1. The Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to systems and methods for managing electronic messages and for delivering solicited electronic messages. More particularly, the present invention relates to systems and methods for delivering solicited electronic messages while filtering unsolicited electronic messages.
2. The Relevant Technology
Electronic messages such as email and instant messages have become, for a growing number of people and businesses, a convenient method of communication. Unfortunately, the ease with which electronic messages may be generated and sent has led to the development of unsolicited bulk electronic messages, better known as “spam.” Unsolicited electronic messages come from a large spectrum of different sources and often include commercial advertisements, political messaging, and other undesirable content including pornographic solicitations.
To many users, it seems that the number of unsolicited messages that they receive increases daily. Receiving unsolicited electronic messages is frustrating for many users because they are required to sort through all of the electronic messages that have been received. If they do not sort through their inbox, the number of unsolicited electronic messages may soon outnumber the desired electronic messages and make it difficult for a user to find certain electronic messages. Users are understandably frustrated with unsolicited electronic messages and often spend quality time sorting through unsolicited electronic messages that they have received on a daily basis. This is true even if the users are simply deleting the unsolicited electronic messages that have been received. With good reason, users have become wary of giving out their electronic addresses for fear that their electronic addresses will wind up in the hands of those who send unsolicited electronic messages.
For these reasons, users need a way to successfully prevent unwanted or unsolicited electronic messages from being delivered. Some attempts have been made to allow users to filter out unwanted and/or unsolicited electronic messages. One method includes allowing a user to “block” a sender's address such that electronic messages from that particular address are not delivered to the user. Other techniques for filtering unsolicited electronic messages involve adding certain words or phrases to filters that are integrated into electronic messaging programs. For example, a user can add certain words to the filters and electronic messages that contain those words are deemed unwanted and are not delivered to the user or are deleted.
One of the primary drawbacks to these solutions is the potential for eliminating or deleting electronic messages that should have been delivered to the user. For example, some online merchants generate bulk electronic messages that are delivered to a large number of users. Many of these users think of these electronic messages as unsolicited and would prefer to have them filtered out and automatically deleted. The methods described above are often suitable for this purpose.
However, there are some users who have subscribed to the electronic mailings of the same online merchants and these users desire to receive the electronic messages that other users view as unsolicited. In other words, current methods of filtering electronic messages cannot determine that a particular electronic message is viewed as an unsolicited electronic message from the perspective of one user while another user views the same electronic message as a solicited electronic message. The problem of delivering solicited electronic messages that look like unsolicited electronic messages becomes even more complex as additional senders of electronic message obtain and use the address of the user. Generally stated, the methods used to prevent electronic messages sent by “spammers” from being delivered often have the undesirable effect of preventing solicited electronic messages from being successfully delivered.
These and other limitations are overcome by the present invention which relates to systems and methods for permitting delivery of solicited electronic messages. Users generally receive and send electronic messages using an electronic message server. The electronic message server often provides electronic message services for a large number of clients or users. Frequently, the users are geographically dispersed. Certain senders are senders of unsolicited electronic messages from the perspective of some users while the same senders are senders of solicited electronic messages from the perspective of other users. One embodiment of the present invention enables the electronic message server to determine which users should receive a particular electronic message and which users should not receive the same electronic message. One advantage of the present invention is the ability to distinguish between automated electronic messages that are solicited and automated electronic messages that are unsolicited.
In one embodiment, a user inserts a tracker (such as personal identification number (“pin”), which is an alphanumeric code,) in the electronic message address that is provided to a sender. The electronic message server then associates the tracker in the user's electronic message address with the specific sender. In one example, the electronic message server also displays the tracker differently than it was entered by the user. When the user or client receives an electronic message from a sender that is addressed to the client using the address that includes the tracker, the electronic message is delivered only if the sender of the electronic message is the same sender that was originally associated with the tracker. The tracker is uniquely tied to a particular sender and only one sender can successfully send electronic messages using the variant of the user's electronic message address that includes the tracker. Alternatively, the tracker can be associated with a particular domain or Internet Protocol (IP) address range.
