The present invention relates to a “people-networking” scheme that may be embodied in computer software and/or hardware and that can be characterized as both a browser and broker of human networks on the Internet. When used in a computer network environment employing a client-server architecture, a client-side software application may act as a browser and relationship manager while a server component may act as a broker. When used in a peer-to-peer or distributed server architecture, the broker function can be distributed.
One theory behind social networking postulates that if person A wishes to meet person B, s/he can leverage friends and acquaintances to achieve that result. In the course of conducting their everyday affairs (whether personal or business), people generally access their networks of contacts for referrals, information and/or advice on a variety of matters, for example
In examples such as these, an individual's decisions can be made more efficient if s/he has access to the advice of trusted associates and friends. However, it is often the case that an individual will find that s/he does not know anyone with the information s/he needs at a specific place and time. In such a situation, the individual may try going out an extra degree within his or her own “human networks” by asking a contact to provide the name of a contact who may have the needed information. This presents a quandary for the person asked for a referral—namely, whether or not to reveal his or her contacts to the requester. By making such revelations, the “connector” may compromise his or her network or expose one or more of his or her contacts to unwanted solicitations. By not making the referral, however, the connector may risk his or her association with the person seeking the referral. Whether or not to make the referral often depends upon the degree of trust that the connector has in the person seeking the referral and any past experiences in making such referrals to the target referee.
Even where the referral is ultimately made, there is no guarantee that the referee is going to be a suitable candidate for the original requestor's purpose. Thus, the requestor may be forced to track down a number of leads (many of which may be unsuitable) in the hope of finding a suitable target. This process is rather inefficient, usually because a) the requestor does not have enough information about the contacts of his or her contacts in order to determine which contacts to approach for referrals, and/or b) the requestor has failed to properly elucidate his or her requirements and/or because the requestor was not provided with sufficient information regarding the potential target to be able to eliminate him or her from further consideration. In other words, the profiles of the desired target and the resulting candidates were not sufficiently developed to meaningfully assist in the selection process.
Despite their inefficiencies, human networks are central to most, if not all, value-creating activities and operate at multiple levels, including personal networks (the personal and professional contacts each of us has), organizational networks (links within and between organizations), and associations and interest groups (people attracted by common values, interests, and goals). Today, many individuals may also be regarded as existing online community members, members of organizational networks (independent consultants, alliances, partnerships, consortiums, associations) or employees of small to large companies. They engage in human development, organizational learning, training, management, brokering, marketing, sales, trade, research, and consulting activities, all of which depend, to some degree, on inter-human networks. Such individuals generally understand the value of computer networks as tools for sharing information, but presently these individuals have only limited access to tools that can give them an edge (e.g., a competitive advantage) to make better human network connections on the Internet. However, even with the advantages provided by the Internet, opportunity is still limited by the reach of an individual's personal network.
Others have recognized some of these deficiencies and have proposed partial solutions. For example, some prior schemes for leveraging human network characteristics show the benefit of using automated means to assist in decision-making processes regarding the use of such networks. However, these schemes do not assist in the forming of relationships or introductions among members of disparate human networks nor do they provide for the brokering function discussed above, which is critical to the exchange of social capital among individuals. Other schemes include access control systems that generally allow only intended users to have access to information. Such systems may make use of encryption schemes, such as public/private key encryption schemes, or other access controls such as:
In addition to access control schemes, other profiling systems do exist and are often used as adjuncts to e-commerce technologies to provide some limited contact book updating capabilities.
The present invention provides advanced filtering, searching and reference checking tools and methods for use with and within social networking applications.
One embodiment of the invention provides a computer-implemented method in which one or more software agents broker matches between user-specified search criteria and targets, report such matches according to the level of identity between the search criteria and information found in profiles of the potential targets. The method also provides for a “one-click” reference search to allow a searcher to access information pertaining to the potential target among other sources within the searcher's network of connections, and then report on such references, ranked according to instructions specified by the searcher.
In one embodiment, a user interface (UI) object (e.g., a one-click reference search button) is provided, for example, on a web page displayed at a user's client device. When selected, the UI object causes a reference search query to be generated. The search query identifies the user performing the search, and a target person for whom the user would like a reference. The search query is communicated to, and processed by, a social networking system (e.g., through an API function call). In turn, the social networking system returns information about potential references to the client.
