Data networks are increasingly employed by users to perform a variety of tasks formerly performed in person. For example, a user may purchase an item from a network-based retailer using his or her computing device. In yet another example, the user may employ a banking service to check account balances, pay bills, schedule transfers, and the like. In this manner, providers of network-based services may conduct a number of pre- and post-sale contacts with the users (i.e., their customers).
In order to help the users employ these services, many network-based retailers have provided service agents that may be contacted by telephone to assist users. Systems, such as call centers, have been further developed as centralized, scalable mechanisms to handle the volume of user calls received.
With these call centers in place, it is desirable to the network-based retailers that their service agents provide good service to users. To that end, improved mechanisms for assessing the quality of calls between users and service agents (e.g., user satisfaction with a call) are desired to determine to quantify the performance of service agents.
The foregoing aspects and many of the attendant advantages will become more readily appreciated as the same become better understood by reference to the following detailed description, when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein:
Aspects of the present disclosure relate to reviewing contacts between service agents of network-based services (e.g., websites) and users of the network-based services for quality. Contacts may include any communication between users and service agents. In this context, the quality of a contact may refer to the service agent's success in addressing the user's concerns and/or a perceived level of the user's satisfaction with the contact. Embodiments discussed below may refer to the users as customers and the service agents as customer service agents (CSAs). However, it may be understood that users are not limited to customers but may include any users of network-based services.
In this regard, a contact review service is described that enables assessment of the quality of a contact between a customer and a CSA. For example, a customer using a customer computing device, such as a personal computer, may identify an item of interest presented by a network-based service and may desire to communicate with a CSA regarding the item of interest. This network-based service may be anything that provides a good, service, or information that is of interest to the customer. Accordingly, the network-based service may include network-based retailers, such as those which sell items for purchase to the customer, network-based sources of entertainment and/or information (e.g., network-based encyclopedias, media sharing, etc), network-based social networking services which enable users to share content with one another, and the like.
In one embodiment, the network-based retailer may provide a mechanism by which the customer may contact a CSA. Contacts may be conducted by communication mechanisms including, but not limited to, telephone, voice-over IP (VOIP), video conferencing, instant messaging (IM), short message service (SMS) text messaging, and other communications protocols known in the art. As described in greater detail below, when the customer employs such a contact mechanism to contact a CSA, the contact review service may distribute the contact to an available CSA and record the content of the contact between the customer and the CSA.
For example, the network-based service may be a network-based retail service, implemented via a website, e.g., a website that sells music and videos. Using a personal computing device, the customer may identify an item of interest displayed for sale by the network-based retail service, for example, an audio CD. In addition to identifying the item of interest, the customer may also have one or more questions regarding purchase of the CD, such as the return policy of the network-based service. The network-based service may provide a telephone number for contacting the network-based service. When the customer places a telephone call to a CSA, a voice recording of both the customer and the CSA may be made by the contact review service.
In order to facilitate quality review of the recorded contact, the contact review service may subject the recorded contact to pre-review processing. The pre-review processing is designed to produce an edited, recorded contact that includes less content than the original recorded contact. In one aspect, the recorded contact may be edited to focus on the customer's portion of the contact. In another aspect, the recorded contact may be edited focus only on a portion of the total contact (e.g., sample the contact). In further embodiments, the recorded content may be edited to remove any sensitive or private information regarding the customer, such as names, credit card information, address, social security number, and the like. Thus, it may be easier for a reviewer to determine the quality of the contact from the edited, recorded contact than the original recorded contact.
Continuing the example of a customer call regarding a CD, the audio recording of the customer speaking with the CSA may be edited during pre-review processing. In one example, the voice of the CSA may be removed from the call, leaving the customer's speech. In another example, at least a portion of the blank space that remains within the call may be removed. In one instance, this blank space may include the blank space created by the previous removal of the voice of the CSA. In another instance this blank space may include at least a portion of pauses between the customer's words, such as at least a portion of long pauses (e.g., pauses longer than a second), may be removed. In a further embodiment, the recorded content may be edited to remove any sensitive or private information regarding the customer, such as names, credit card information, addresses, social security numbers, and the like. In an additional example, a selected duration of the remaining audio recording (e.g., the last 15 to 20 seconds of the duration of the audio recording) may be sampled. The audio recording edited in this manner may be stored for later review.