In another embodiment, a module on the client computer determines when the user enters and submits the user's electronic message address to a sender or a domain of senders through a form on a web site. The module then notifies the electronic message server that the user's address has been provided to a particular sender, domain, or sub-domain. The electronic message server makes that sender or domain an authorized sender and permits electronic messages from that sender or domain to be delivered to the specific client. Electronic messages from the same sender may not be delivered, however, to other users or clients.
In another embodiment of the present invention, electronic messages that may or may not be unsolicited are placed in a temporary folder. Then, a reverse filter is performed on the temporary folder to identify which of the electronic messages may not be unsolicited. Instead of identifying unsolicited electronic messages, the reverse filter identifies potentially valid electronic messages. The intended recipients of those electronic messages are notified that they may have received some valid electronic messages. The intended recipients have the option to review and/or receive the electronic messages that have been deemed potentially valid by the reverse filter.
In another embodiment of the present invention, senders of electronic messages are given the ability to register with the electronic messaging service that is provided by the electronic message server. The users or clients of the electronic messaging service are then given the opportunity to either opt in or opt out of receiving electronic messages from the registered senders. The users who opt in can identify senders from whom they wish to receive electronic messages. Conversely, the users may have the option of opting out of the list of senders compiled by the electronic messaging service. In order to ensure that the users do not receive electronic messages, the electronic messaging service typically presents the list as an opt in list.
Additional features and advantages of the invention will be set forth in the description which follows, and in part will be obvious from the description, or may be learned by the practice of the invention. The features and advantages of the invention may be realized and obtained by means of the instruments and combinations particularly pointed out in the appended claims. These and other features of the present invention will become more fully apparent from the following description and appended claims, or may be learned by the practice of the invention as set forth hereinafter.
A more particular description of the invention will be rendered by reference to specific embodiments thereof which are illustrated in the appended drawings. It is appreciated that these drawings depict only typical embodiments of the invention and are therefore not to be considered limiting of its scope. The invention will be described and explained with additional specificity and detail through the use of the accompanying drawings in which:
Many of the electronic messages delivered to the inboxes of users today are unsolicited. User addresses are available from a variety of sources and various senders utilize those sources to generate and send unsolicited electronic messages. However, there are many instances where electronic messages are solicited. The distinction between an unsolicited electronic message and a solicited electronic message is often dependent on the perspective of the intended recipient. Some recipients have specifically requested certain electronic messages while other recipients view the same electronic messages as unsolicited.
The term “electronic messaging” includes any form of sending a message electronically including, but not limited to, via electronic mail (“email”), instant messaging, and other forms of electronic communication that involve the use of a sender address and a client or user address. Electronic messages including emails, instant messages, and other forms or electronic messages including graphics and attachments, are also within the scope of the present invention. The term “unsolicited” in the context of the invention typically refers to any electronic message that is not desired or wanted by the user even when the user is the only recipient of the electronic message. The term “solicited” typically refers to electronic messages that the user desires to receive. Electronic messages that are sent in bulk can be solicited electronic messages, unsolicited electronic messages, or a combination of both solicited and unsolicited electronic messages.
The present invention further extends to methods and systems for managing electronic messages and more particularly to delivering solicited electronic messages while filtering out unsolicited electronic messages. The present invention addresses the need of determining whether a particular electronic message is solicited or unsolicited from the perspective of the intended recipient and treating the particular electronic message accordingly. Thus, an electronic message that is addressed to multiple recipients may be delivered to some of the recipients and not delivered to other recipients. In other words, one embodiment of the present invention also relates to systems and methods for delivering electronic messages that would otherwise be treated as unsolicited electronic messages. In addition to filtering out unsolicited electronic messages while delivering solicited electronic messages, the present invention can also be applied to electronic messages that are delivered over voice messaging systems, voicemail systems, telephone systems, and the like. Thus, a voice mail or voice message is considered an electronic message.
Advantageously, the present invention is able to take pre-determined actions with respect to electronic messages. When a tracker is used by the clients of an electronic messaging service, the clients will begin to receive electronic messages from senders that have included the tracker in the client or user address. The client has usually associated a tracker with one or more senders and can take actions according to whether the tracker in the client address is associated with the sender of the electronic message. If the tracker matches, the electronic message can be delivered to a particular folder. If the tracker does not match, the electronic may be, for example, stored in a temporary folder, deleted, and the like. In addition, the client or user may be notified that a particular sender is using a tracker that is associated with a different sender.
