, corresponding distinguishing notes, or other notes, corresponding and certified search, corresponding office action(s), an access and amendment log is created and time stamped. End Users can elect to be notified whenever and by whom the patent application is accessed and or amended and or challenged.
  • potential licensees of the patent application can review the patent application to determine if they want to license the invention.
  • a log is kept of every instance that the patent application was reviewed.
  • a log is also kept of each subsequent patent application where the issued patent application is cited as prior art.
  • Such logs may be generally available, available only to authorized end users, and/or available for a fee, or based upon any other applicable terms and conditions or any combination of the forgoing.
  • a potential licensee can elect to license the patent.
  • the potential licensee can notify the central system that they would like to license the patent.
  • the central system can notify the end user that an anonymous potential licensee would like to license the patent via electronic transmission.
  • a fee is charged to the potential licensee and the potential licensee is notified that the end user has been notified and a fee has been charged to his account.
  • Such fee may be determined via any applicable means available, including, for example, based upon such factors as: exclusive vs. nonexclusive licenses, term of the license, field of use, novelty score, type of patent, e.g., device vs. method vs. design patents, or based upon input or rules or pricing established by the inventor or her assignee.
  • the central system can generate an electronic transmission to the potential licensee and the end user to determine if the patent was licensed. If the patent was licensed, the central system records that the patent application was licensed to a particular licensee and the dollar value and other terms and conditions of the license. In some embodiments, the data is kept unpublished, but is used by the central system to determine the strength of the patent application on subsequent prior art and patent strength searches. Potential licensees could be given the opportunity to buy an exclusive or non-exclusive license.
  • serial numbers for patent applications can be assigned in various ways, such as the following:
  • Numbers are assigned by a central system as patent applications are filed [0279] Numbers can be distributed in blocks to various sub entities and assigned by the sub entities.
  • Sub entities can request numbers from a central system as end users file patent applications with them.
  • the class and subclass of a patent application can be generated by the system, assigned by the end user, or assigned by a person in the patent office. If the patent class and subclass are suggested and/or assigned by the system, the system may determine the appropriate class and subclass based on, for example, (i) scanning the text of the patent application and assigning it an appropriate class and subclass based on similar text in patent applications that have already been filed, (ii) asking the end user a series of questions about the application and assigning it a class and subclass based on the answers to the questions (iii) reviewing relevancy scores of included or attached or referenced prior art, or (iv) any combination of the forgoing. An end user could be presented with and select from a suggested class and subclass and or assign a class and subclass to the patent application by answering a series of questions about the application and selecting an appropriate class and subclass based on the answers to the questions.
  • a system 600 may incorporate one or more programs or modules configured to perform the various functions described herein. These programs may be housed on one or more servers, including system or client servers. As a non- limiting example, system 600 may include the following programs housed on one or more servers: [0284] Central Server 602 (or a combination of servers, not shown)
  • the system may further include one or more databases configured to collect and associate various data.
  • databases that would be suitable in the presently described system include:
  • End User Database 621 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Patent Application Database 622 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Patent Examiner Database 623 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Notification Database 624 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Fee Database 625 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • system may be configured to perform various method steps such as, but not limited to:
  • the present disclosure provides a method and systems to provide undisclosed prior art to invalidate an issued patent and/or one or more of its claims.
  • an end user after receiving notice from the central notification system, and/or after an end user discovers a pending or issued patent through his own initiative, an end user attaches a prior art file along with any notes to an issued patent application record via a web- based system. The end user requests that the patent be reexamined in light of the prior art file and attached arguments and/or notes. The patent application is flagged as needing reexamination.
  • a fee is applied to the end user account for submitting the prior art and for requesting the reexamination of the patent application.
  • the patent application is assigned to an examiner and placed in his examination queue. The patent examiner can reexamine the issued patent application using the prior art submitted by the end user. The patent examiner can also verify that the submitted prior art is legitimate by cross checking the reference and certifying that the prior art reference and date are true and accurate.
  • the end user who submits the prior art reference and requests the reexamination can be charged a fee when he submits the reference, when the patent is reexamined, or when the patent is or is not invalidated in light of the prior art.
  • a refund equal to, less than or greater than the original fee can be given to the end user who submitted the prior art and requested the reexamination of the issued patent. For example, such refund may include the full amount paid, plus interest.
  • the Artificial Intelligence or other search system will also be receiving more prior art files over time.
  • the system can reexamine pending and issued patents and add prior art, e.g., prior art with an origin date that precedes the application, to their certified search files, including the insertion of hyperlinks.