The contact review service may subsequently transmit the edited audio recording to a reviewer for quality review. In one embodiment, the reviewer may be a CSA. In this case, the contact review service may identify one or more on-duty CSAs that did not participate in the contact under review and are not presently conducting a contact with a customer. The contact review service may select one or more of these available CSAs and transmit the edited, recorded contact to the selected CSAs.
In an alternative embodiment, the reviewer may include a human worker of a human interaction task component. The human interaction task component may employ human workers to obtain selected information in response to a given input. In this case, the contact review service may provide the human interaction task component with the edited, recorded contact and instructions for a selected number of human workers to review the contact.
The contact review service may further generate and transmit a user interface to the reviewer. The reviewer may employ this user interface with his or her computing device to facilitate quality review of the edited, recorded contact. For example, the user interface may enable the reviewer to review the recorded contact, rate the contact, and, optionally, request additional information regarding the recorded contact, amongst other functions.
If the customer appeared to be satisfied from the sample, the reviewer may employ the user interface to indicate that the contact quality was good. If the customer did not appear to be satisfied from the sample, the reviewer may employ the user interface to indicate that the contact quality was bad. If the reviewer is unable to determine the customer's disposition after reviewing the sample, the reviewer may indicate that the contact quality was indeterminate. Alternatively, if the reviewer is unable to determine the customer's disposition after reviewing the sample, the reviewer may request additional information regarding the contact, such as a longer sample or a sample from another location within the contact. It may be understood that, in alternative embodiments, the contact may be rated on a numerical scale or be rated using other ratings schemes known in the art.
For example, assume that the reviewer includes a selected number of CSAs. The edited, recorded audio recording discussed above may be provided to one or more CSAs (e.g., 3), along with the graphical user interface, when the selected CSAs are not busy with other duties. The CSAs may listen to the sampled portions of the edited call and enter his or her review in the provided user interface. For example, the CSAs may be prompted by the user interface to provide an assessment of whether the customer was satisfied and/or whether the CSA handled a difficult situation well (a good call) or the customer was dissatisfied and/or the CSA did not handle the call well (a bad call). A selected scale, such as a numerical scale (e.g., 1 to 5, 1 to 10) or a binary scale (e.g., positive/negative), may be employed by the reviewer when making their review.
Optionally, as discussed in greater detail below, should a CSA require more information to provide a review, the CSA may request more information through the user interface. In response to the request, the contact review service may provide a version of the edited call that is modified to include more of the call (e.g., the last 30 seconds of the call as compared to the last 15 seconds). In certain embodiments, the CSA may choose, through the user interface, the additional information provided by the contact review service.
The ratings generated by the reviewers may be returned to the contact review service for further analysis. Analysis may include aggregating the reviews of the respective reviewer and generating a composite review. The composite review may be associated with the CSA participating in the call to evaluate the performance of the participating CSA. The composite review may be further employed to characterize the contact for training purposes.
For example, continuing the example above, the contact review service may receive reviews from three CSAs. Assume that a binary positive/negative scale is employed to rate the call and the reviewers return two positive reviews and one negative review. As the majority of the reviews are positive, the contact review service may determine the aggregate review of the call to be positive.
Beneficially, reviewing contacts that are edited and sampled significantly improves the contact review process. In one aspect, traditional contact review has focused primarily upon customer surveys. However, these surveys are dependent upon obtaining customer responses, which can be both time consuming and expensive. In contrast, embodiments of the disclosed contact review service are not reliant upon customer feedback in a traditional sense, reducing this cost. Instead, the customer's feedback is taken from their contact with a CSA.
With reference to
The system 100 is depicted in
The contact review service 102 and network-based service 106 may each be embodied in a plurality of components, each executing an instance of the respective contact review service 102 and network-based service 106. A server or other computing component implementing the contact review service 102 and network-based service 106 may include a network interface, memory, processing unit, and computer readable medium drive, all of which may communicate which each other may way of a communication bus. The network interface may provide connectivity over a network 112 and/or other networks or computer systems. The processing unit may communicate to and from memory containing program instructions that the processing unit executes in order to operate the contact review service 102 and network-based service 106. The memory generally includes RAM, ROM, and/or other persistent and auxiliary memory.
Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the network 112 may be any wired network, wireless network, or combination thereof. In addition, the network 112 may be a personal area network, local area network, wide area network, cable network, satellite network, cellular telephone network, or combination thereof. Protocols and components for communicating via the Internet or any of the other aforementioned types of communication networks are well known to those skilled in the art of computer communications and, thus, need not be described in more detail herein.
The customer computing device 104 and agent computing device 110 may include any communication device, such as a PC, a kiosk, a thin client, a home computer, and a dedicated or embedded machine. Further examples may include laptop or tablet computers, personal computers, personal digital assistants (PDAs), hybrid PDAs/mobile phones, mobile phones, electronic book readers, set-top boxes, and the like.
With further reference to
The contact distribution component 116 may be in communication with one or more CSAs, as represented by agent computing device 110. In an embodiment, a CSA may employ his or her agent computing device 110 to notify the contact distribution component 116 of times when the CSA is available for duty. In other embodiments, the contact distribution component 116 may maintain a schedule of available CSAs. Embodiments of the contact distribution component 116 may be found in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/192,067, filed on Aug. 14, 2008, entitled, “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATED CALL DISTRIBUTION” and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/192,064, filed Aug. 14, 2010, entitled, “INDEPENDENT CUSTOMER SERVICE AGENTS,” the entirety of each of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
Contact requests may take any form, depending upon the type of communication mechanisms that are provided to contact the CSA. In one embodiment, a customer may call a CSA using a traditional POTS or voice-over-IP service. In another embodiment, a customer may employ a messaging service, such as instant messaging, text messaging, and electronic mail, to contact the CSA. In another embodiment, a customer may employ video conferencing to contact the CSA. In a further embodiment, the customer may contact the CSA through a website (e.g., the network-based service 106). Examples of such a contact may be found in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/547,370, filed on Aug. 25, 2009, entitled, “SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CUSTOMER CONTACT” and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/547,387, filed on Aug. 25, 2009, entitled, “SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CUSTOMER CONTACT,” the entirety of each of which is hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
During the course of the contact, a contact processing component 120 of the contact review service 102 may further record the contact between the CSA and the customer for quality assessment. Contacts received by the contact review service 102 may be stored in one or more data stores, represented by data store 114. It may be understood that data store 114 may include network-based storage capable of communicating with any component of the system 100 via network 112. The data store 114 may further include storage that is in local communication with any component of the system 100.
Upon completion of the contact between the CSA and the customer, contact processing component 120 may further process the recorded contact prior to quality review. In one embodiment, the recorded contact may be edited to substantially remove content from the CSA. For example, in the case of a contact that is a call, at least a portion of the voice of the CSA may be removed from the edited contact. In the case of a contact that is an instant message conversation, at least a portion of the text of the CSA may be removed from the edited contact. In another embodiment, the recorded contact may be edited by the contact processing component 120 to remove delays in the customer's portion of the contact. For example, in the case of a call, long pauses between words spoken by the customer (e.g., pauses due to the removal of the CSA's portion of contact or pauses in speech by the customer), white noise, or other durations of silence may be removed from the edited contact.
In a further embodiment, the contact processing component 120 may sample a portion of the edited contact. Sampling may include taking a selected portion of the edited contact for further use in the contact review process. By employing a sample, rather than the entire contact, the reviewer is not required to listen to the entire edited contact. Sampling durations may be varied, as necessary. In one embodiment, a sample may be approximately 15 to 30 seconds. In one embodiment, sampling may include taking a portion of the contact of at the end. Taking a portion of the contact at the contact end may be beneficial, as the final disposition of the customer may be readily apparent and the reviewer may easily assign a review to the contact. In other embodiments, sampling may include other portions of the contact, such as a portion of the contact at the beginning or in the middle of the contact.
As discussed in greater detail below, when the reviewer finds it difficult to make a review determination, the reviewer may request additional information regarding the contact. In this case, the contact processing component 120 may sample additional parts of the contact. For example, the contact processing component 120 may sample a portion of the contact contiguous with the portion of the contact already sampled. In another example, the contact processing component 120 may sample a portion of the contact that is different that the portion of the contact already sampled. For example, if an end portion of the contact has been previously sampled, a beginning portion of the contact may be additionally sampled in response to the reviewer request.
