Patent Grant
9529851
Data quality is a critical component of large-scale data processing and storage. If data furnishers submit erroneous or outdated data to a data processing and storage system, such submissions may be in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) section 623 and result in inaccurate analyses and decisions.
In one embodiment, a server architecture for data quality processing is provided. The server architecture may include a primary system configured to electronically communicate with a set of data furnisher systems, to access encrypted data sets of a data furnisher which include account data for a plurality of the data furnisher's consumers, and to communicate with a large-scale credit data store storing billions of records; a data format manager module configured to electronically communicate with the primary system to access the encrypted data sets, to decrypt the encrypted data sets, and to format the data sets to conform with or determine the data set already conforms with a first predetermined format and generate decrypted, processed data sets; a data loader module configured to electronically communicate with the data format manager module to access the decrypted processed data sets and external data and make them available for analysis; a configuration and control module configured to access data furnisher-specific instructions specific to the data furnisher from a data furnisher information database, to use the data furnisher-specific instructions to select a set of services and metrics to run on the corresponding data furnisher's descripted, processed data, to instruct the data loader module to make the corresponding data furnishers' decrypted, processed data available for analysis; an analysis module configured to access the data furnisher's decrypted, processed data set, to perform the selected set of services and metrics on the decrypted, processed data set to automatically generate data quality indicators which represent the quality of the data in the decrypted processed data set, to generate an analytics result data package based on the performed services and metrics and generated data quality indicators, and to store the analytics result data package in an analytics database; and a reporting application configured to electronically communicate with the analytics database and provide electronic access to a system of the data furnisher, to electronically create report displays, benchmarking displays, and metric displays by querying the analytics result data package, and to enable access of the report displays, the benchmarking displays, and the metric displays to the system of the data furnisher.
In another embodiment, a computer-implemented method of evaluating quality of data received from a furnisher is provided. The computer-implemented method may include, as implemented by one or more computing devices configured with specific computer-executable instructions, accessing a data set of a data furnisher for updating a large-scale credit database; formatting the data set to conform to or determining that the data set already conforms with a predetermined format; obtaining configuration information specific to the data furnisher; obtaining historical records of the data furnisher that are related to the data set; analyzing the data set and the obtained historical records, in accordance with the obtained configuration information, to calculate one or more indices that represent quality of the data set; generating a data quality report, the data quality report including at least one of the calculated one or more indices; and generating an instruction to allow the data set to be added to the credit database if the calculated one or more indices meet a predetermined criterion.
In a further embodiment, a non-transitory computer storage medium storing computer-executable instructions that direct a computing system to perform operations is provided. The operations may comprise: accessing a data set of a data furnisher for updating a large-scale credit database; formatting the data set to conform to or determining that the data set already conforms with a predetermined format; obtaining configuration information specific to the data furnisher; obtaining historical records of the data furnisher that are related to the data set; analyzing the data set and the obtained historical records, in accordance with the obtained configuration information, to calculate one or more indices that represent quality of the data set; generating a data quality report, the data quality report including at least one of the calculated one or more indices; and generating an instruction to allow the data set to be added to the credit database if the calculated one or more indices meet a predetermined criterion
Specific embodiments will be described with reference to the following drawings.
Embodiments of the disclosure will now be described with reference to the accompanying figures. The terminology used in the description presented herein is not intended to be interpreted in any limited or restrictive manner, simply because it is being utilized in conjunction with a detailed description of embodiments of the disclosure. Furthermore, embodiments of the disclosure may include several novel features, no single one of which is solely responsible for its desirable attributes or which is essential to practicing the embodiments of the disclosure herein described. For purposes of this disclosure, certain aspects, advantages, and novel features of various embodiments are described herein. It is to be understood that not necessarily all such advantages may be achieved in accordance with any particular embodiment. Thus, for example, those skilled in the art will recognize that one embodiment may be carried out in a manner that achieves one advantage or group of advantages as taught herein without necessarily achieving other advantages as may be taught or suggested herein.