  • prior art e.g., prior art with an origin date that precedes the application
  • a notice can be sent to the end user who submitted the patent application that additional prior art has been found and needs to be distinguished over.
  • the system can flag the issued patent as potentially needing to be reexamined (along with a "probability score" and, if the score is above a certain level, place it in an examiner's queue, but not if it has already passed the reexamination process.
  • the artificial intelligence system that conducted the certified search on the patent application can use the added prior art reference as another method of training itself to conduct better searches in the future.
  • the AI system could automatically check to see if the prior art that was manually submitted to invalidate a patent is in its prior art database but not disclosed. If the prior art is in the database, the AI system can certify the validity of the prior art reference before it is reviewed by an examiner. In some embodiments, the system may determine if such manually submitted prior art was submitted by an end user whose prior submissions were found valid or invalid. If prior submissions were found to be invalid, such new submissions may be discounted or be subjected to further review.
  • the system could also receive the submission of an expert testimony.
  • expert testimony may be provided via any applicable means, including, for example, via notes or alerts.
  • An alternate embodiment allows end users to submit prior art to a central system and link it to a particular patent application.
  • an end user submits a piece of prior art, they also indicate the type and/or source of the prior art, i.e. Patent, Lexis Nexus, article, website, etc.
  • the central system verifies that the prior art cited is stored in one of the prior art databases and verifies the prior art date from those databases. In this manner an independent third party system can generally verify the validity and date of prior art cited.
  • the system can be built utilizing three different architectural methods: 1) a simple, table based method 2) a rules based system or 3) an artificial intelligence (AI) system such as Neural Net, or Bayesian Algorithm or any combination of these methods.
  • AI artificial intelligence
  • the presently described system may incorporate one or more programs or modules configured to perform the various functions described herein. These programs may be housed on one or more servers, including system or client servers. As a non-limiting example, the system may include the following programs housed on the following server: [0306] Central Server 702
  • the system may further include one or more databases configured to collect and associate various data.
  • databases that would be suitable in the presently described system include:
  • End User Database 721 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Prior Art Database 722 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Patent Application Database 723, which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Fee Database 724 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Fee Amount [0312] Moreover, the system may be configured to perform various method steps such as, but not limited to:
  • the present disclosure provides systems and methods in which various patent related documents are entered into a system and stored electronically. As described above, in many of these embodiments, end users and patent examiners can access the documents via a web-based or other networked system. Moreover, not only can the documents be reviewed, but notes can be added to them. These notes can be used, for example, to generate relevance scores for prior art documents as they related to submitted patent applications. Accordingly, in one embodiment the present disclosure provides methods and systems for facilitating certified prior art note taking and a method for using the same. [0318] According to various embodiments, notes can be flagged as published or unpublished.
  • unpublished notes can be viewed by patent examiners, but not by end users or only by authorized end users.
  • Notes, whether published or not, may be encrypted to better control access by authorized users.
  • the notes could be flagged with several layers of administrative clearance if necessary.
  • Notes may take any suitable form including, but not limited to, blogs, overlays, hyperlinks, threads, or any other method for attaching or embedding words, comments, documents, or the like, into a digital document.
  • the end user and/or examiner could add notes that appear as a rollover overlay to a section of a patent application.
  • the notes will be associated with the patent application so that they can be partially or completely viewed simultaneously with the patent application.
  • a note may be viewed "simultaneously" whenever the note, a portion thereof, or a link thereto, can be viewed at the same time as a portion of the patent application. According to various embodiments, such simultaneous viewing should be available with a minimal amount of effort by the viewer. For example, the viewer may be required to roll their cursor over a portion of the patent application in order to view some or all of the note or a link thereto. However, in this embodiment, a viewer should not be required to separately search for and download the note. [0319] According to some embodiments, some, or all, of the prior art identified or referred to by the notes may be hosted by the system.
  • a link in a note may or may not lead to a document hosted on the same server as the patent submission system described herein.
  • examiners or other users may be able to highlight sections of prior art with different colors.
  • the different colors may be ranked to indicate various factors such as, but not limited to, the degree of relevance and/or the degree of potential infringement.
  • the end user and/or examiner could then add feedback to indicate whether the art was flagged with the appropriate highlight color.
  • system 800 such as that described herein may be configured to perform the various functions described above and may incorporate one or more servers capable of running any number and/or combination of software modules configured to perform various tasks. Exemplary combinations of servers and software modules useful for the presently-described system include: [0323] Central Server
  • a system according to the present disclosure may further include a number of databases configured to store and associate the various types of data that are used by the system to perform the functions described above.