In a further embodiment of the invention, a one-click reference feature allows a user to automatically initiate an introduction request to an individual within the user's social network who has a direct connection to one or more of the targets identified during the user's search.
In another embodiment of the invention, a computer implemented method in which incoming messages are scanned, and the senders' names (and other user-definable information) are compared to a social networking application database, thereby initiating a search for a profile that matches the sender within the database. Upon locating such a profile, summary information concerning the sender (e.g., as extracted from the database) is displayed along with the incoming message.
In a further embodiment of the invention, incoming messages (e.g., e-mail messages, IM messages, etc.) are filtered by a computer implemented system according to user-definable instructions. The filtered messages are prioritized, again according to user-definable criteria, and information therein used to search a social networking application database for summary information regarding the senders of the filtered and prioritized messages, such that each message can be displayed along with that summary information.
The incoming messages may be filtered according to user-definable instructions that include one or more of the following: a sender's relationship to the recipient as determined by the social networking application, the sender's current title and place of employment, the sender's profile summary, as entered by the sender into the social networking application, reputation information about the sender as derived from the social networking application, relevance of the content of the message as compared to the interests of the recipient which the recipient may have recorded in his or her own profile in the social networking application or elsewhere, and the relevance of the content of the sender's profile to the recipient's profile, as recorded for each in the social networking application or elsewhere.
Another embodiment of the invention provides a computer implemented method that provides a mechanism for viral forwarding of searches conducted within a social networking application. A user is permitted to select criteria for a search within a social networking database, conduct the search and view results displayed, and is then offered a list of individuals to whom the search criteria and results could be forwarded in order to obtain improved results by virtue of access to the personal networks of those other individuals. Such a list may include individuals that satisfy user-definable criteria. and such individuals may be ranked according to user-specified criteria. The user may also be able to select individuals from the list recommended by the system to whom the search should be forwarded. An embodiment of the invention would also allow the user to attach a message to the forwarded search.
In still another embodiment of the invention, a mechanism is provided whereby each person receiving a forwarded search may in turn forward that same search to others. Each time a search is so forwarded, if permitted by the searcher, the individual forwarding the search has the ability to modify, add to, or otherwise alter the search. Individuals receiving forwarded searches are selected based on user-definable criteria, wherein those criteria can include one or more of the following: connection threshold, connection strength, affiliations with organizations, industries or employers, schooling, or other elements of profiles the user wishes to use as a filter.
These and other more detailed and specific objects and features of the present invention are more fully disclosed in the following specification, reference being had to the accompanying drawings, in which:
Described herein are improvements and enhancements for social networking applications including search and user interface components, advanced message management functions, and systems and methods to augment searches through a process of viral forwarding of search profiles.
Some portions of the detailed description that follows are presented in terms of algorithms and symbolic representations of operations on data within a computer memory (e.g., using flowcharts and the like). These algorithmic descriptions and representations are the means used by those skilled in the computer science arts to most effectively convey the substance of their work to others skilled in the art. An algorithm is here, and generally, conceived to be a self-consistent sequence of steps leading to a desired result. The steps are those requiring physical manipulations of physical quantities. Usually, though not necessarily, these quantities take the form of electrical or magnetic signals capable of being stored, transferred, combined, compared and otherwise manipulated. It has proven convenient at times, principally for reasons of common usage, to refer to these signals as bits, values, elements, objects, symbols, characters, terms, numbers or the like. It should be borne in mind, however, that all of these and similar terms are to be associated with the appropriate physical quantities and are merely convenient labels applied to these quantities. Unless specifically stated otherwise, it will be appreciated that throughout the description of the present invention, use of terms such as “processing”, “computing, “calculating”, “determining”, “displaying” or the like, refer to the action and processes of a computer system, or similar electronic computing device, that manipulates and transforms data represented as physical (electronic) quantities within the computer system's registers and memories into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computer system memories or registers or other such information storage, transmission or display devices. The various objects, data structures, algorithms, etc. described herein may be stored as computer-readable instructions on computer-readable media in the conventional fashion.
