The invention relates to software licensing, and in particular to a system for authorizing a redundant software license server to process software license requests in the event of primary software license server failure.
It is a problem in the software field to prevent the unavailability of necessary application files from decreasing employee productivity while also allowing the business to purchase and concurrently use more than one copy of the application files. A number of software publishers license software files under a pricing model wherein a customer purchases the right to concurrently use a predetermined number of copies. Software files that are sold for concurrent use are often delivered with license management software installed on a license server, from which the customer requests software licenses. The licensing management software ensures that the customer does not use more software licenses than they have purchased and are entitled to use. A problem arises when the software license management system fails.
Effective management of multiple copies of application files presents a major dilemma for computer site administrators and software application publishers. The focus of control for managing multiple copies of an application file or application file software license is the physical location of the application file or the program disk. The details of controlling physical access and the degree of inconvenience vary, but in a world of hard disks, networks, file servers and electronic email, management based on controlled distribution is intrinsically impractical or even impossible. Without any practical tools, site administrators are forced to rely on redundant license management systems at each site.
The primary reason a company purchases hardware and software is to improve employee productivity and to enable employees to do things they could not do otherwise. Reduced productivity because users need to wait for software licenses to be available is a very real cost. These costs can delay product development or manufacture and reduce customer and employee satisfaction. It is a problem if the license server at one location fails, resulting in no software licenses available and thus, a reduction in productivity.
A solution to the problem is to break the software licenses into sets and provide each site with its own license server, licensing management software and a subset of software licenses. User equipment is configured to request a software license from one of the multiple license servers. Using this solution, users at each site contact their local license server first. If the license server does not have a license available, the user is required to request a license from another server across the WAN. Using this solution, when one server fails, then only the subset of software licenses allocated to the failed license server are unavailable. However, the user has no way of knowing which license server has a software license available. The problem is exasperated when additional sites are added, providing fewer software licenses at each site and additional sites to contact to request a software license. It is also a problem when the number of software licenses available at the other sites is not sufficient to meet the demand, again, reducing productivity.
A solution to the problem is implemented by FLEXIm, from GLOBEtrotter Software, Inc., in San Jose, Calif. This solution is based on providing three license servers each having a unique host identification and including the unique host identifiers of all three of the license servers in a license file. The three license servers are interconnected and track the number of software licenses that are available within the system. When one of the license servers is disconnected from the other license servers, the disconnected license server is not permitted to distribute software licenses. The connected license servers continue to receive software license requests, grant software licenses and track the number of software licenses that are available within the system and the number of software licenses that were granted by the disconnected license server. This solution prevents distribution of more software licenses than are purchased. It also provides a method for continuing to monitor the number of software licenses granted by the disconnected license server, thus allowing all of the software licenses to be granted. A problem occurs when a second of the three license servers fails or is disconnected, resulting in no software licenses being available.
For these reasons, a need exists for a software license management system to allow an alternative computer device having the required software license management software to manage software licenses when the license server fails.
The present method for authorizing a substitute software license server overcomes the problems outlined above and advances the art by allowing the customer or the license server to gain approval from the software provider to temporarily authorize a substitute license server to process user requests.
The present method for authorizing a substitute software license server is intended for use by a business operating a license server running a license management software wherein the license server is assigned a host identification. The plurality of software licenses are also assigned the same host identification and only a license server having the matching host identification may authorize use of the plurality of copies of the application file. In response to an application file usage request, the license server checks the number of application file usage requests authorized and the number of software licenses available. If the number of application file usage requests authorized is less than the number of software licenses, the usage request is authorized.
When the license server fails, application file usage requests are not processed. The present method for authorizing a substitute software license server allows the customer to contact the software provider to request authorization to utilize a substitute license server for processing the application file usage requests. The substitute license server may be any computer system meeting the requirements of the license management software. The software provider downloads the necessary application software to the substitute license server and authorized substitution for a period of time. When the time period expires, the substitute license server discontinues processing the application file usage requests.
