Utility meters may be configured to perform wireless transmission of meter readings. For example, an Encoder Receiver Transmitter (“ERT”) may be implemented within a utility meter in order to encode and transmit data utilizing radio-based communications. Utility meters configured to report meter readings in this way are commercially available and increasingly being installed in homes, businesses, and the like. At installation or subsequently, a utility service provider may register and begin obtaining meter readings using a collection system such as fixed network, mobile collection unit, etc.
Transmissions of meter readings are typically encoded as “packetized” data. In the present application, the term “packet” is intended to encompass packets, frames, cells or any other method used to encapsulate data for transmission between remote devices. As understood in the art, packets typically maintain a plurality of fields as well as a preamble and trailer to identify the beginning and end of the packet. For example, existing packet formats typically include a time stamp field identifying the time maintained by the “clock” of a utility meter. To extend the operating life of a battery or other power source, techniques and devices that minimize power consumption are utilized. As a result, a low-power clock having at least some tendency to “drift” from an actual time may be employed by utility meters. Unfortunately, existing packet formats and related systems are not readily able to measure inaccuracies in the time maintained by utility meters.
A collection system employed by a utility service provider may include Cell Control Units (“CCU”) that receive meter readings within a geographic coverage area. To provide fault-tolerance and ensure that meter readings are collected, CCUs will typically maintain overlapping coverage areas. As a result, meter readings originating from a utility meter may be received by multiple CCUs with each being forwarded to a utility service provider. During normal operations, this fault tolerance may result in excessive network resources being consumed since the same data is forwarded by multiple CCUs.
This summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts in a simplified form that are further described below in the Detailed Description. This summary is not intended to identify key features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended to be used as an aid in determining the scope of the claimed subject matter.
Packet formats and associated metering infrastructure for measuring and/or correcting the time kept by endpoint device clocks, such as utility meter clocks, are disclosed. In one embodiment, a method is provided of measuring the accuracy of an endpoint clock, such as a utility meter clock, from a remote device configured to capture transmissions that originate from the utility meter. Generally, the method includes synchronizing the time maintained by the utility meter with the time maintained by the remote device. The method receives and decodes a packet that includes a time stamp provided by the utility meter. Then, the method calculates the extent of the inaccuracy of the time stamp in the received packet and determines whether the extent of the inaccuracy satisfies a predetermined threshold.
The foregoing aspects and many of the attendant advantages of this invention will become more readily appreciated by reference to the following detailed description, when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein:
The detailed description set forth below in connection with the appended drawings is intended as a description of various embodiments of the disclosed subject matter and is not intended to represent the only embodiments. Each embodiment described in this disclosure is provided merely as an example or illustration and should not be construed as preferred or advantageous over other embodiments. In this regard, the following description first provides an overview of a metering environment in which the disclosed subject matter may be implemented. Then, exemplary routines that provide an improved metering infrastructure are described. The illustrative examples provided herein are not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise forms disclosed. Similarly, any steps described herein may be interchangeable with other steps, or combinations of steps, in order to achieve the same or substantially similar result.
Referring to
As illustrated in
Generally described, the collectors 102-106 serve as the interface for collecting meter reading data from devices that utilize automated meter reading protocols (e.g., the utility meters 114-130). However, wireless communications are typically less reliable than communications performed over wired networks. As such, interference sources may exist that prevent meter reading data encoded as one or more packets from being successfully transmitted to a collector. To improve reliability, the utility meters 114-130 are typically configured to transmit the same meter reading data in multiple transmissions. Moreover, the coverage areas of the collectors 102-106 may overlap so that meter readings originating from the utility meters 118, 122, and 124 within overlapping coverage areas are received by multiple collectors. As a result, existing systems may cause an excessive amount of meter reading data to be forwarded to the utility service provider 108.
A packet format and associated metering infrastructure are provided for filtering meter reading data that is received by the collectors 102-106. Generally, a sample of unfiltered meter reading data is obtained and used to rank the ability of different collectors to communicate with the same utility meter. Collectors identified as being less reliable in collecting data for a particular utility meter may be re-configured to “drop” packets received from the utility meter. To facilitate the filtering, network configuration bytes within the packets transmitted by utility meters may be modified in a way that allows the collectors 102-106 to differentiate between packets that will be forwarded to a utility service provider from those that will be “dropped.”
In another aspect, a packet format and associated metering infrastructure are provided for identifying and determining whether the “drift” in the time maintained by a utility meter 114-130 is more than a threshold level. As mentioned previously, a low-power clock having at least some tendency to drift from an actual time may be employed to maintain the time within a utility meter 114-130. A substantial amount of drift could ultimately impact the accuracy in the meter reading data that is collected. In one embodiment, a packet format and related systems are provided for monitoring the accuracy of the time maintained by a utility meter 114-130.