  • Exemplary database architectures useful for the presently-described system include: [0325] Prior Art Database
  • a system such as that described herein will be configured to perform various functions, such as those described above, by performing various method steps in order to accomplish one or more given tasks.
  • methods that may be performed by a system according to the present disclosure include the following:
  • the present disclosure provides a document examiner comment system.
  • a document is examined and an opinion is rendered by an examiner.
  • End users can log into a system that permits partial or complete access to one or more of the documents and/or examiner opinions and gives the end user the option to submit a comment about the examiner or the examiner's rendered opinion.
  • These comments are used to provide a rating for the examiner.
  • the comments and ratings can be viewed or used by end users of a search engine database. The comments can be used to assign new documents to an examination queue.
  • Such a comment system may be a separate application provided by a document examining authority, such as the USPTO or a third party.
  • the system may or may not be integrated with the examining authority's software.
  • the presently described system may be provided as an add-on module or plug-in to an existing system or application, for example, Google's search engine, or a Patent Application Drafting Tool (PDT) such as that described in U.S. Patent Application No.11/627,263, which is hereby incorporated by reference. Accordingly, the system herein described may be added to the examining authority's existing applications or provided as a stand alone product offered by the examining authority or a third party.
  • PTT Patent Application Drafting Tool
  • the examiner commenting system described herein may be implemented through the creation of a notes system.
  • Exemplary methods to provide attachment of notes into documents and/or associate notes with documents, or words, or other data are disclosed in US Patent Application Nos. 11/690,095 "Facilitating Certified Prior Art Note Taking and Method for Using Same,” filed March 22, 2007; 11/697,480 entitled “Note Overlay System,” filed April 6, 2007; and 11/697,486 entitled “Document Examiner Comment System,” filed April 6, 2007; each of which is incorporated herein by reference.
  • a notes system When using a notes system, such system may be a part of a generic notes system, or it may be a separate notes system provided primarily for the purpose of providing examiner opinions and/or notes regarding such opinions.
  • a generic notes system may be modified to add specific features, functions and design improvements in support of any one or more of the herein disclosed inventions and methods.
  • a database for example, a notes database.
  • one or more parties or end users may be notified, including any one or more or any combination of: the examiner's supervisor, the inventor(s), the assignee, the attorney of record, and/or any other third parties, including, for example, interested inventors, patent attorneys, and/or entities.
  • various parties may indicate fields of use, classes, subclasses, inventors, assignees, or any other category in which they have an interest and, when an opinion is rendered to an application that satisfies the indicated area of interest a copy of, or link to, the rendered opinion may be provided to or made available to the interested party.
  • Interest may be indicated via overt means, e.g., though a process wherein the party requests to receive such notifications, and/or may be determined by any other suitable means, for example, by tracking third parties' searching activities.
  • Notifications may be provided via any applicable means, including, for example an alert or email message. Exemplary methods to determine alert events and/or to send alerts are disclosed for example, in U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/676,848 "Virtual Environment with Alerts" filed February 20, 2007 which is incorporated herein by reference.
  • examiners may render and record opinions at any time and/or may be limited to specific or approved times at various steps throughout the examination process.
  • Examiners may copy an opinion from one application, in whole or in part, to another related or otherwise relevant application or whenever such copying is desired or useful.
  • a copy and paste option may save the examiner time and effort in rendering an opinion.
  • the examiner Prior or subsequent to pasting a copied opinion, the examiner may be given the option of making changes to the copied opinion.
  • the original source of the copies information may or may not be stored with the copied information or otherwise made identifiable and may or may not be made available to the end user, applicant, assignee, attorney of record, etc.
  • end users may be notified, for example, via an alert. Furthermore, end users may be permitted to provide comments regarding the opinion. Comments can be provided by any one or more of the following, including:
  • a comment can include (if permitted / authorized / available):
  • Comments may be made via any suitable means, including, for example, via a blog or notes system.
  • Comments may or may not be reviewable by the patent examiner and/or a supervisor or other third parties. Such access may or may not require end user or other authorization/permission.
  • certain opinions and/or comments may be entered and flagged as public or private and/or may carry any applicable designation, which may generally grant and/or restrict access to certain users or classes of end users. For example, an inventor may choose to affix a comment that only the patent examiner can see or review and/or respond to. Alternatively or additionally, a particular comment may only be viewable by such patent examiner's supervisor, the inventor's patent attorney, other persons or end users designated by the inventor submitting such commentary, and/or any other party or combination thereof.
  • notes may also include priority or other attributes or designations. For example, a note may be flagged as being of high or low importance and/or relating to claims or prior art.
  • classifications or flags may be limited to those options permitted or otherwise included by the owner / developer of the system, and/or may be flexible, including an option to permit the creation and maintenance of any number or type of such classes.
  • classes may include subclasses.