In an alternative embodiment, the registered substitute license server is connected to the customer network. The substitute license server contacts the software provider and requests authorization to process application file use requests. After checking the registration, the software provider downloads the necessary application software to the substitute license server and authorized substitution for a period of time. When the time period expires, the substitute license server discontinues processing the application file usage requests.
The authorization of redundant software license management servers summarized above and defined by the enumerated claims may be better understood by referring to the following detailed description, which should be read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. This detailed description of the preferred embodiment is not intended to limit the enumerated claims, but to serve as a particular example thereof. In addition, the phraseology and terminology employed herein is for the purpose of description, and not of limitation.
A number of software providers license software files under a pricing model wherein a customer purchases the right to concurrently use a predetermined number of copies. Software files that are sold for concurrent usage are often delivered with license management software installed on a license server, from which users request software licenses. The licensing management software ensures that the customer does not use more licenses than they have purchased and are entitled to use.
Network Configuration—
A software license network 100 configuration includes a software license server 140 for controlling software license distribution and a plurality of workstations having computers 130-133 on which to execute the software file as illustrated in
While the network configuration just described includes a plurality of workstations, the term workstation used throughout the following description is for illustration only and it is understood that a server or other type of computer may be substituted. Similarly, the phrase “application file” refers generally to a feature or a single file which could contain an application file including one or more features that may be individually turned on or off with a license and is not limited to a single feature or a single application file.
In the example illustrated in
Each software license server 140 is assigned a unique host identifier allowing the software license provider to control the number of software licenses available at the particular software license server. The software file residing in the license server memory 140 includes the predetermined number of software licenses and the unique host identification of the license server on which it is installed. The license server 140 accessing the license file must be assigned the same unique host identification. A problem occurs when the host identification of the license server does not match the host identification within the license file, the license server is not authorize to access the license file for processing usage requests. Thus, when a license server fails, an alternative license server can not be substituted. Instead, usage requests for concurrent usage of the application file are denied. Likewise, as users terminate usage of an application file, usage of the application file is not available to other users.
Software License Server Operation
Referring to the operational flow diagram of
When a license server fails, the operator may substitute a backup license server. However, if the host identifications do not match in step 216, the license server is not authorized to process the user request. Thus, the license server that is installed to ensure that the customer does not use more software licenses than they have purchased and are entitled to use, blocks usage of all of the software licenses. The present method for authorizing a substitute software license server overcomes the problem by allowing the customer or the license server to gain approval from the software provider to temporarily authorize a substitute license server to process user requests.
Manual Substitute License Server Authorization—
The present method for authorizing a substitute software license server allows a customer to contact the software provider in step 312 to request permission to temporarily authorize a substitute license server to process application usage requests when the host license server fails in step 310. The software provider may require the substitute license server to be registered prior to the request. The software provider may request information in step 314 including the host identification and the expected duration of time for which the substitution is sought. In step 316 the substitute license server communicates with the software provider server via a secure communication channel to request authorization in step 318 to process application file requests. If the substitute license server is not registered with the software provider, the substitute license server may not be authorized in step 324 and therefore does not have permission to process user application file requests and the substitution request is denied in step 322.
If the substitute license server is registered with the software provider, the substitute license server is authorized in step 320 to process application file usage requests in step 324. Prior to processing the plurality of application file usage requests, the software provider server downloads the license management software and a substitute license file in step 323 to the substitute license server. The substitute license file may include a temporary identification and a plurality of software licenses having the temporary identification. Since the identification of the substitute license server matches the software license identification, the substitute license server is allowed to authorize concurrent usage of the corresponding application files. The substitute license server continues to process application file usage requests until the time period for which the substitute license server is authorized expires in step 326, at which time the substitute license server discontinues processing application file usage requests in step 328.