Various embodiments of the present invention may be implemented with the aid of computer-implemented processes or methods (a.k.a. programs or routines) that may be rendered in any computer language including, without limitation, C#, C/C++, Fortran, COBOL, PASCAL, assembly language, markup languages (e.g., HTML, SGML, XML, VoXML), and the like, as well as object-oriented environments such as the Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA), Java™ and the like. Java is a form of an object-oriented (i.e., focused on data and the interfaces to it), dynamic programming language for computer systems developed by Sun Microsystems of Mountain View, Calif. Java has an extensive library of subroutines for coping with TCP/IP (transmission control protocol/Internet protocol) protocols like HTTP (hypertext transfer protocol) and FTP (file transfer protocol). Thus, Java applications can open and access objects (i.e., data) across the Internet (or other computer networks) via URLs (uniform resource locators, also known as web addresses) similar to the way other software can access a local file system. Because Java was designed to support applications on networks, which may be composed of a variety of systems with a variety of central processing unit (CPU) and operating system architectures, all Java programs are compiled to an architecture- or platform-neutral object file format. Thus, the compiled code is executable on many processors.
The present invention can likewise be implemented with an apparatus to perform the operations described herein. This apparatus may be specially constructed for the required purposes, or it may comprise a general-purpose computer, selectively activated or reconfigured by a computer program stored in the computer. Such a computer program may be stored in a computer readable storage medium, such as, but not limited to, any type of disk including floppy disks, optical disks, CD-ROMs, and magnetic-optical disks, read-only memories (ROMs), random access memories (RAMs), EPROMs, EEPROMs, magnetic or optical cards, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions, and each coupled to a computer system bus.
The algorithms and processes presented herein are not inherently related to any particular computer or other apparatus. Various general-purpose systems may be used with programs in accordance with the teachings herein, or it may prove convenient to construct more specialized apparatus to perform the required method. For example, any of the methods according to the present invention can be implemented in hard-wired circuitry, by programming a general-purpose processor or by any combination of hardware and software. One of ordinary skill in the art will immediately appreciate that the invention can be practiced with computer system configurations other than those described below, including hand-held devices, multiprocessor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, DSP devices, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, and the like. The invention can also be practiced in distributed computing environments where tasks are performed by remote processing devices that are linked through a communications network.
Computer implemented social networking applications help people find and obtain trusted referrals to other people they wish to meet by taking advantage of the social connections of their own friends, acquaintances, and family. Such a system was described in U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 09/852,336, 11/146,815 and 11/219,035 each of which is incorporated herein for reference. One component of social networking is the ability to find individuals among one's connections to provide personal insights and knowledge about people one would like to meet. Another component of social networking is the use of reputation information to efficiently determine which individuals within one's contacts is most likely to have the information best suited to one's purpose. What is needed in a computer-implemented system of social networking is a way to efficiently integrate one's everyday methods of communications, particularly digital communications, with the knowledge contained in the aggregate of all of one's contacts.
One-Click Reference Checking
As a component of social networking, contacts are valuable for not only finding an individual the searcher wishes to meet, but also for finding persons who can act as references to give the searcher personal insights and knowledge about individuals the searcher may wish to meet. When checking references, searchers typically wish to check the references explicitly provided by the individual being checked. In order to establish increased objectivity as well as to create increased personal trust and rapport between the person providing the reference and the searcher, an ability to find individuals in addition to those provided by the person being checked is desirable. For example, if John would like to evaluate Paul, John will speak with the references Paul has provided, but John would also like to speak with others who may be able to provide John with further insight on Paul. Ideally, these “hidden” references will be individuals whom John knows, or who are trusted contacts of one of John's trusted contacts.
Embodiments of the present invention build on the systems and methods described in the above-cited U.S. patent applications by adding unique search and user interface components that enable users of social networking systems to find and choose appropriate additional references who have not been revealed by the targeted candidate. Hence, embodiments of the present invention include mechanisms for conducting searches for potential target persons that match the search criteria provided by the searcher or by defaults inherent in the social network system. An option is provided for each target person found as a selectable (e.g., by mouse click or other cursor control event) link for a “one-click reference”.
Referring to
If the search is successful 403, the user may initiate a request for information on the target from one or more of the potential reference 404. If the results are not useful, the user has the option to choose attributes to add or remove from the one click reference search 405 and run the search again 402 using these new parameters.