  • feedback or scores or grades may be aggregated and made available for subsequent review by any one or more of: the patent examiner(s), supervisors, end users, inventors, patent attorneys, private companies or any third parties, perhaps only as authorized, and/or any combination of the forgoing.
  • scores may be aggregated using any applicable means, for example, an average or a weighted average score may be determined.
  • a weighted score certain end user's votes or feedback or commentary may carry more or less weight than other end users.
  • the feedback or score provided by peers of the examiner may carry more weight than either the examiner's supervisor and/or the inventor.
  • a system to permit or support such calculations may include a table or rules based system, which permits authorized users to determine such relative rankings, and/or a self adapting or learning system may be implemented to provide a system which learns which scores should carry more or less weight.
  • a system based upon the use of one or more genetic algorithms may be implemented. By receiving feedback from large numbers of users, the system could determine, over time, which users and/or classes of users are more adept at providing such feedback or scores and/or which end users and/or classes of user's feedback is more or less accurate or useful.
  • inventors or other interested parties may make use of such ranking and/or grades in determining which field of use and/or examiner they desire to submit or change submission and/or priority for a given application, inventor or group or class of applications.
  • Exemplary methods for priority queuing documents are disclosed for example in U.S. Patent Application Nos. 11/462,621 11/462,621, "Fee-Based Priority Queuing for Insurance Claim Processing," filed August 4, 2006; 11/611,024 “System and Method for Prioritizing Items in a Queue” filed December 14, 2006; and PCT Application No. PCT/US06/340347, "Insurance Form Priority Queuing;” each of which are incorporated herein by reference.
  • a system such as that described herein may also be affected by a feedback mechanism that includes information regarding the eventual outcome or activities associated with any one or more such applications and/or examiners.
  • a system could be implemented that provides information about the ultimate issuance or rejection of one or more applications reviewed by one or more examiners. If a given examiner's cases are more frequently upheld in a court of law, then such examiner's opinions could be ranked higher than those of other, less successful examiners.
  • end users e.g., inventors, examiners, examiners' supervisors and/or patent attorneys may use scores and opinions to determine which examination queue they prefer for a given patent application or group of applications. For example, using the scores and opinions provided by this disclosed invention, a patent attorney may determine that a new application would be best served by being examined by a particular examiner and/or within a specific examination queue. In addition or in the alternate, such attorney may further conclude that, since a similar or related application has been or is about to be examined within a given queue or by a particular examiner, that his client would best be served if his application is reviewed sooner rather than later, as relevant information and decisions are or have been recently made by a particular examiner and/or within particular queue.
  • an end user e.g., inventor or patent attorney
  • Such changes and fees, if any, for such change requests may be made by any applicable means.
  • examiners' pay may be based in whole or in part upon feedback from end users and/or results outcomes, e.g., patents being upheld or overturned, whether in court or via any review processes. For example, examiners may receive a pay increase or bonus if their opinions are ranked highly and/or are upheld when such examiner's cases are tested in a court of law.
  • a system may include a user interface that permits access to any such historical data. Such access may or may not require authorization. Such data may or may not be encrypted in order to provide added levels of security for such information. For example, in the case where large groups of end users are accessing the USPTO 's database, certain of its information may be encrypted and/or carry a higher level of encryption and/or other security measures, e.g., user id and/or passwords, to ensure system integrity and to maintain the confidence of certain information, including, for example, unpublished pending patents and/or private communications or opinions.
  • security measures e.g., user id and/or passwords
  • the user interface may assist or aid such an end user by providing a search tool to permit scanning or searching for relevant opinions or comments, and/or any other accessible information, e.g., examiner scores or rankings.
  • Search results may be determined and sorted or presented via any suitable means, including, for example, in order of relevancy to the patent examiner, patent applicant, patent attorney, assignee, date, time, or any other relevant discriminating characteristic and/or any combination of the forgoing.
  • search results may include a list of hyperlinks that permit the end user to click on to be redirected to any such additional information or results data.
  • a search tool may be based upon existing search engines, such as Google, and/or using any applicable means, including, for example, use of a plug-in module to enhance an existing or new search engine.
  • Exemplary methods for providing patent and prior art searches are disclosed in U.S. Patent Application Nos. 11/671,380, "Automated Patent Searches” filed February 5, 2007; 11/693,555 “Providing Certified Patent Searches Conducted by Third Party researchers” filed March 29, 2007; and 11/697,447 entitled “Enhanced Patent Prior Art Search Engine,” filed April 6, 2007; each of which is hereby incorporated by reference.
  • sort and/or other selection criteria including, for example, filters which can sort and/or filter by any applicable means, including: a) date, b) time, c) examiner, d) end user, f) patent attorney, g) patent application or patent number(s), h) supervisor, i) opinion type, class, subclass, or number, j) prior art references, k) case id or number, 1) note id, m) and/or any combination of the above and/or by alphabetical or numeric sorting of any of the above in ascending and/or descending order, n) and/or any other data or variables stored or available in the database or connected databases or systems.
  • filters which can sort and/or filter by any applicable means, including: a) date, b) time, c) examiner, d) end user, f) patent attorney, g) patent application or patent number(s), h) supervisor, i) opinion type, class, subclass, or number, j) prior art references, k) case