Data quality is a critical component of industries that provide services based on analyses of large sets of data. Often, the data is collected from various external sources and then stored in a central location. In such situations, the quality of the centrally stored data is directly dependent on the quality of the collected data. If the collected data includes a significant number of errors or other inaccuracies, then the analyses performed on the collected data can be adversely affected. For example, inaccurate data provided by data furnishers to a credit bureau may result in incorrect credit decisions, issues for consumers/creditors/retailers, and/or complaint disputes with consumers.
For data furnishers, it would be beneficial and help with compliance to have a system that can automatically monitor and assess the quality of the data they provide to other entities, such as credit bureaus. This system could assist data furnishers in complying with quality-related regulations, maintaining a competitive edge over other data furnishers, reducing the number of consumer disputes, and/or increasing their trust levels with their consumers as well as entities that use and rely upon their data. Similarly, for data collectors managing large data stores (inclusive of warehouses and platform repositories), it would be beneficial to have a system to assist the data collectors in ensuring that their large data stores meet required regulations or guidelines and allow them to flag poor quality, incoming data before it is added into to their data stores.
In one embodiment, a data quality system provides modules for automatically aggregating data related to data furnishers and their consumers, analyzing dispute reporting data, generating data quality reports based on information related to a data furnisher, providing benchmarking analyses that compare a data furnisher with other data furnishers in similar peer groups, computing data trend analyses, generating and updating business rules to improve data quality, and/or conducting simulation and impact analyses. The data quality system may also include various modules to allow for report generation, automated notifications, visualization tools, peer information dashboards and displays, simulation tools, as well as other interfaces that allow data furnishers or analysts to access, interact with, customize, and utilize the system.
A benefit of some embodiments is that the data quality system is able to perform the analyses and/or review without having to sacrifice main processing capacity. Such embodiments are better than other designs that might require running an analysis on the same server as the main data prep and loading processes. Those other designs either sacrifice main processing capacity to perform the analysis functions or require significant investment into the existing technology that is typically more expensive than the parallel analytical system used by embodiments of the data quality system disclosed herein. In addition, the data quality system avoids having to develop a single, entire main processing solution, which would require significant additional development (estimated over 1 year) and a very large hardware and software systems expense related to that undertaking.
Data Aggregation
In some embodiments, the data quality system may access and/or review data from a variety of sources including, for example, data from the data furnishers, credit bureau data, dispute data, processing statistics, segmentation data, and historical data quality analysis metrics data, which may include historical metric summaries for data furnishers as well as individual metrics for particular records. The data from the data furnisher may include data in a standard format, such as Metro 1 and Metro 2, for example. The credit bureau data may include a sample set of extracted aggregated data, which excludes any personally identifiable information. The disputed data may include data from an entity that collects and processes credit data disputes. The data may include current as well as historical data for a set period of time, such as 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and so forth. The system can analyze the quality of the data furnisher's data sets based on the collected information. A data quality report, including a data quality index or score for the data furnisher and its data sets, can also be provided by the system. The score may, for example, include an indication of a fatal error rate percentage and be included on one of the reports.
Dispute Reporting
In some embodiments, the data quality system may review dispute data and link subsets of the data to specific data furnishers as well as specific account types. The data quality system can then run statistics on the linked data to determine, for example, metrics on a specific furnisher or metrics on specific account type of a furnisher. This data can then be used to compare a data furnisher to other peer data furnishers.
Benchmarking
In some embodiments, the data quality system provides benchmarking analyses and reports that allow a data furnisher to understand not only its own reporting practices, but also where it stands against the industry and its peer groups. Data furnishers are then able to understand where they currently stand, as well as how enhancements that they may make will likely trend based on historical reporting and continued peer review. The benchmarking may include both data and dispute reporting reviews providing information on: reporting inconsistencies, such as incomplete consumer information or invalid values or discrepancies in data, portfolio review of on-file data, identification of dispute trends, as well as analyses of response rates, response times, and/or actions taken.