The edited and sampled contact may be stored in the data store 114 until the contact is selected for review by the contact processing component 120. In an embodiment, contacts may be selected for review in the order in which it they are recorded by the contact processing component 120. In another embodiment, contacts may be selected for review based upon performance evaluations of CSAs. That is to say, contacts that are conducted by CSAs pending review may be selected ahead of contacts that are not conducted by CSAs pending review. Other mechanisms for selecting contacts for review may additionally be employed without limit.
After identifying the contact to be reviewed, the contact processing component 120 may select one or more reviewers to review the contact. In one embodiment, the reviewer may include one or more CSAs. In this case, the contact processing component 120 may query the contact distribution component 116 to identify one or more CSAs that are available to conduct contact reviews (e.g., CSAs that the contact distribution component 116 knows to be on duty and are not presently in contact with a customer). To preserve the integrity of the review process, in certain embodiments, a CSA that participated in the contact under review may be eliminated from consideration for review of that same contact. The contact processing component 120 may further select at least one of these available CSAs and transmit the edited, sampled contact to the selected CSAs for review.
In an alternative embodiment, the reviewer may include a human worker of a human interaction task component 124. Embodiments of the human interaction task component 124 are described in U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 12/200,822, filed Aug. 28, 2008, entitled, “ENHANCING AND STORING DATA FOR RECALL AND USE” and 12/623,354, filed Nov. 20, 2009, entitled “ENHANCING AND STORING DATA FOR RECALL AND USE USING USER FEEDBACK,” each of which are incorporated by reference in their entirety. Generally described, the human interaction task component 124 may include a collection of human workers that are tasked with responding to questions that are relatively faster, easier, and/or more cost effective to answer using a human respondent rather than a computing device. Therefore, a human worker of the human interaction task component 124 may receive the edited, sampled contact and be requested to provide a review to the contact processing component 120.
A user interface component 122 of the contact review service 102 may also generate a user interface for transmission with the edited, sampled contact that facilitates the reviewer's review of the edited, sampled contact. In alternative embodiments, the user interface may be transmitted to the reviewer before or after transmission of the edited, sampled contact. As discussed in greater detail below, the user interface may enable the reviewer to examine the edited, sampled contact (e.g., audio, text, video, etc.), such as pause, play, fast-forward, and rewind. The user interface may further enable the reviewer to request additional information regarding the edited, sampled contact (e.g., a longer sample and/or a sample from a different portion of the contact). The user interface may further enable the reviewer to submit a review of the edited, sampled contact to the contact processing component 120.
Reviews may employ any review scheme as understood in the art. In one embodiment, the review scheme may include a binary scheme in which the reviewer provides a positive or negative response (e.g., good review or bad review). In another embodiment, the review scheme may include a numerical scheme in which the reviewer provides a numerical value provides a number within selected limits (e.g., 1 to 10, where 1 is worst and 10 is best).
The contact processing component 120 may further collect the reviews generated by the reviewers and generate an aggregate review based upon the received reviews. In one embodiment, where the review scheme is binary, the response receiving the majority of reviewer responses may be determined by the contact processing component 120 to be the aggregate review. In another embodiment, where the review scheme is numerical, the contact processing component 120 may employ an average of the received reviews to determine the aggregate review. The aggregate reviews may subsequently be stored in the data store 114 for subsequent use in evaluating the performance of the CSA participating the in the contact and/or for training purposes.
The request from the customer may be transmitted to the contact review service 102. The contact review service 102 identifies an available CSA and directs the customer into contact with the identified, available CSA. As discussed above, the contact review service 102 may maintain real-time records of CSA availability such that, when a customer request for contact with a CSA is received, the contact review service 102 may be able to determine whether a CSA is immediately available or whether the customer will be required to wait for a CSA to become available.
The contact review service 102 may further record the content. As discussed above, the content may include any mechanism of communication, including but not limited to, telephone calls, voice-over IP (VOIP) calls, video conferencing, instant messaging (IM), short message service (SMS) text messaging, and other communications protocols known in the art. Recordation of the contact may take place concurrently with the contact or after completion of the contact.