Automatic Substitute License Server Authorization—
In an alternative embodiment, the software license management application includes a process for contacting the software provider to request permission to temporarily authorize the substitute license server to process application usage requests when the host license server fails. The substitute license server may be connected to the network and periodically query the host license server to ensure that the host license server is operational. If the query is not responded to, in this alternative embodiment, the registered substitute license server contacts the software provider in step 412. If the registered substitute license server is not connected to the network, the customer may, in response to failure of the host license server in step 410, connect the substitute license server and initiate communication in step 412 between the substitute license server and the software provider.
The software provider may request information in step 414 including the host identification and the expected duration for which the substitution is sought. In step 416 the substitute license server communicates with the software provider server via a secure communication channel to request permission in step 418 to process application file requests. If the substitute license server is not registered with the software provider, the substitute license server is not authorized in step 424 and therefore does not have permission to process user application file requests and the substitution request is denied in step 422.
If the substitute license server is registered with the software provider, the substitute license server is authorized in step 420 to process user application file requests in step 424. Prior to processing the plurality of application file usage requests, the software provider server downloads the license management software and a substitute license file in step 323 to the substitute license server. The substitute license server continues to process application file usage requests in step 424 until the time period for which the substitute license server is authorized expires in step 426, at which time the substitute license server discontinues processing application file usage requests in step 428.
The present method for authorizing a substitute software license server allows a customer to register a substitute license server to prevent having periods of downtime where application file usage requests, and therefore application file usage, is not available. Thus increasing user productivity by providing an alternative license server to process application file usage requests when the host license server fails. The software provider may allow the user to take advantage of the present method for authorizing a substitute software license server as a feature that is purchased by the customer. As a paid for feature, only those license servers having the feature activated may take advantage of requesting authorization of a substitute license server.
As to alternative embodiments, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the present method for authorizing a substitute software license server has been described authorizing a substitute license server. The substitute license server may be any computer system meeting the system requirements of the license management software to be utilized as a substitute.
Software license management systems having redundant license servers may also utilize from the present method for authorizing a substitute software license server. In a redundant software license server system, when one of the software license servers fails, application file usage requests directed to that particular license server are not processed, thus not authorizing additional users. A redundant software license system utilizing the present method for authorizing a substitute software license server may connect a substitute license server and request authorization to process application usage requests.
Substitution for a failed license server is particularly useful in fragmented software license systems having multiple license servers wherein each license server authorizes usage of a subset of the plurality of software licenses. When a license server fails, the subset of software licenses available for authorization by the failed license server is not available for authorizing application file usage requests, thus the customer is unable to authorize usage of the total number of software license that the customer paid for.
The present method for authorizing a substitute software license server is also useful for a small business that does not have multiple license servers authorizing application file use. In this environment, the customer may substitute any computer system meeting the requirements of the license management software for the failed software license server. Thus reducing cost to the customer and improving productivity by reducing downtime.
Alternative embodiments will occur to those skilled in the art. Although the present method for authorizing a substitute software license server has been described and illustrated for a network configuration having one software license server, two or more software license servers may be concurrently operating within the same network. Similarly, although embodiments were described and illustrated wherein the software license server authorized the usage of an application file corresponding to the software license, the software license server may authorize concurrent usage of one or more features or the application file may contain one or more features that are independently authorized by a software license. Such variations and alternatives are contemplated, and can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention claimed in the appended claims.