In some embodiments, an identifier for the data furnisher may be related to a company identifier, as a single company may have multiple entities that provide data. The data for the data furnisher can then be tied to the company identifier and compared to other sets of data related to company identifiers of other companies or data furnishers in the same category. This allows the identity of each of the other data furnishers to be masked and anonymized for benchmarking reports. In addition, the benchmarking data may be presented as metrics via percentages and ratios rather than absolute numbers to avoid inadvertently revealing the identity of other data furnishers.
In some embodiments, the benchmarking and/or peer data is presented via an electronic dashboard interface and allows for viewing of the information as well and visualizations of the data and/or analysis.
Data Trending and Analysis
In some embodiments, the data quality system analyzes the data for a single furnisher or a group of furnishers to determine trends in the data quality, whether positive or negative. Information about trending for outlier performance may also be provided, which lends itself to credibility to the system. The data quality system may also provide statistics on the specific trends as well as other metrics. The system may also utilize historical data to compare a data furnisher's current results with the data furnisher's prior results. A set of results that greatly departs from the historical data may indicate a problem with the current data set. In addition, the current result may indicate that the data furnisher's quality is on an incline or a decline or that a particular metric that is out of range for the data furnisher.
Business Rules
In some embodiments, the data quality system generates new business rules or edits to existing business rules that would assist a data furnisher in improving its data quality. The system may also identify which rules would have the most impact.
Simulation and Impact Analysis
In some embodiments, the data quality system also provides simulation tools to allow a data furnisher to see what would happen to its data quality if one or more of the business rules were implemented or revised. The system may also indicate that first X rules, if implemented, would improve data quality by 34% whereas the other remaining rules would collectively only improve data quality by 1%.
Data Furnisher Systems
In one embodiment, the data furnisher systems 110 include server systems associated with a variety of data furnishers, sometimes referred to as vendors. The data furnishers may include banks, insurance companies, credit unions, credit card companies, collection agencies, or other entities that provide their customer data to large data stores, such as a credit bureau. The data furnishers may also include data processors that collect and process data from other financial institutions and companies and then provide the collected data to a large data store, such as a credit bureau. The exemplary data furnisher systems 110 electronically communicate with the mainframe 120 to make their respective data sets available to the data quality evaluation system 140. The data may be provided via a variety of data transfer technologies such as push, pull, file transfer protocol, secure file transfer protocol, secure copy, a virtual private network, and so forth. In addition, the data may be provided in a variety of formats. For example, it may be provided in a raw format or it may be encrypted using one or more existing encryption technologies or other technologies that allow for a secure transfer. The data sets may then be processed by other computing systems including the data quality evaluation system 140, for analyzing the quality of the data sets, updating credit information stored in the credit database 130, or updating information in the data furnisher information database 160.
The data furnisher systems 110 may utilize a variety of data formats for their own, internal purposes. As such, data transmitted from the data furnisher systems 110 to the mainframe 120 may include data in various formats depending on the data furnisher or even the type of data that is being provided. In some embodiments, the data sets from the data furnisher systems 110 may include data in a standard industry format, such as Metro 1 or Metro 2, for example. In other embodiments, the data set from the data furnisher systems 110 may include data in furnisher internal formats or variations on standard formats. As discussed further below, the data set from the data furnisher systems 110 may be standardized and formatted by the data format manager 150 before being analyzed by the data quality evaluation system 140.
In some embodiments, an identifier representing the data furnisher can be associated with, or included in, the data set from the data furnisher. An identifier may also be used to indicate the type of data being provided. For example, the data from Bank 123 (identifier 73A8) may include mortgage data (identifier M) along with automobile loan data (identifier A). Using theses identifiers, the data quality evaluation system 140 can identify origin of the data and/or the type of data, conduct data furnisher-specific analyses, conduct data type-specific analyses, conduct comparative analysis for different data furnishers or data types, and generate data quality reports for specific data furnishers. In certain embodiments, the data furnishers and/or a subset of the data, can be organized into subgroups for comparative analysis among the subgroups of the data furnishers.