The recorded contact may also be edited at the time of recordation or at a later time and stored. In certain embodiments, editing may reduce the amount of total content within the contact and further isolate the customer's contribution to the contact. In this manner, subsequent review of the edited contact may be less time consuming and more focused on the role of the customer.
Upon receipt of the edited contact record, the contact review service 102 may select one or more CSAs for review of the edited contact. CSAs may be selected using a number of criteria. In one embodiment, a CSA may be selected at random. In another embodiment, a CSA may be selected based upon seniority and/or experience. In a further embodiment, a CSA may not be selected should that CSA have participated in the contact under consideration. It may be understood, however, that the CSA selection may be performed in advance of the contact selection in alternative embodiments.
Following selection of the edited contact and the one or more CSAs, the edited contact may be transmitted to the CSAs for review. As discussed above, a contact quality user interface 400 that facilitates review of the edited contact may also be transmitted to the CSAs before, during, or after transmission of the edited contact. An embodiment of the contact review user interface 400 is illustrated in
The user interface 400 may include a contact record identification number 402, media control window 404, media windows 406, 408, and contact review window 410. The contact record identification number 402 may be employed for use in uniquely identifying the edited contact amongst others.
The media control window 404 may provide user interface objects 404A and 404B for controlling the playback of edited contact. For example, edited contacts including telephone and VOIP calls and video may all benefit from the ability to precisely control the playback of such media. For example, user interface objects 404A may enable start, stop, fast-forward, and rewind of the contact playback. User interface objects 404B may include a progress bar indicating the time of the edited contact file at which the reviewer is presently located. The user interface objects 404B may be further employed to move the media playback to a desired point within the total sampled duration of the edited contact.
Instant messaging, text messaging, electronic mail messages, and other written forms of contact may be displayed in media window 406. In certain embodiments, the contact review service 102 may perform speech to text conversion on audio contacts (e.g., calls) and/or the audio portions of video conferencing contacts and display the edited contact within the media window 406. In certain embodiments, written forms of the contact may be displayed in the media window 406 even if they are redundant with other audio or visual media displayed in media window 408.
The reviewer, after reviewing the edited contact, may enter their review in the contact review window 410. In an embodiment illustrated in
Should the reviewer be unable to make a review based upon the received contact, a request for more information may be made by selection of user interface object 410C. Selection of user interface object 410C may request a selected amount of additional time to be sampled from the contact record. Furthermore, the reviewer may select where the additional time comes from, such as the contact end, the contact beginning, or a selected location therebetween.
With reference again to
The contact review service 102 may subsequently generate a final review for the contact under review based upon at least a portion of the received reviews. The manner in which this final review is generated may depend upon the review options. For example, in the binary review option scheme illustrated in
All of the processes described herein may be embodied in, and fully automated via software code modules executed by one or more general purpose computers or processors. The code modules may be stored in any type of computer-readable medium or other computer storage device. Some or all the methods may alternatively be embodied in specialized computer hardware. In addition, the components referred to herein may be implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or a combination thereof.
Conditional language such as, among others, “can,” “could,” “might,” or “may,” unless specifically stated otherwise, are otherwise understood within the context as used in general to convey that certain embodiments include, while other embodiments do not include certain features, elements, and/or steps. Thus, such conditional language is not generally intended to imply that features, elements and/or steps are in any way required for one or more embodiments or that one or more embodiments necessarily include logic for deciding, with or without user input or prompting, whether these features, elements and/or steps are included or are to be performed in any particular embodiment.
Any process descriptions, elements, or blocks in the flow diagrams described herein and/or depicted in the attached figures should be understood as potentially representing modules, segments, or portions of code which include one or more executable instructions for implementing specific logical functions or elements in the process. Alternate implementations are included within the scope of the embodiments described herein in which elements or functions may be deleted, executed out of order from that shown, or discussed, including substantially concurrently or in reverse order, depending on the functionality involved as would be understood by those skilled in the art.