It is apparent that there has been described a method for authorizing a substitute software license server that fully satisfies the objects, aims, and advantages set forth above. While the authorization of redundant software license server method has been described in conjunction with specific embodiments thereof, it is evident that many alternatives, modifications, and/or variations can be devised by those skilled in the art in light of the foregoing description. Accordingly, this description is intended to embrace all such alternatives, modifications and variations as fall within the spirit and scope of the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4288659 | Atalla | Sep 1981 | A |
4405829 | Rivest et al. | Sep 1983 | A |
4780821 | Crossley | Oct 1988 | A |
4811393 | Hazard | Mar 1989 | A |
4888800 | Marshall et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
4937863 | Robert et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
5005122 | Griffin et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
5023907 | Johnson et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5157663 | Major et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5179591 | Hardy et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5204897 | Wyman | Apr 1993 | A |
5206903 | Kohler et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5230020 | Hardy et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5260999 | Wyman | Nov 1993 | A |
5307481 | Shimazaki et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5329570 | Glassmacher et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5341427 | Hardy et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5347580 | Molva et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5386369 | Christiano | Jan 1995 | A |
5390297 | Barber et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5408649 | Beshears et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5448639 | Arazi | Sep 1995 | A |
5553143 | Ross et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5563946 | Cooper et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5579222 | Bains et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5646992 | Subler et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5671412 | Christiano | Sep 1997 | A |
5673315 | Wolf | Sep 1997 | A |
5699431 | Van Oorschot et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5708709 | Rose | Jan 1998 | A |
5717604 | Wiggins | Feb 1998 | A |
5724428 | Rivest | Mar 1998 | A |
5742757 | Hamadani et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5745569 | Moskowitz et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5745576 | Abraham et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5745879 | Wyman | Apr 1998 | A |
5754761 | Willsey | May 1998 | A |
5758068 | Brandt et al. | May 1998 | A |
5758069 | Olsen | May 1998 | A |
5790074 | Rangedahl et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5790664 | Coley et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796941 | Lita | Aug 1998 | A |
5828747 | Fisher et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5835600 | Rivest | Nov 1998 | A |
5864620 | Pettitt | Jan 1999 | A |
5905793 | Flockhart et al. | May 1999 | A |
5905860 | Olsen et al. | May 1999 | A |
5935243 | Hasebe et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5940504 | Griswold | Aug 1999 | A |
5956505 | Manduley | Sep 1999 | A |
5956716 | Kenner et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5960085 | de la Huerga | Sep 1999 | A |
5978565 | Ohran et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5982873 | Flockhart et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5995625 | Sudia et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6006016 | Faigon et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6009401 | Horstmann | Dec 1999 | A |
6011973 | Valentine et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6023763 | Grumstrup et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6023766 | Yamamura | Feb 2000 | A |
6047242 | Benson | Apr 2000 | A |
6067621 | Yu et al. | May 2000 | A |
6108703 | Leighton et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6128389 | Chan et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6134660 | Boneh et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6148415 | Kobayashi et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6163607 | Bogart et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6173053 | Bogart et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6178511 | Cohen et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6189146 | Misra et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6192122 | Flockhart et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6212635 | Reardon | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6219652 | Carter et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6223291 | Puhl et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6246871 | Ala-Laurila | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6314565 | Kenner et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6343280 | Clark | Jan 2002 | B2 |
6360320 | Ishiguro et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6381747 | Wonfor et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6414595 | Scrandis et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6421726 | Kenner et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6442708 | Dierauer et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6463534 | Geiger et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6498791 | Pickett et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6502079 | Ball et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6513117 | Tarpenning et al. | Jan 2003 | B2 |
6513121 | Serkowski | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6539481 | Takahashi et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6557105 | Tardo et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6574612 | Baratti et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6584454 | Hummel, Jr. et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6615347 | de Silva et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6640305 | Kocher et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6654888 | Cooper et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6675208 | Rai et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6697945 | Ishiguro et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6760324 | Scott et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6765492 | Harris | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6769063 | Kanda et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6772133 | Kambayashi et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6775782 | Buros et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6778820 | Tendler | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6785726 | Freeman et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6795941 | Nickels | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6816842 | Singh et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6826606 | Freeman et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6842896 | Redding et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6850958 | Wakabayashi | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6854010 | Christian et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6868403 | Wiser et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6876984 | Tadayon et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6883095 | Sandhu et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6889212 | Wang et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6901386 | Dedrick et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6904523 | Bialick et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6920567 | Doherty et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
6928166 | Yoshizawa | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6928558 | Allahwerdi et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6934463 | Ishiguro et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6934848 | King et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6941283 | Kambayashi et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6957344 | Goldshlag et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
6959291 | Armstrong et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