Mainframe
In one embodiment, the mainframe 120 is configured to act as an intermediary system among the data furnisher systems 110, the credit database 130, and the data quality evaluation system 140. While the term mainframe is used herein, it is recognized that this component of the system may be implemented as another system or computing device, such as a non-mainframe server. The mainframe 120 is a gateway for facilitating electronic communication between the data quality evaluation system 140 and the data furnisher systems 110. Data sets from the data furnisher systems 110 can then be transmitted to the data quality evaluation system 140 via the mainframe 120. In addition, in one embodiment, the credit database 130 can be updated with data sets received from the data furnishers systems 110 via the mainframe 120.
The data sets may be received by the mainframe 120 at different times, or may be received simultaneously. As discussed above, the data sets may include a large variety of data types, such as consumer data, business data, real property data, unstructured transaction data, and/or other types of data. The mainframe 120 may be capable of receiving large data sets, such that each set of data received from a given data furnisher may include millions of records, where each record may be associated with a different individual, business, property, account or other entity.
Credit Database
The exemplary credit database 130 is a large data store that is configured to store and manage credit information of customers of financial institutions, which includes data received from third party data furnishers. The credit database 130 may be a large-scale database that includes account data for millions or even billions of customers, where each customer identified in the data may have one or more accounts. The credit database 130 may be based on several sources of data which include existing trade data, new trade data, inquiries, public record data (for example, bankruptcy filings), change of address data, demographic data, and so forth. A common type of credit data is “tradeline data”, sometimes referred to as trade data. Tradeline data may be an entry by a credit grantor to a consumer's credit history, which is maintained by a credit-reporting agency in a credit database 130. Tradelines provide information about a consumer's account status and activity and can include names of companies with which the consumer has accounts, dates the accounts were opened, credit limits, types of accounts, account balances, payment histories, and/or other data. The information in the credit database 130 may be used to evaluate credit of a person or a company, to resolve financial disputes. This information can also be updated based on the data sets from the data furnisher system 110 after the data is processed, reviewed and evaluated by the data quality evaluation system 140. The terms “consumer,” “customer,” “people,” “persons,” “individual,” “party,” “entity,” and the like, whether singular or plural, should be interpreted to include either individuals or groups of individuals, such as, for example, married couples or domestic partners, organizations, groups, business entities, non-profit entities, and other entities.
Data Quality Evaluation System
In one embodiment, the data quality evaluation system 140 is configured to evaluate and generate indications of the quality of the data sets received from the data furnishers 110. The exemplary data quality evaluation system 140 includes the data format manager 150, the data furnisher information database 160, the data loader server 162, the configuration and control database server 164, the data furnisher analysis server 166, and the analytics database server 168.
To conduct data quality analysis, the data quality evaluation system 140 is configured to access data sets of data furnishers, process the data sets, access information related to the data furnishers, calculate data quality indexes for the data set, and/or generate data quality index reports based on the calculated data quality indexes. In some embodiments, the data quality indexes include statistical information derived from the data sets of the data furnishers and/or a metrics representing absolute or relative qualities of the respective data set. Business rules may be used to conduct various analyses, such as evaluating data set quality against industry standards or internal standards, or other metrics gained from experience, practice, and/or logic. The business rules may depend on the specific data, data type, furnisher, or other factors such that analysis some fields may work for some analyses, while other fields may work for other analyses. In one embodiment, the data quality evaluation system 140 is also configured to generate new business rules or update existing business rules that would assist the data furnishers in improving their data reporting quality. Some example rules include determining if status codes values are logical for specific date field values, if balances are logical compared to credit limit, if critical fields (for example, date of birth) are complete and if so are they logically valid (for example, not future), if certain criteria have been met to indicate fatal errors along with the reasons for the fatal errors.