Incoming Message Relationship Information and Filtering
Social network applications can provide extremely valuable information to help in evaluating the potential importance of incoming messages by providing information about the sender that would otherwise not be known to the recipient. The present invention includes improvements and enhancements to user interface designs and message management functions that build upon and significantly add to the field of social networking.
Embodiments of the invention can be implemented with any type of digitized messages, including email, instant messaging, telephone and any type of digital communications environment, including client-server and person-to-person (p2p). With email as an example of an incoming message, embodiments of the invention include a computer-implemented mechanism to scan certain portions of each incoming email that arrives in a user's message inbox. As each message arrives, the sender's name and digital address are extracted and provided to a social networking application database that may be external to the user's email application. If the system matches information about the sender to information recorded in the database, the system retrieves pre-determined summary information about the sender to be displayed along with the incoming message.
As shown in
Information about the sender may include any one or more of the following:
The present invention thus makes it possible for the message recipient to see additional information about the sender derived from a social networking application and then conveniently overlaid upon the incoming message for easy reference and evaluation. Providing this information to the user in a convenient display streamlines the process by which the user decides whether or not to read and respond to the current message.
In another embodiment of the invention, the same information is additionally used to filter and prioritize incoming messages for the recipient's attention and according to either default instructions or customized instructions provided by the user/recipient. For example, messages may be prioritized and flagged, or sorted by order of display or into various message folders, or discarded, according to specific combinations of factors chosen by the user. Such factors may include: the sender's degree of separation from the recipient; minimum indications of closeness of connection or trust connecting the sender and recipient; relevance of the sender's message content to the recipient's stated interests; relevance of sender's profile content to the recipient's profile content; and reputation information about the sender.
Viral Forwarding of Searches in a Social Networking Application
The present invention improves on prior social networking applications by allowing users to augment their searches by forwarding those searches on to other people.
In embodiments of the invention, an original searcher will define criteria for a search and then launch the search. The searcher then requests that the search be forwarded on to other people. The system responds to this request by compiling a list of recommended individuals to whom the searcher should forward the search. The list of recommended individuals may be compiled using various techniques for (a) finding actual connectors who may have been filtered out of the original search results (e.g., by their own access controls or by the criteria of the searcher), and/or (b) finding likely connectors whom the searcher knows.
Criteria used by the system for selecting individuals to whom the search should be forwarded include:
In some embodiments of the invention, the user will have the option to select some or all of the individuals recommended for receiving the forwarded search. The user will also be able to compose a message to accompany the forwarded search.
In some embodiments of the invention, the following information accompanies the forwarded search:
In accordance with embodiments of the invention, the process of compiling a list of potential recipients of the search and then forwarding the search to those recipients along with recommendations for further forwarding, can continue up to the number of iterations limited by settings of any searcher in the chain of searchers, or by the settings of the system. The end result of forwarding the search even a few iterations will be the ability of the original searcher to reach a far broader network of contacts than would have been possible if the search had been contained within his own circle of contacts.
Contact Management Dashboard
The present invention significantly enhances the ability of users of social network applications to manage their contact information and interactions with their contacts through a social-network-enhanced “dashboard” user interface where users can quickly see and manage many aspects of their relationships, including messages which the user has sent to and received from various contacts of the user.
In order to support all of these functions, the system periodically scans and analyzes the user's sent and received email messages, contact lists on the user's personal computer system, and information updates made by the user's personal contacts on the shared social networking application. Updates made by the user's contacts may include, for example, their current position titles and companies names, updates to their email addresses and other contact information, updates to their information about their own personal contacts, and updates or additions to any other components of their personal profiles in the shared social networking application.
Each time the dashboard is viewed by the user the system updates each section of the dashboard based on information retrieved from the latest scan, as stated above, and including results of analysis completed by the system against the updated information scanned. The system also takes into consideration any information available regarding permissions granted to the user by the user's contacts pertaining to the user's ability to view their updated information.