It should be emphasized that many variations and modifications may be made to the above-described embodiments, the elements of which are to be understood as being among other acceptable examples. All such modifications and variations are intended to be included herein within the scope of this disclosure and protected by the following claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5557668 | Brady | Sep 1996 | A |
5724418 | Brady | Mar 1998 | A |
5970132 | Brady | Oct 1999 | A |
6026087 | Mirashrafi et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6144670 | Sponaugle et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6173052 | Brady | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6199096 | Mirashrafi et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6212192 | Mirashrafi et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6310941 | Crutcher et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6347139 | Fisher et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6356632 | Foster et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6360216 | Hennessey et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6366666 | Bengtson et al. | Apr 2002 | B2 |
6389132 | Price | May 2002 | B1 |
6408066 | Andruska et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6434230 | Gabriel | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6463148 | Brady | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6487290 | Le Grand | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6510221 | Fisher et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6535600 | Fisher et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6535601 | Flockhart et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6560330 | Gabriel | May 2003 | B2 |
6661889 | Flockhart et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6665395 | Busey et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6707811 | Greenberg et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6731393 | Currans et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6791974 | Greenberg | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6914899 | Siegrist et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6925165 | Cohen et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6934381 | Klein et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
7016532 | Boncyk et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7028020 | Keskar et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7075921 | Siegrist et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7092509 | Mears et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7197479 | Franciscus de Heer et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7203188 | Siegrist et al. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7222085 | Stack | May 2007 | B2 |
7315518 | Siegrist | Jan 2008 | B1 |
7367051 | Siegrist et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7403652 | Boncyk et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7519200 | Gokturk et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7542610 | Gokturk et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7599950 | Walther et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7603367 | Kanter et al. | Oct 2009 | B1 |
7627502 | Cheng et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7636450 | Bourdev | Dec 2009 | B1 |
7657100 | Gokturk et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7706521 | Gavagni et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7730034 | Deflaux | Jun 2010 | B1 |
7813557 | Bourdev | Oct 2010 | B1 |
7827286 | Deflaux | Nov 2010 | B1 |
7881957 | Cohen | Feb 2011 | B1 |
7945470 | Cohen | May 2011 | B1 |
7949999 | Willeford | May 2011 | B1 |
7958518 | Willeford | Jun 2011 | B1 |
8001124 | Svendsen | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8005697 | Cohen | Aug 2011 | B1 |
8046309 | Evans et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8160929 | Park | Apr 2012 | B1 |
8249245 | Jay et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8271987 | Willeford | Sep 2012 | B1 |
8340275 | Brandwine et al. | Dec 2012 | B1 |
20010014143 | Kuhn | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20030169870 | Stanford | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030220866 | Pisaris et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040076936 | Horvitz et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040101127 | Dezonno et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040186778 | Margiloff et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050111653 | Joyce et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20060002607 | Boncyk et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060006441 | Park et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060143058 | Brunet et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060198504 | Shemisa et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060203993 | Busey et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070104348 | Cohen | May 2007 | A1 |
20070160188 | Sharpe et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070201684 | Boghani | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070204308 | Nicholas et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070208590 | Dorricott et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070279521 | Cohen | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070286180 | Marquette et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080005118 | Shakib et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080071763 | Ferrenq et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080082341 | Blair | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080082426 | Gokturk et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080094417 | Cohen | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080147470 | Johri et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080187125 | Siegrist | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080229404 | Siegrist et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080260135 | Siegrist | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080267377 | Siegrist | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080276183 | Siegrist et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080288349 | Weisberg et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090010414 | Siegrist | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090122972 | Kaufman et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090154688 | Jay et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090156178 | Elsey et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090182622 | Agarwal et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090198628 | Stadler | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090228493 | Kephart et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090234849 | Erera et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090240652 | Su et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090261157 | Kumar et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090316687 | Kruppa | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100070501 | Walsh et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100131382 | Fitzsimmons | May 2010 | A1 |
20110051920 | Dashe et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110051922 | Jay et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110286444 | Petrovykh | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110310891 | Howe et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110320200 | Broman et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120101865 | Zhakov | Apr 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
101918939 | Dec 2010 | CN |
2 250 575 | Nov 2010 | EP |
2000-307735 | Mar 1999 | JP |
11-112666 | Apr 1999 | JP |
2001-500677 | Jan 2001 | JP |
2002-57801 | Feb 2002 | JP |
2003-87411 | Mar 2003 | JP |
2004-537091 | Dec 2004 | JP |
2011-514573 | May 2011 | JP |
2010-0105773 | Sep 2010 | KR |
WO 9801987 | Jan 1998 | WO |
WO 2009091700 | Jul 2009 | WO |