The discussion provided above with reference to
For illustrative purposes and by way of example only, representative packets 200 and 250 suitable to illustrate aspects of the disclosed subject matter are depicted in
Similar to
As illustrated in
Those skilled in the art and others will recognize that attributes and format of the packets 200 and 250 illustrated in
Now with reference to
The memory 302 depicted in
In one embodiment, the processor 300 is configured to receive meter reading data (e.g., packets) from one or more utility meters utilizing the radio-based communication system 308. The received data is parsed and re-packaged into a structured format suitable for transmission over the wide area network 112 to the host servers 110. In this regard, data from a plurality of collectors may be aggregated in a data store maintained by the utility service provider 108. The aggregated data is analyzed to quantify and rank the ability of different collectors to communicate with a particular utility meter. Based on the ranking, a read list 310 is created and stored in the memory 302 that may be used to filter data received from different utility meters. In this regard, logic suitable to be executed by the processor 300 performs processing to determine whether received packets originate from a utility meter identified on the read list 310. When a packet originates from a utility meter on the read list 310, the meter reading data is parsed, re-packaged, and forwarded to the utility service provider 108. In contrast, packets that originate from utility meters that are not on the read list 310 may be dropped without being forwarded to the utility service provider 108. In an alternative embodiment, a “black” list (not illustrated) is created and stored in the memory 302. As such, packets that originate from utility meters on the black list may be dropped in this alternative embodiment.
Now, with reference to
At block 410 of the filtering routine 400, a metric is generated that measures the ability of a collector to collect data from a particular utility meter. As mentioned previously, the utility service provider 108 maintains the host servers 110 with associated application logic for managing and aggregating the collection of data in a metering environment. To facilitate billings and monitor the performance of the metering infrastructure, the host servers 110 are configured to process meter reading data in a variety of ways. At block 410, a metric known as a “read coefficient” may be generated that quantifies the number of meter readings successfully obtained by a collector from a particular utility meter. As mentioned above, utility meters may be configured to transmit meter reading data at known intervals. Since the total number of meter readings transmitted over the sample time period is known, the read coefficient may be readily generated by comparing the packets successfully obtained by a collector with the total number of packets transmitted from a utility meter. However, those skilled in the art and others will recognize that the ability of the collectors 102-106 to communicate with a utility meter may be measured utilizing other factors such as, but not limited to, signal strength, interference measurements, and combinations thereof, etc. Accordingly, the exemplary utilization of a read coefficient should be construed as exemplary as the ability of a collector to obtain meter reading data may be measured, at block 410, in other ways without departing from the scope of the claimed subject matter.
At block 415 of the filtering routine 400, a ranking that assesses the relative ability of two or more collectors to communicate with the same utility meter is generated. In this regard, the metric quantified at block 410 may be used to rank the ability of collectors to communicate with the same utility meter. Accordingly, collectors that received higher read coefficients, as a result of successfully collecting a higher percentage of meter readings during the sample period, will be ranked higher than collectors associated with lower read coefficients.
At block 420 of the filtering routine 400, a read list is generated identifying utility meters from which meter reading data will be forwarded by a collector. As mentioned previously, a read list 310 allows a collector 102 to differentiate between meter reading data that will be forwarded to a utility service provider 108 from meter reading data that will be “dropped.” The creation of the read list 310 may be based on rankings that assess the relative ability of a plurality of collectors to communicate with the same utility meter (generated at block 415). In one embodiment, a predetermined number of collectors (e.g., 3) that are ranked the highest in their ability to communicate with a utility meter will be configured to forward meter reading data received from a utility meter. In this regard, the number of collectors that are allowed to forward meter reading data is configurable and may depend on network and device variables that make a particular configuration preferable over another. In this way, aspects of the disclosed subject matter are able to provide a fault-tolerant metering infrastructure while still allowing the expenditure of network resources to be minimized.
At block 425 of the filtering routine 400, settings of a utility meter are established to allow filtering of transmitted packets. The disclosed subject matter may be implemented in the context of a metering infrastructure in which a utility meter may be re-configured based on a received command. In one aspect, existing metering protocols are extended so that a collector may generate a command to modify the value of the network configuration bytes field 210 or 260 of packets being transmitted from a utility meter. For example, a collector identified as being the highest ranked in communicating with a utility meter may generate and transmit a command to establish the value of the network configuration bytes field 208 or 258 that will be transmitted from a utility meter. Then, the filtering routine 400 proceeds to block 430, where it terminates. Once the filtering routine 400 has been performed, the utility meters 114-130 will be configured to encode and transmit packets in a way that allows the collectors 102-106 to filter received meter reading data. Collectors identified as being the most reliable in communicating with a particular utility meter will forward data originating from the utility meter to a service provider. In contrast, lower-ranked collectors will not forward data originating from the utility meter, thereby conserving network resources.