6961858 | Fransdonk | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6968384 | Redding et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6973444 | Blinn et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6976164 | King et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6981222 | Rush et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6993664 | Padole et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7032113 | Pendlebury | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7035918 | Redding et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7065214 | Ishiguro et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7073063 | Peinado | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7080402 | Bates et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7085382 | Terao et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7096469 | Kubala et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7100044 | Watanabe et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7100200 | Pope et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7124304 | Bel et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7127442 | Mazza et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7139737 | Takahashi et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7143409 | Herrero | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7146340 | Musson | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7149806 | Perkins et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7152245 | Dublish et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7171662 | Misra et al. | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7185195 | Hug et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7197321 | Erskine et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7206936 | Aull et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7216363 | Serkowski et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7225333 | Peinado et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7228426 | Sinha et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7228567 | Serkowski et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7272500 | Walker | Sep 2007 | B1 |
7278164 | Raiz et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7283519 | Girard | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7302703 | Burns | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7308717 | Koved et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7310734 | Boate et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7313828 | Holopainen | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7318236 | DeMello et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7336791 | Ishiguro | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7353388 | Gilman | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7356692 | Bialick et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7373657 | Walker | May 2008 | B2 |
7382881 | Uusitalo et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7383205 | Peinado et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7415729 | Ukeda et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7545931 | Dillaway | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7552166 | Chack | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7565325 | Lenard et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
20010001268 | Menon et al. | May 2001 | A1 |
20010034846 | Beery | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20020013722 | Kanaga | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020017977 | Wall | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020038422 | Suwamoto et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020052939 | Lee | May 2002 | A1 |
20020083003 | Halliday et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020087892 | Imazu | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020107809 | Biddle et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020112186 | Ford et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020116340 | Hellberg et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020138441 | Lopatic | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020154777 | Candelore | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020169625 | Yang et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020169725 | Eng | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020188656 | Patton et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020188704 | Gold | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030013411 | Uchiyama | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030018491 | Nakahara et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030018582 | Yaacovi | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023564 | Padhye et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030055749 | Carmody et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030084306 | Abburi et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030095542 | Chang et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030144959 | Makita | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030149670 | Cronce | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030149874 | Balfanz et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030156719 | Cronce | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030159033 | Ishiguro | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030159070 | Mayer et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030163428 | Schneck et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030172035 | Cronce et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030177393 | Ishiguro | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030191936 | Kawatsura et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030208449 | Diao | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030233547 | Gaston et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040010440 | Lenard et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040044629 | Walker et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040044630 | Walker et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040044631 | Walker et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040047354 | Slater et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040054930 | Walker et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040073517 | Zunke et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040078339 | Goringe et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040088541 | Messerges et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040103011 | Hatano et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040103324 | Band | May 2004 | A1 |
20040127196 | Dabbish et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040128395 | Miyazaki | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040128551 | Walker et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040133794 | Kocher et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040162998 | Tuomi et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040172367 | Chavez | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040181696 | Walker | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040249763 | Vardi | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040260589 | Varadarajan et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040268120 | Mirtal et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050005098 | Michaelis et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050038753 | Yen et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050076204 | Thornton et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050086174 | Eng | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050091507 | Lee et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050144437 | Ransom et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050154877 | Trench | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050185792 | Tokutani et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050198510 | Robert et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050202830 | Sudit | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050229004 | Callaghan | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050246098 | Bergstrom et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050289072 | Sabharwal | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060021068 | Xu et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060026105 | Endoh | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060036554 | Schrock et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060036894 | Bauer et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060064582 | Teal et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060089912 | Spagna et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060178953 | Aggarwal et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060242083 | Chavez | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060294010 | Kim et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070033419 | Kocher et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070094710 | Walker et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070107067 | Fountian | May 2007 | A1 |
20070219917 | Liu et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080052295 | Walker et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080082449 | Wilkinson et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080141242 | Shapiro | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080189131 | Chavez | Aug 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1071253 | Jan 2001 | EP |
1562378 | Aug 2005 | EP |
2006085481 | Mar 2006 | JP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040010469 A1 | Jan 2004 | US |