Data Format Manager
In one embodiment, the data format manager 150 is configured to process data sets received from the data furnishers 110 via the mainframe 120 and transform the data into a standard format that can be analyzed by the system. The exemplary data format manager 150 includes a data standardizer module 152 and a data translator module 154 used to convert the data of the data furnishers to a format that can be analyzed by the data quality evaluation system 140. In some embodiments, the data format manager 150 may divide a data set into subgroups based on the data types for data type specific analysis.
The data standardizer module 152 is configured to convert the data into a general standardized format that is used by the data quality evaluation system 140. For example, if the data quality evaluation system 140 uses variation 1 of the Metro 2 standard, data received in the Metro 1 format or in variation 2 of the Metro 2 standard is converted to be in the variation 1 of the Metro 2 standard. As another example, if the data quality evaluation system 140 uses proprietary format Y, then data received in any Metro 1 or Metro 2 format is converted to be in the proprietary standard Y format.
The data translator module 154 is configured to undo or roll back furnisher-specific changes or customized elements that have been made by the data furnishers' to their own data sets to put their data sets into the standard formats. Accordingly, the data translator module 154 may include data furnisher specific sub-translator modules 154A, 154B that are configured to process data from specific corresponding data furnishers. For example, Bank A may vary slightly from variation 2 of the Metro 2 standard format, and Credit Card Company B may vary slightly from variation 4 of the Metro 2 standard format. The data translator 154 may have a translator 154A that is specific to Bank A configured to translate the data received from Bank A into the standard variation 2 of the Metro 2 standard format. Similarly, the data translator 154 may have a translator 154B that is specific to Credit Card Company B configured to translate the data received from Credit Card Company B into the standard variation 4 of the Metro 2 standard format. Moreover, if a new data furnisher wants to submit data and has its own customizations to a standard industry format, a new sub-translator module can be generated specific to the new data furnisher.
Once translated into the standard format, the data standardizer module 152 may convert the standardized data into the specific format used by the data quality evaluation system 140. For example, if the data quality evaluation system 140 uses proprietary format Y, then the data standardizer module 152 may convert Bank A's data, which is now is in the format of variation 2 of the Metro 2 standard format, into the proprietary format Y and convert Credit Card Company B's data, which is now in the format of variation 4 of the Metro 2 standard format, into the proprietary format Y. Thus, the data sets from both Bank A and Credit Card Company B are now in the proprietary format Y and can be analyzed by the data quality evaluation system 140.
Data Furnisher Information Database
In one embodiment, the data furnisher information database 160 is a data store configured to store and manage configuration, requirements, preferences and instructions specific to the data furnishers. The data furnisher information database 160 may also include prior data quality evaluation results of the data furnishers, historical records of the data furnishers, previous data quality indices and reports generated during past data quality evaluations that have been performed for specific data furnishers. For example, the data furnisher information database 160 may store information on which services and metrics to run for Bank A. It may also include information on which historical analyses that have been run for Bank A, along with Bank A's instruction to always run specific benchmarking reports on its mortgage data and specific benchmarking reports that should be excluded on its automobile loan data.
Data Loader Server
In one embodiment, the data loader server 162 is configured to load and prepare data sets for analysis. The data loader server 162 may comprise one or more servers which access and receive data sets using a variety of techniques and on various schedules, such as in real-time, hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, and so forth.
As noted above, the data quality evaluation system 140 can analyze a variety of data associated with data furnishers including: incoming data from data furnishers often via the mainframe 120, information extracted from the credit database 130, aggregated dispute data collected from credit data dispute entities, processing statistics associated with the data furnisher, and configuration information from the data furnisher information database 160, which identifies the specific data furnisher-specific and/or data type specific analyses to be conducted. Thus, the data loader server is configured to electronically communicate with internal and external systems to access data used for the analyses. The data loader server 162 may also run other processes to prepare the data for the data quality analyses. For example, the data loader server 162 may be configured to anonymize credit information from the credit database 130 by excluding identification associated with the credit information and anonymize information of the data furnishers for peer data quality review among the data furnishers. The data loader server 162 can also generate statistical information (for example, industry average metrics) and metrics, such as the sizes of the data sets and schedules during which they were loaded. While the data loader server 162 may load data for analysis by the data furnisher analysis server 166, it also recognized that data may be loaded by other components, such as the mainframe, the credit database 130, as well as other external or remote systems.