When determining what information to display in each section of the dashboard, and in what order, the system takes into account specific factors related to each section, as will be further described below. In addition, in all of these sections, the system also takes into account the relative importance to the user of the contact to which the relevant information pertains. For example, relevant information about contacts may be given higher rank in the displayed list based on one or more of the following factors:
In each case the dashboard also presents the user with the opportunity to fine-tune information recorded about any of these factors related to specific contacts. For example, when selected the “Manage” button next to the “Keep-in Touch Reminders” shown in
Next to each item shown in each section the user is also provided means within the dashboard to immediately respond to the item. For example, the “Send Email” button next to items in the “Keep-in-touch Reminders” section, when selected, will cause a new email composition window to open, allowing the user to send a new message to the contact referred to.
In the embodiment illustrated in
The above description is included to illustrate the operation of various embodiments of the present invention and is not meant to limit the scope thereof.
The present application is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/674,027, filed Feb. 12, 2007, which is related to and claims the benefit of the filing date of U.S. Provisional Patent Application with Ser. No. 60/773,008, filed on Feb. 13, 2006. This patent application is hereby incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5164897 | Clark et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5426700 | Berson | Jun 1995 | A |
5475819 | Miller et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5694595 | Jacobs et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5729735 | Meyering | Mar 1998 | A |
5758324 | Hartman et al. | May 1998 | A |
5832497 | Taylor | Nov 1998 | A |
5860126 | Mittal | Jan 1999 | A |
5884270 | Walker et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5922057 | Holt | Jul 1999 | A |
5978768 | McGovern et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987440 | O'Neil et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6073106 | Rozen et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6078924 | Ainsbury et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6092197 | Coueignoux | Jul 2000 | A |
6108756 | Miller et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6112186 | Bergh et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6115709 | Gilmour et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6125401 | Huras et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6161169 | Cheng | Dec 2000 | A |
6175831 | Weinreich et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6205472 | Gilmour | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6219763 | Lentz et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6266659 | Nadkarni | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6269369 | Robertson | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6363394 | Rajarajan et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6381592 | Reuning | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6385620 | Kurzius et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6405197 | Gilmour | Jun 2002 | B2 |
6567784 | Bukow | May 2003 | B2 |
6665389 | Haste, III | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6678516 | Nordman et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6714916 | Robertson et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6879985 | Deguchi et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
7069308 | Abrams | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7117254 | Lunt et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7177880 | Ruvolo et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7181498 | Zhu et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7325012 | Nagy | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7343365 | Farnham et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7472110 | Achlioptas | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7613695 | Solomon et al. | Nov 2009 | B1 |
7716140 | Nielsen et al. | May 2010 | B1 |
7831684 | Lawler | Nov 2010 | B1 |
8010460 | Work et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
20010042000 | Defoor, Jr. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020023230 | Bolnick et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020046074 | Barton | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020055870 | Thomas | May 2002 | A1 |
20020059201 | Work | May 2002 | A1 |
20020091667 | Jaipuria et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020145626 | Richards et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020194049 | Boyd | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020194112 | Depinto et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030063072 | Brandenberg et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20040030566 | Brooks | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040044536 | Fitzpatrick et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040122803 | Dom et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040122855 | Ruvolo et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040148275 | Achlioptas | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040167813 | Robertson et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040215793 | Ryan et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050021750 | Abrams | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050044423 | Mellmer et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050125408 | Somaroo et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050131894 | Vuong | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050144483 | Robertson et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050154639 | Zetmeir | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050159970 | Buyukkokten et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050159998 | Buyukkokten et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050171799 | Hull et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050171954 | Hull et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050171955 | Hull et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050177385 | Hull et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050198171 | Landsman et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050198305 | Pezaris et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050216295 | Abrahamsohn | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050216300 | Appelman et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050235062 | Lunt et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050246420 | Little, II | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050272413 | Bourne | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283497 | Nurminen et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060004703 | Spivack et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060004914 | Kelly et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060041543 | Achlioptas | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060042483 | Work et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060064436 | Fowler et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060069732 | Shannon et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060085259 | Nicholas et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060100919 | Levine | May 2006 | A1 |
20060106670 | Cai et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060111975 | Fowler et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060117378 | Tam et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060123127 | Littlefield | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060155750 | Fowler et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060165040 | Rathod et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060173957 | Robinson et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060190536 | Strong et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060224675 | Fox et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060235969 | Dugan | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060242014 | Marshall et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070174304 | Shrufi et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070245245 | Blue et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070250361 | Hazy | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070250483 | Blue et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080005072 | Meek et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080021870 | Birnbaum et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080040428 | Wei et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080097826 | Leach et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080103907 | Maislos et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080126476 | Nicholas et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO-9939279 | Aug 1999 | WO |
WO-0177793 | Oct 2001 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Advisory Action mailed Jan. 16, 2013”, 2 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Advisory Action mailed Feb. 10, 2014”, 4 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Advisory Action mailed Feb. 28, 2011”, 3 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Appeal Brief filed Apr. 14, 2011”, 15 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Examiner Interview Summary mailed Aug. 5, 2009”, 2 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Final Office Action mailed Jun. 10, 2009”, 20 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Final Office Action mailed Nov. 8, 2012”, 20 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Final Office Action mailed Nov. 20, 2013”, 26 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Final Office Action mailed Dec. 15, 2011”, 23 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Final Office Action mailed Aug. 18, 2010”, 20 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Non Final Office Action mailed Mar. 29, 2013”, 21 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Non Final Office Action mailed Apr. 13, 2012”, 26 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Non Final Office Action mailed Jul. 8, 2011”, 24 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Non Final Office Action mailed Dec. 2, 2008”, 16 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Non Final Office Action mailed Dec. 7, 2009”, 21 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Response filed Jan. 21, 2014 to Final Office Action mailed Nov. 20, 2013”, 10 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Response filed Jan. 8, 2013 to Final Office Action mailed Nov. 8, 2012”, 10 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Response filed Feb. 16, 2011 to Final Office Action mailed Aug. 18, 2010”, 3 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Response filed Mar. 2, 2009 to Non Final Office Action mailed Dec. 2, 2008”, 8 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Response filed Mar. 12, 2012 to Final Office Action mailed Dec. 15, 2011”, 3 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Response filed Jun. 7, 2010 to Non Final Office Action mailed Dec. 7, 2009”, 5 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Response filed Jul. 13, 2012 to Non Final Office Action mailed Apr. 13, 2012”, 13 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Response filed Aug. 29, 2013 to Non Final Office Action mailed Mar. 29, 2013”, 11 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Response filed Sep. 10, 2009 to Final Office Action mailed Jun. 10, 2009”, 16 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/674,027, Response filed Sep. 21, 2011 to Non Final Office Action mailed Jul. 8, 2011”, 6 pgs. |