It should be well understood that the filtering routine 400 described above with reference to
Now with reference to
At block 510 of the timing routine 500, one or more packets originating from a utility meter are collected. As mentioned previously, an existing metering infrastructure may be used to collect packets originating from a utility meter that contains a time stamp. For example, the packets 200 and 250 (
As further illustrated in
At decision block 520, a determination is made regarding whether the inaccuracy in a utility meter clock is greater than a predetermined error threshold. In this regard, an error threshold may be established so that inaccuracies rising to a certain percentage (e.g., 5%) from any given interval will satisfy the threshold. In addition, error thresholds may be based on systematic inaccuracies observed over multiple intervals. In any event, if an inaccuracy in a utility meter clock does not satisfy the error threshold, then the result of the test performed at block 520 is “no” and the timing routine 500 proceeds back to block 510. Conversely, if an error threshold is satisfied, the result of the test performed at block 520 is “yes” and the timing routine 500 proceeds to block 525. Then, at block 525, action is performed to correct the inaccuracy in a utility meter clock. In this regard, the corrective action taken at block 525 may include having utility service personnel replace a component of a utility meter. In addition or alternatively, the corrective action may include resetting a utility meter clock and/or propagating a software update that compensates for the inaccuracy. Then, once the corrective action to the utility meter clock has been implemented, the timing routine 500 proceeds to block 530 where it terminates.
While embodiments of the claimed subject matter have been illustrated and described, it will be appreciated that various changes can be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the present disclosure.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4132981 | White | Jan 1979 | A |
4190800 | Kelly, Jr. et al. | Feb 1980 | A |
4204195 | Bogacki | May 1980 | A |
4254472 | Juengel et al. | Mar 1981 | A |
4322842 | Martinez | Mar 1982 | A |
4396915 | Farnsworth et al. | Aug 1983 | A |
4425628 | Bedard et al. | Jan 1984 | A |
4638314 | Keller | Jan 1987 | A |
4749992 | Fitzemeyer et al. | Jun 1988 | A |
5138615 | Lamport et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5216623 | Barrett et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5400246 | Wilson et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5432507 | Mussino et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5459727 | Vannucci | Oct 1995 | A |
5515509 | Rom | May 1996 | A |
5608780 | Gerszberg et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5717718 | Rowsell et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5719564 | Sears | Feb 1998 | A |
5727057 | Emery et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5767790 | Jovellana | Jun 1998 | A |
5844893 | Gollnick et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5874903 | Shuey et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5880677 | Lestician | Mar 1999 | A |
5892758 | Argyroudis | Apr 1999 | A |
5894422 | Chasek | Apr 1999 | A |
5896097 | Cardozo | Apr 1999 | A |
5898387 | Davis et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5898826 | Pierce et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5914673 | Jennings et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5933092 | Ouellette et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5963146 | Johnson et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5963457 | Kanoi et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5963650 | Simionescu et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5987011 | Toh | Nov 1999 | A |
5991806 | McHann, Jr. | Nov 1999 | A |
6014089 | Tracy et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6044062 | Brownrigg et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6058355 | Ahmed et al. | May 2000 | A |
6073169 | Shuey et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6075777 | Agrawal et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6078785 | Bush | Jun 2000 | A |
6088659 | Kelley et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6097703 | Larsen et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108699 | Moiin | Aug 2000 | A |
6124806 | Cunningham et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6134587 | Okanoue | Oct 2000 | A |
6137423 | Glorioso et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6150955 | Tracy et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6195018 | Ragle et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6239722 | Colten et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6240080 | Okanoue et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6246677 | Nap et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6246689 | Shavitt | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6249516 | Brownrigg et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6300881 | Yee et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6304556 | Haas | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6338087 | Okanoue | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6366217 | Cunningham et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6400949 | Bielefeld et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6407991 | Meier | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6415330 | Okanoue | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6437692 | Petite et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6480505 | Johansson et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6535498 | Larsson et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6538577 | Ehrke et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6553355 | Arnoux et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6577671 | Vimpari | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6606708 | Shifrin et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6636894 | Short et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6653945 | Johnson et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6657552 | Belski et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6665620 | Burns et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6681110 | Crookham et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6691173 | Morris et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6697331 | Riihinen et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6710721 | Holowick | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6711166 | Amir et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6711409 | Zavgren, Jr. et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6714787 | Reed et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6718137 | Chin | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6725281 | Zintel et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6728514 | Bandeira et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6751455 | Acampora | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6751672 | Khalil et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6775258 | van Valkenburg et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6778099 | Mayer et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6826123 | Herring | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6826620 | Mawhinney et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6829216 | Nakata | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6829347 | Odiaka | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6831921 | Higgins | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6845091 | Ogier et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6859742 | Randall et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6865185 | Patel et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6885309 | Van Heteren | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6891838 | Petite et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6900738 | Crichlow | May 2005 | B2 |