  • search algorithms and/or search results may be refined through the use of survey or other questions presented to the end user or examiner using the search tool to find and/or view comments and/or opinions or other notes.
  • Such surveys may be provided using any applicable means.
  • Exemplary methods to provide for survey questions and gathering of data are disclosed by applicants in U.S. Patent Application Nos. 60/774,177, entitled “Survey Based Qualification of Keyword Searches," 11/278,123, also entitled “Survey Based Qualification of Keyword Searches" 11/562,738 "Survey Based Qualification of Keyword Searches" and 11/608,150, entitled “Map and Inventory Based On-Line Purchases” which applications are incorporated herein by this reference.
  • any of the disclosed methods for searching and/or sorting opinions and notes and/or other information may be included in an existing or new search engine.
  • Methods to create or modify search engines are well known and understood within the prior art and by any person of ordinary skill.
  • methods to design and build a search engine are disclosed and discussed by the authors of the following books, including, for example "Understanding Search Engines: Mathematical Modeling and Text Retrieval (Software, Environments, Tools), Second Edition, by Michael W. Berry and Murray Browne, which is incorporated by reference.
  • Methods to create WebPages, hyperlinks and hypertext are well known in the prior art and any person with ordinary skill in the art can design and create such hyperlinks.
  • one or more fees may be charged to practice or use of one or more of the systems or methods disclosed herein. For example, applicants may be charged a fee for access to and/or searching or reviewing or commenting one or more of an examiner's notes, comments and/or opinions and/or to copy and/or paste or use such information and/or to contest any opinion, statements, comment, or the like.
  • the disclosed invention may be practiced in the real or virtual world.
  • a video game may include a virtual patent office.
  • Exemplary methods and systems for providing protection of intellectual property in a virtual environment are disclosed, for example, in U.S. Patent Application Nos.
  • the disclosed invention may be applied to a suitable virtual environment, world or video game(s).
  • commentary and opinions and/or scoring such as those disclosed herein may be created, used and/or delivered in the virtual world.
  • virtual patent examiners (which may or may not be real world patent examiners too), may be used to provide patent opinions regarding a player's or player character's patent application for a virtual object.
  • the disclosed invention could be also be used for the creation of agreements between or among real or virtual end users, players, player characters or other third parties.
  • methods to ensure that agreements are enforceable and that advertising fees are collected in such virtual environments are desirable.
  • Exemplary methods for providing such contract enforcement and collection of fees are disclosed, for example, in U.S. Patent Application Nos.
  • a typical data processing system generally includes one or more of a system unit housing, a video display device, memory, processors, operating systems, drivers, graphical user interfaces, and application programs, interaction devices such as a touch pad or screen, and/or control systems including feedback loops and control motors.
  • a typical data processing system may be implemented utilizing any suitable commercially available components to create the gaming environment described herein.
  • a system 900 may comprise a plurality of various hardware and/or software components such as those shown and described below.
  • Exemplary database architecture includes:
  • Examiner Database 921 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • User Database 922 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Attorney Database 923 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Document Database 924 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Hyperlinks e.g., document locations 1 - N
  • Type 1 - N a. Subtype 1 - N
  • Opinion / Note Database 925 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Examiner Rules Database 926 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as: a. Rule ID 1 - N b. Rule Description c. Rules 1 - N 1. Notes 1 - N
  • qualifications Database 927 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Billing Terms and Conditions Database 928 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Accounts Receivable Database 929 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Search Database 930 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Transaction Database 931 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Document Class Database 932 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Document Sub Class Database 933 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Document Type Database 934 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Document Sub Type Database 935 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Group Database 936 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Word Count Database 937 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Survey Database 938 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Results Database 939 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Rules Database 940 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Notes Database 941 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Hyperlink Database 943 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • User Database 944 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Document Group Database 945 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Document Class 946 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Document Sub Class 947 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Note Class 948 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Subclass 949 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Alert Event Rules Database 950 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Alert Event Rules 1 - N a. Event Condition b. Alert Recipient ID 1 - N
  • Alert Method 1 - N c. Alert Database ID 1 - N
  • Alert Database 951 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:
  • Alert Contents one or more of: a. Text b. Variable Data c. Executable 3. Notes 1 - N
  • Alert Methods Database 952 which may be configured to collect, store, and interrelate data such as:

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
  • Computational Linguistics (AREA)
  • General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
  • Audiology, Speech & Language Pathology (AREA)
  • Artificial Intelligence (AREA)
  • Strategic Management (AREA)
  • Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
  • Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
  • General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Data Mining & Analysis (AREA)
  • Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
  • Quality & Reliability (AREA)
  • Economics (AREA)
  • Operations Research (AREA)
  • Marketing (AREA)
  • Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)

Abstract

L'invention concerne un système de conservation de notes associées à des documents qui peuvent être, par exemple, dans une base de données de document, telle qu'une base de données de brevet. Les notes peuvent être soumises par le ou les auteurs du document original, par des parties associées au document original (tel que l'examinateur de brevet) ou par un tiers. Un accès aux notes peut être limité sur la base, par exemple, d'une relation de la partie au document original.
PCT/US2007/066687 2007-04-16 2007-04-16 Système de commentaire basé sur des notes de propriété intellectuelle WO2008130397A1 (fr)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
PCT/US2007/066687 WO2008130397A1 (fr) 2007-04-16 2007-04-16 Système de commentaire basé sur des notes de propriété intellectuelle

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
PCT/US2007/066687 WO2008130397A1 (fr) 2007-04-16 2007-04-16 Système de commentaire basé sur des notes de propriété intellectuelle

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2008130397A1 true WO2008130397A1 (fr) 2008-10-30

Family

ID=39875770

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/US2007/066687 WO2008130397A1 (fr) 2007-04-16 2007-04-16 Système de commentaire basé sur des notes de propriété intellectuelle

Country Status (1)

Country Link
WO (1) WO2008130397A1 (fr)

Cited By (9)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2012161947A1 (fr) * 2011-05-23 2012-11-29 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. Système et procédé permettant d'activer des canaux de commercialisation sur un marché ip
US8386623B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2013-02-26 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling channel relevancy and rating in an IP marketplace
US8516076B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2013-08-20 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for compiling statistics in an IP marketplace
WO2014100086A1 (fr) * 2012-12-21 2014-06-26 Thomson Reuters Global Resources Systèmes et procédés de paiement d'annuité/maintenance de propriété intellectuelle et de prévention d'abandon erroné
US8977761B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2015-03-10 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling product development
US9037733B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2015-05-19 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling product development
US9245244B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2016-01-26 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling product development
WO2022174096A1 (fr) * 2021-02-11 2022-08-18 Tang Young A Liens activés par intelligence artificielle et interface utilisateur graphique corrélée
US11537788B2 (en) * 2018-03-07 2022-12-27 Elsevier, Inc. Methods, systems, and storage media for automatically identifying relevant chemical compounds in patent documents

Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US7069592B2 (en) * 2000-04-26 2006-06-27 Ford Global Technologies, Llc Web-based document system

Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US7069592B2 (en) * 2000-04-26 2006-06-27 Ford Global Technologies, Llc Web-based document system

Cited By (26)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US8942998B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2015-01-27 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling channel community ratings in an IP marketplace
US8516076B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2013-08-20 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for compiling statistics in an IP marketplace
US8775246B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-07-08 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling channel registration in an IP marketplace
US8775272B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-07-08 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling marketing channels in an IP marketplace
US8650315B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-02-11 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling healthcare industry channels in an IP marketplace
US8650319B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-02-11 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for workflow driven channel search results
US8650318B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-02-11 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for channel to channel integration in an IP marketplace
US8650316B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-02-11 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling channel content drill down
US8656035B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-02-18 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling user requested channels in an IP marketplace
US8661148B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-02-25 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling industry based channels in an IP marketplace
US8667082B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-03-04 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for targeting channels to users
US8751674B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-06-10 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling channel promotions in an IP marketplace
US9245244B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2016-01-26 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling product development
US8386623B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2013-02-26 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling channel relevancy and rating in an IP marketplace
US8650317B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-02-11 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for searching channels based on channel rating
US8775204B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-07-08 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling group channels in an IP marketplace
US8868767B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-10-21 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling IP marketplace APIs
US8886560B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2014-11-11 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling channel agreements negotiations in an IP marketplace
US9037733B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2015-05-19 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling product development
US8972271B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2015-03-03 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling custom portfolio definition in an IP marketplace
US8977761B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2015-03-10 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling product development
US8996411B2 (en) 2009-12-17 2015-03-31 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. System and method for enabling integrated channels in an IP marketplace
WO2012161947A1 (fr) * 2011-05-23 2012-11-29 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. Système et procédé permettant d'activer des canaux de commercialisation sur un marché ip
WO2014100086A1 (fr) * 2012-12-21 2014-06-26 Thomson Reuters Global Resources Systèmes et procédés de paiement d'annuité/maintenance de propriété intellectuelle et de prévention d'abandon erroné
US11537788B2 (en) * 2018-03-07 2022-12-27 Elsevier, Inc. Methods, systems, and storage media for automatically identifying relevant chemical compounds in patent documents
WO2022174096A1 (fr) * 2021-02-11 2022-08-18 Tang Young A Liens activés par intelligence artificielle et interface utilisateur graphique corrélée

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US20070219854A1 (en) Document Examiner Comment System
Krotov et al. Tutorial: Legality and ethics of web scraping
US11461859B1 (en) Method for improving document review performance
Ayling et al. Putting AI ethics to work: are the tools fit for purpose?
US11151677B2 (en) Systems and methods for targeting policymaker communication
US20070220041A1 (en) Prior Art Notes Associated with Patent Applications
US10699349B2 (en) Computerized system and method for data field pre-filling and pre-filling prevention
Remus et al. Can robots be lawyers: Computers, lawyers, and the practice of law
US20070219940A1 (en) Merchant Tool for Embedding Advertisement Hyperlinks to Words in a Database of Documents
US9830663B2 (en) System and method for determination of insurance classification and underwriting determination for entities
US20180144421A1 (en) System and Methods for Complaint Evaluation
WO2008130397A1 (fr) Système de commentaire basé sur des notes de propriété intellectuelle
US20080059485A1 (en) Systems and methods for entering and retrieving data
US20080033741A1 (en) Automated Prior Art Search Tool
WO2011025400A1 (fr) Analyse et organisation structurées de documents en ligne et procédés apparentés
US20070219987A1 (en) Self Teaching Thesaurus
US20070219939A1 (en) Portfolio Mapping of Intellectual Property
CN114303140A (zh) 与产品和服务相关的知识产权数据分析
Di Porto Algorithmic disclosure rules
WO2008127337A1 (fr) Examen en propriété intellectuelle
Gruner In Search of the Undiscovered Country: The Challenge of Describing Patentable Subject Matter
US20080033924A1 (en) Keyword Advertising in Invention Disclosure Documents
Sheffner Access to Adjudication Materials on Federal Agency Websites
WO2008127338A1 (fr) Moteur renforcé pour la recherche de l'état de la technique des brevets
WO2008127340A1 (fr) Outils de rédaction, de préparation et de soumission de demandes de brevets

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application

Ref document number: 07760696

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1

NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: DE

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase

Ref document number: 07760696

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1