The following overview of electronic messaging is described in the context of email sent over the Internet.
The electronic message server 106 may be a server residing on a local area network with the client computer 108, a server that the client computer 108 accesses via a modem pool or with another Internet connection, a web server that provides web-based electronic messaging services to the client computer 108, a server that operates with the client computer 108 in any of a variety of other network configurations, or the like.
The electronic message server 106 may be remote or local with respect to client computer 108. Depending on the manner in which the invention is implemented, the electronic message server may be a local server that provides services for a local area network, or may be a remote server that provides the electronic message services described herein for a number of geographically distributed client computers. Moreover, the invention can be practiced in a system that collapses the functionality of the electronic message server 106 into the client computer 108.
As shown in
The electronic message server 106 includes an electronic message module 210 that determines whether a particular electronic message should be delivered to the client computer 108 in accordance with the present invention described herein. The electronic message module 210 implements various methods for permitting delivery of solicited electronic messages to the client computer 108. The electronic message server 106 also has other modules, for example, to ensure that certain electronic messages are not delivered to the client computer 108. These modules typically execute in conjunction with the electronic message module 210 or are part of the electronic message module 210.
The electronic message server 106 maintains a sender address list 208 that stores or includes sender addresses along with several attributes that are associated with each sender address. Each user or client computer of the electronic message server 106 has an associated sender address list 208. Alternatively, one or more clients may share a particular sender address list 208. The electronic message module 210 typically utilizes entries in the sender address list 208 to determine whether a particular electronic message should be delivered to the intended recipient, which corresponds to a user or client computer.
A sender address list is a data structure that relates attributes to senders or sender addresses. The attributes include, for example, authorized sender, unauthorized sender, unconfirmed sender, and the like. Other attributes can be included in the sender address list and associated with each sender address as required. For example, an attribute that indicates whether a sender properly responded to a challenge or responded to the challenge in a timely fashion may also be included in this embodiment of the sender address list 208. Details of the challenge/response protocol are disclosed below. In another embodiment, the sender address list is separated into at least three categories: an authorized senders category, an unauthorized senders category, and an unconfirmed senders category. Sender addresses are placed in each category accordingly.
In one example, the challenge is an electronic message that includes a link to a web page that may be maintained by the electronic message server 106 or other server. At the web page, the sender is required to enter a confirmation code in order to properly respond to the challenge. Often, the confirmation code is also displayed on the web page. In order to successfully respond to the challenge, a person must respond to the challenge because a machine or computer is preferably unable to read and enter the confirmation code. In this manner, a sender can become an authorized sender and the electronic message may be deemed a solicited electronic message that is delivered to the intended recipient(s). The challenge module can act independently to identify solicited electronic messages from unsolicited electronic messages or can be utilized in conjunction with other embodiments of the present invention.
The authorized sender attribute 304 indicates whether the sender address 314 is authorized to send electronic messages to the client associated with the sender address list 208. The unauthorized sender attribute 306 indicates that electronic messages from the sender address 314 will not be delivered to the user associated with the sender address list 208.
The unconfirmed sender attribute 308 is used to identify senders that are neither authorized nor unauthorized. For example, an unconfirmed sender may have been sent a challenge that requires a response. A correct response to the challenge will result in the sender becoming an authorized sender and the authorized sender attribute 304 will be set for that sender. An incorrect and/or untimely response to the challenge will result in the unauthorized sender attribute 306 being set for that sender. An example of the challenge/response methods that can be used in this manner to determine whether a sender is authorized to send electronic messages to the recipient is disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/174,561, filed Jun. 18, 2002, which is incorporated herein by reference.
The challenge/response attribute 310 can be used to identify how the sender became either authorized or unauthorized, for example. Alternatively, the challenge/response attribute 310 can indicate whether a particular sender has been sent a challenge and whether the particular sender has provided a response to the challenge. The tracker attribute 312 stores a value that is associated with a particular sender. Typically, each sender has a unique tracker attribute 312 as described in more detail below. There is no requirement that each attribute 302 be used for each sender. For example, the tracker attribute 312 may be empty for one or more sender(s) 316.