6904025 | Madour et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6904385 | Budike, Jr. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6909705 | Lee et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6963285 | Fischer et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6975613 | Johansson | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6980973 | Karpenko | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6985087 | Soliman | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7009379 | Ramirez | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7009493 | Howard et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7016336 | Sorensen | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7054271 | Brownrigg et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7062361 | Lane | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7064679 | Ehrke et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7072945 | Nieminen et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7102533 | Kim | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7103511 | Petite | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7106044 | Lee, Jr. et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7126494 | Ardalan et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7135956 | Bartone et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7143204 | Kao et al. | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7145474 | Shuey et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7170425 | Christopher et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7185131 | Leach | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7209840 | Petite et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7215926 | Corbett et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7230544 | Van Heteren | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7250874 | Mueller et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7271735 | Rogai | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7274305 | Luttrell | Sep 2007 | B1 |
7274975 | Miller | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7277027 | Ehrke et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7289887 | Rodgers | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7301476 | Shuey et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7304587 | Boaz | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7308370 | Mason, Jr. et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7312721 | Mason, Jr. et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7317404 | Cumeralto et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7321316 | Hancock et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7327998 | Kumar et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7346463 | Petite et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7349766 | Rodgers | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7379981 | Elliott et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
20010005368 | Rune | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010038342 | Foote | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010046879 | Schramm et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020012358 | Sato | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020110118 | Foley | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20030037268 | Kistler | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030117899 | Eidson | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030123481 | Neale et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030185104 | Goergen | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040034773 | Balabine et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040113810 | Mason, Jr. et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040125776 | Haugli et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040138787 | Ransom et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040140908 | Gladwin et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040157613 | Steer et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040190378 | Farmer | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050027859 | Alvisi et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050030968 | Rich et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050055432 | Rodgers | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050058144 | Ayyagari et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050065742 | Rodgers | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050172024 | Cheifot et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050251403 | Shuey | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060056363 | Ratiu et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060056368 | Ratiu et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060098576 | Brownrigg et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060167784 | Hoffberg | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060184288 | Rodgers | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060215583 | Castagnoli | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060215673 | Olvera-Hernandez | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060217936 | Mason et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060271678 | Jessup et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070019598 | Prehofer | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070057767 | Sun et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070058491 | Dahlen et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070063868 | Borleske | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070085700 | Walters et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070087756 | Hoffberg | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070103324 | Kosuge et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070109121 | Cohen | May 2007 | A1 |
20070136817 | Nguyen | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070139220 | Mirza et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070147268 | Kelley et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070189249 | Gurevich et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070200729 | Borleske et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070205915 | Shuey et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070206521 | Osaje | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070207811 | Das et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070248047 | Shorty et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070258508 | Werb et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070266429 | Ginter et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070271006 | Golden et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070276547 | Miller | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080132185 | Elliott et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080177678 | DiMartini et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20090028006 | Ha et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090135677 | Veillette | May 2009 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
10-070774 | Mar 1998 | JP |
10135965 | May 1998 | JP |
WO 0054237 | Sep 2000 | WO |
WO 0155865 | Aug 2001 | WO |
WO 2008027457 | Mar 2008 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Machine translation of abstract of JP 10070774. |
Machine translation of abstract of JP 10135965. |
International Search Report for PCT Application No. PCT/US00/06312, dated Jul. 31, 2000. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US07/19051, dated Sep. 16, 2008. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13016, dated Jan. 9, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13030, dated Jan. 9, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13020, dated Jan. 9, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13023 dated Jan. 12, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13019, dated Jan. 12, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13024, dated Jan. 13, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13025, dated Jan. 13, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13021, dated Jan. 15, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13028, dated Jan. 15, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13022, dated Jan. 27, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13018, dated Jan. 30, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US08/13027, dated Feb. 9, 2009. |
International Search Report for PCT Application No. PCT/US01/03056, dated Apr. 26, 2001. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100188938 A1 | Jul 2010 | US |