“Esther Dyson's Monthly Report”, EDventure Holdings, Inc, Release 1.0, (Nov. 19, 1996), 23 pgs. |
“http://www.craigslist.org Exhibit 1-7”, Exhibit 1-7 [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://www/craigslist.org>, (Jan. 22, 2002). |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/015021, International Search Report mailed Nov. 21, 2012”, 1 pg. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/015021, International Preliminary Examination Report, Jan. 28, 2003”, 5 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2005/031704, Int'l Search Report and Written Opinion”, Linkedin Corporation, (Dec. 13, 2005), 7 pgs. |
Armstrong, Robert, et al., “Webwatcher: A Learning Apprentice for the World Wide Web”, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, (Mar. 19, 1997), 7 pgs. |
Bodie, John, “First Search Technology Report: Social Networking Platforms and Technologies”, Boston Patent Research, (Jun. 2004), 1-145. |
Cassandra, Anthony, et al., “Capability-based Agent Matchmaking”, Article, USA, 2 pgs. |
Decker, Keith, et al., “Designing Behaviors for Information Agents”, Article, (1997), 9 pgs. |
Decker, Keith, et al., “Intelligent Adaptive Information Agents”, Kluwer Academic Publishers, (1996), 1-24. |
Decker, Keith, et al., “Matchmaking and Brokering”, The Robotic Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, (May 16, 1996), 1-19. |
Decker, Keith, et al., “Middle-Agents for the Internet”, Article, (1997), 6 pgs. |
Foner, L.N., “A Multi-Agent Referral System for Matchmaking”, Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Practical Application of Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Technology, (Apr. 22, 1996), 245-261. |
Foner, Leonard, et al., “Multi-agent matchmaking”, BT Technology J, vol. 14 No. 4, (Oct. 1996), 115-123. |
Hermans, Bjorn, “Intelligent Software Agents on the Internet: an inventory of currently offered functionality in the information society and a prediction of near future developments”, Article, Tilburg University, (Jul. 9, 1996), 1-88. |
Hutchinson, Sue, “Computer Matchmaker Finds a Ready Clientele”, San Jose Mercury News, Local Secion, Penninsula/AM Edition, (Sep. 11, 1992), 2 pgs. |
Ingvarson, Daniel, et al., “Electronic Networking: Social and Policy Aspects of a Rapidly Growing Technology”, Electronic NetworkingL Social and Policy Aspects Prc, INET94JENC5, 432-1-432-6. |
Janis, Mara, “List Man”, Brandweek, vol. 41, Issue 33, [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http:/ /web.ebscohost.cornlehost/detail ?vid=7 &hid=4&sid=O 1 dd3f56-0414-4428-88b8-525 . . . >, (Aug. 21, 2000), 2 pgs. |
Jha, Somesh, et al., “A Formal Treatment of Distributed Matchmaking”, Article, 457-458. |
Kautz, Henry, et al., “Agent Amplified Communication”, Proceedings of the 13th National Conf on Artificial Intelligence and the 8th Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, vol. 1, (1996), 3-9. |
Kautz, Henry, et al., “Referral Web: Combining Social Networks and Collaborative Filtering”, Communications of the ACM, 40(3), (Mar. 1997), 63-65. |
Kautz, Henry, et al., “The Hidden Web”, Al Magazine, vol. 18, No. 2, (1997), 27-36. |
Koukka, Daniel R, et al., “Issues and Extensions for Information Matchmalung Protocols”, Int'l Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, vol. 5 No. 2 and 3, World Scientific Publishing, (1996), 251-273. |
Kranakis, Evangelos, et al., “A Note of Weighted Distributed Match-Making”, Math Systems Theory 25, (1992), 123-140. |
Lee, Byoungcheon, et al., “Secure Matchmaking Protocol”, Information and Communications University, Korea, (2001), 12 pgs. |
McClean, Sally, et al., “Using Intelligent Software Agents to Query Heterogeneous Distributed Statistical Databases”, Article, 769-774. |
Mitchell, Tom, et al., “Experience with a Learning Personal Assistant”, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, (1994), 1-19. |
Mullender, Sape J, et al., “Distributed Match-Making”, Algorithimica, (1988), 367-391. |
Raman, Rajesh, et al., “Matchmaking: An extensible framework for distributed resource management”, Cluster Computing 2, (1999), 129-138. |
Shah, M.A., “Referral Web: A Resource location system guided by personal relations”, Master's thesis, M.I.T., (May 1997), 1-47. |
Shardanand, Upendra, et al., “Word of Mouth.”, Social Information Filtering Algorithms for Automating Article, MIT Media Lab, (1995), 13 pgs. |
Sycara, Katia, et al., “Coordination of Multiple Intelligent Software Agents”, International Journal of Cooperation Information Systems, World Scientific Publishing Company, 1-31. |
Sycara, Katia, et al., “Dynamic Service Matchmaking Among Agents in Open Information Environments”, Article, 7 pgs. |
Sycara, Katia, et al., “Inoperability among Heterogeneous Software Agents on the Internet”, The Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, (Oct. 1998), 1-35. |
Sycara, Katia, et al., “Matchmaking among Heterogeneous Agents on the Internet”, Article, 1-13. |
Vivacqua, Adriana S, “Agents for Expertise Location”, AAAI Spring Symposium on Intelligent Agents in Cyberspace, (1998), 5 pgs. |
Vivacqua, Adrianna, et al., “Agents to Assist in Finding Help”, Mass. Institute of Technology, (Apr. 1-6, 2000), 65-72. |
Wickler, Gerald, et al., “Capability Representations for Brokering: A Survey”, Article, 1-70. |
Yu, Bin, et al., “A Multi agent referral system for expertise location”, In Working Notes of the AAAi Workshop on Intelligent Information Systems, (1999), 66-69. |
Zelitchenko, Alexander I, “Matchmaker”, Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 8, (1992), 281-296. |
Zhang, Kan, et al., “A Private Matchmaking Protocol”, Article, 9 pgs. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20070250585 A1 | Oct 2007 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60773008 | Feb 2006 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11674027 | Feb 2007 | US |
Child | 11678978 | US |