In this example, the sender 316 has a sender address 314 of sender@sender.com and the sender address 314 is an authorized address as indicated by the authorized sender attribute 318. The sender address 314 further has a tracker attribute 320 of “code” in this example.
The sender address list 208 can store a variety of different address formats and can hold multiple variations of a sender's address. Also, the sender address list 208 may contain symbolic addresses that do not necessarily refer to a single sender. This enables, for example, all addresses from a particular domain to be categorized. Also, the addresses in the sender address list 208 can be deleted, modified, and/or moved. A sender address typically refers to an address that accompanies an incoming electronic message and either actually identifies or purports to identify the sender.
Using the attributes 302, the electronic message server can determine how an electronic message should be handled. Electronic messages from authorized senders are oz delivered to the intended recipient while electronic messages from unauthorized senders are not delivered to the intended recipients. The status of a particular sender is determined by accessing the sender address list 208 according to the sender address that accompanies the electronic message. Electronic messages from unconfirmed senders are not delivered, in one embodiment, until the sender is confirmed.
In the example of
The tracker provided by the user in the electronic message 410 is unique to a specific sender (e.g., specific to the sender associated with sender computer 102) and provides several advantages. First, if the sender provides the user's address to another entity or sender and that sender attempts to send electronic messages to the user, those messages will be filtered out or rejected because the tracker is not associated that sender. In addition, the user knows that his or her address was shared by the original sender that first received the tracker.
In another embodiment, however, the tracker is not specific to a particular sender or sender computer. The tracker, for example, can be a global tracker such that all senders that include the tracker in the user address can send electronic messages to the user. The electronic messages from senders that do not include the tracker may be discarded as unsolicited messages.
In one example, the electronic message server changes how the tracker appears in the user address. In other words, the tracker provided by the user is shown differently than it was provided to the electronic message server. This helps prevent unauthorized senders from obtaining and using the tracker to deliver unsolicited electronic messages to the user.
From the perspective of the sender computer 102, the tracker is a part of the user's electronic message address. Later, the sender computer 102 generates an electronic message 404 that is addressed to the user using the user address 406 that was provided by the user in the electronic message 410. The electronic message 404 may also include the source sender address 408.
When the electronic message server 106 receives the electronic message 404, the electronic message server 106 parses the user address and extracts the tracker from the base user name. Using the sender address 408 and the tracker, the electronic message server can access the sender list 208 and determine whether the tracker included in the user address 406 is associated with the sender address 408. If the association between the sender address and the tracker (402) is present in the sender list 208, then the electronic message 404 is delivered to the client computer 108. If either the tracker or sender address is incorrect, then the electronic message 404 is discarded and treated as an unsolicited message. Alternatively, if the sender is unknown, a challenge can be issued to the unknown sender.
For example, when a user subscribes to a periodic email service, such as one provided by an online merchant, the user enters his or her email address in a field provided in a web site of the merchant. The email address includes a field that contains an identifying string, or tracker, selected by the user. The email address used for the subscription process is often a variant of the basic email address of the user.
For instance, referring to the example of
When the online merchant sends an email to the user using the address provided by the user, the electronic message server parses the user address and recognizes the inclusion of the identifying string or tracker in the user address and permits the email to be delivered to the user associated with the user name segment of the user address. As previously indicated, a user can select different codes for different online merchants or different mass email subscriptions. The electronic message server recognizes only emails from senders whose domain, sub-domain or address is specifically associated with the service from which the emails were originally requested. One significant advantage of this embodiment of the invention is that the filtering features are enabled simply by the user selecting a tracker or identifying string that is associated with a specific sender, such as a merchant from whom periodic electronic messages are requested. The methods according to this embodiment of the invention do not require software being installed at the client computer 108, nor do they require any cooperation from the entities that send the periodic electronic messages from sender computer 102.
In another example, the client computer 108 is not required to inform the electronic message server 106 of the tracker that was used or sent to a particular sender. Rather, the electronic message server 106 can monitor the user address of electronic messages that are sent by the client computer 106. When the user address in a particular incoming electronic message includes a segment that appears to be a tracker segment in addition to the user name segment, the electronic message server 106 recognizes the tracker and an entry is made in the sender list 208 as described above. In this example, the electronic message server 106 can compare the user address 412 included in the electronic message 410 with an assigned user address to determine if a tracker is present in the user address 412.
In order to facilitate the parsing process applied by the electronic message server to the user addresses specified in incoming electronic messages, the user name segment and the tracker segment can be separated by a delineating or separating character, such as a hyphen “-”. For instance, if the domain segment is “me.com”, the user name is “me” and the selected tracker is “xyzbooks”, the user address supplied to the sender computer 102 could be me-xyzbooks@me.com.
When the notification module 506 detects that the user has entered the user address, the electronic message server 106 is notified of that fact. The notification module 506 also provides the electronic message server 106 with the domain associated with the entry of the user address. For example, if a user is browsing a “sender.com” domain and enters his or her user address at in the sender.com domain, the notification module 506 provides this information to the electronic message server 106.
The electronic message server 106 then makes an entry in the sender list 208 to reflect that the user has provided his or her address to a certain sender. With reference to
One advantage of the embodiment illustrated in
The filter module 604, in one embodiment, is a module that analyzes each electronic message to ascertain if the electronic message is unsolicited. The filter module 604 also identifies those electronic messages that are potentially wanted by the user. The client computer 108 or user is informed that certain messages in the unconfirmed folder 602 may be valid electronic messages and are not unsolicited. The user then has the option of performing various actions on the potentially valid electronic messages. The user can receive those electronic messages and read them, delete the electronic messages without reading them, move the electronic messages to another folder, make the senders of those electronic messages authorized senders, and the like or any combination thereof. One advantage is that potentially valid electronic messages are identified by the filter module 604 before the electronic messages, for example, are permanently deleted. Identifying potentially valid electronic messages may also help the user receive solicited electronic messages more reliably.
The electronic message module of the electronic message server 106 (shown in
After a sender, such as sender 704, has registered, the sender 704 is placed in a potential senders list 708. Periodically, the electronic message server 106 distributes the potential senders list 708 to the clients 111 of the electronic message server 106 along with the information that was provide by the senders in the potential senders list 708. In one example, the clients 111 are given the opportunity to opt in with senders that are selected from the potential senders list. For each client, the sender list 208 is populated with the selected senders and the authorized senders attribute is set for the selected senders. The unauthorized attribute of the remaining senders in the potential senders list is then set. The clients 111 may be given an opportunity at a later time to set the authorized attribute of the senders that were not selected.
Alternatively, the senders in the potential senders list 708 are made authorized senders and the clients 111 are given the chance to opt out. In this case, the unauthorized attributes of the senders from which clients opt out are set. In this example, there is a separate sender list 208 for each of the clients 111. This enables a particular sender to be authorized, for example, for the client computer 108 while being unauthorized for the client computer 109.
The present invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from its spirit or essential characteristics. The described embodiments are to be considered in all respects only as illustrative and not restrictive. The scope of the invention is, therefore, indicated by the appended claims rather than by the foregoing description. All changes which come within the meaning and range of equivalency of the claims are to be embraced within their scope.
This application is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/361,241, filed Feb. 10, 2003, which application is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4977520 | McGaughey, III et al. | Dec 1990 | A |
5040141 | Yazima et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
5093918 | Heyen et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5159673 | Sackmann et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5204961 | Barlow | Apr 1993 | A |
5245532 | Mourier | Sep 1993 | A |
5283856 | Gross et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5319776 | Hile et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5333266 | Boaz et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5377354 | Scannell et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5423042 | Jalili et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5448734 | Hrabik et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5471519 | Howe et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5473671 | Partridge, III | Dec 1995 | A |
5539828 | Davis | Jul 1996 | A |
5548789 | Nakanura | Aug 1996 | A |
5600799 | Young et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5604803 | Aziz | Feb 1997 | A |
5608786 | Gordon | Mar 1997 | A |
5619648 | Canale et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5627764 | Schutzman et al. | May 1997 | A |
5630123 | Hogge | May 1997 | A |
5632018 | Otorii | May 1997 | A |
5655079 | Hirasawa et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5721779 | Funk | Feb 1998 | A |
5734903 | Saulpaugh et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5742668 | Pepe et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5742769 | Lee et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5781857 | Hwang et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5796840 | Davis | Aug 1998 | A |
5826022 | Nielsen | Oct 1998 | A |
5832227 | Anderson et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5835722 | Bradshaw et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5859967 | Kaufeld et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5884033 | Duvall et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5893911 | Piskiel et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5909589 | Parker et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5917489 | Thurlow et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5930479 | Hall | Jul 1999 | A |
5937162 | Funk et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5999600 | Shin | Dec 1999 | A |
5999932 | Paul | Dec 1999 | A |
5999967 | Sundsted | Dec 1999 | A |
6014634 | Scroggie et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6023723 | McCormick et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6052709 | Paul | Apr 2000 | A |
6055510 | Henrick et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6057841 | Thurlow et al. | May 2000 | A |
6073142 | Geiger et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6092101 | Birrell et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6112227 | Heiner | Aug 2000 | A |
6154765 | Hart | Nov 2000 | A |
6173322 | Hu | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6182118 | Finney et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6189026 | Birrell et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6195698 | Lillibridge et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6199102 | Cobb | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6199106 | Shaw et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6205432 | Gabbard et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6226372 | Beebe et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6230188 | Marcus | May 2001 | B1 |
6237027 | Namekawa | May 2001 | B1 |
6249807 | Shaw et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6266692 | Greenstein | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6282565 | Shaw et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6349328 | Haneda et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6356935 | Gibbs | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6366950 | Scheussler et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6373950 | Rowney | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6393465 | Leeds | May 2002 | B2 |
6421709 | McCormick et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6457044 | IwaZaki | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6460074 | Fishkin | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6484197 | Donohue | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6546416 | Kirsch | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6587550 | Council et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6625257 | Asaoka et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6640301 | Ng | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6671718 | Meister et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6678704 | Bridge, Jr. et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6691156 | Drummond et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6708205 | Sheldon et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6748422 | Morin et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6856963 | Hurwitz | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6868498 | Katsikas | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6880088 | Gazier et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6883095 | Sandhu et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
7043753 | Roddy et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7065341 | Kamiyama et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7076533 | Knox et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7085925 | Hanna et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7120927 | Beyda et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7136897 | Raghunandan | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7185194 | Morikawa et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7185359 | Schmidt et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7188358 | Hisada et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7263545 | Digate | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7346696 | Malik | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7383433 | Yeager et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7512788 | Choi et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
20020042815 | Salzfass et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020046099 | Frengut et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020046250 | Nassiri | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020099781 | Scheussler et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020107856 | Scheussler et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020116641 | Mastrianni | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020147726 | Yehia et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020152272 | Yairi | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020194308 | Hall | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020199095 | Bandini et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030009698 | Lindeman et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023736 | Abkemeier | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030030680 | Cofta et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030037103 | Salmi et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030037250 | Walker et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030065926 | Schultz et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030081621 | Godfrey et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030086543 | Raymond | May 2003 | A1 |
20030097597 | Lewis | May 2003 | A1 |
20030110400 | Cartmell et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030163691 | Johnson | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030167311 | Kirsch | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030167402 | Stolfo | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030191969 | Katsikas | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030196116 | Troutman | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030200267 | Garrigues | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030233418 | Goldman | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030236847 | Benowitz et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040003283 | Goodman et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040015554 | Wilson | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040054887 | Paulsen et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040087300 | Lewis | May 2004 | A1 |
20040111480 | Yue | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040143633 | McCarty | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040148358 | Singh et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040167941 | Prahlad et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040199595 | Banister et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040236835 | Blankenship | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040236838 | Tout | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040243676 | Blankenship | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040243698 | Blankenship | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050015481 | Blankenship | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050015482 | Blankenship | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050076220 | Zhang et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050081059 | Bandini et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050188045 | Katsikas | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20060101021 | Davis et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060168048 | Lyle et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20070016641 | Broomhall | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20080162926 | Xiong et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
19708856 | Sep 1998 | DE |
0883271 | Dec 1998 | EP |
9910817 | Mar 1999 | WO |
0116695 | Mar 2001 | WO |
02077768 | Oct 2002 | WO |
03044617 | May 2003 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10361241 | Feb 2003 | US |
Child | 11651974 | US |