Configuration and Control Database Server
In one embodiment, the configuration and control database server 164 is configured to manage and control the analyses of the data furnisher's data sets. The configuration and control database server 164 may check the mainframe for inbound data, review the received data and/or the information stored in the data furnisher information database 160 to determine which services and metrics to run for a specific data set, instruct the data loader servers 162 to load the appropriate data, and/or instruct the data furnisher analysis server 166 to conduct the appropriate analyses and metrics. In some embodiments, the configuration and control database server 164 is configured to electronically communicate with the data quality application server 172 and/or the data quality web server 174 to receive instructions from the clients 184 or the analysts 182 to modify or update data furnisher-specific data and store the updates or modifications in the data furnisher information database 160.
Data Furnisher Analysis Server
In one embodiment, the data furnisher analysis server 166 is configured to analyze the formatted data sets of the data furnishers 110 according to the instructions and parameters given by the configuration and control database server 164 in order to evaluate the quality of the data sets. The data furnisher analysis server 166 may also be configured to calculate metrics and/or indexes representing the quality of the data sets in absolute or relative terms. The metrics may be calculated on individual records, but may also be calculated based on aggregated data sets or subsets. In addition, the data furnisher analysis server 166 may be configured to generate a message indicating that a particular set of data has passed a quality metric and can be added to or released into the large data store or that a particular set of data has not passed a quality metric such that the data provider should be notified and/or the data set should not be added into the large data store.
In some embodiments, the data furnisher analysis server 166 also conducts comparative or benchmarking analyses for generating electronic peer review reports such that the data furnishers can understand not only their own data reporting practices, but also where they stand among their peer groups or in the industry. The peer review reports may include both data and disputes reporting reviews. The peer review reports may also provide information on reporting inconsistencies (incomplete consumer information, invalid values, discrepancies in data), portfolio review of data stored in the credit database 130, trends regarding disputes, as well as data furnisher response information, such as response rates, response times, and actions taken.
In some embodiments, the data furnisher analysis server 166 is configured to generate analytics associated with a single data furnisher (or a group of data furnishers) to determine trends in data quality using historical data quality information. The determined trends can be utilized for initiating processes to send notifications to data furnishers of possible problems or discrepancies or to update business rules of the data furnishers to improve data quality.
In some embodiments, the data furnisher analysis server 166 is configured to load the results of the analyses, metrics, benchmarking comparisons, and so forth onto the analytics database server 168.
Analytics Database Server
In one embodiment, the analytics database server 168 is configured to store the results of the analyses, metrics, benchmarking comparisons, and so forth from the data furnisher analysis server 166. In some embodiments, the analytics database server 168 is configured to provide a quick response time to queries and to electronically communicate with the data quality application server 172 and the data quality web server 174 to provide information (for example, statistical, graphical, reporting, summary, and so forth) to the data furnishers and analysts.
Data Quality Application Server and Data Quality Web Server
In one embodiment, the data quality application server 172 is configured to electronically communicate with the analytics database server 168 to provide data quality analytics, metrics, reports, and other requested data to the analyst systems 182. In one embodiment, the data quality web server 174 is a web server that is configured to electronically communicate with the analytics database server 168 to provide data quality analytics, metrics, reports, and other requested data to the data furnisher client systems 184 via a web-based interface. While
In some embodiments, the data quality application server 172 and/or the data quality web server 174 may provide simulation tools to allow the analysts and/or data furnishers to see what may happen to data quality if one or more of the business rules are revised or if various conditions changed and may also provide various reporting tools and comparison graphs for use by the analysts and/or data furnishers. The data quality application server 172 and/or the data quality web server 174 may also allow for account set up, analysis configuration, service requests, job monitoring, system monitoring, and/or help requests.
It is recognized that in some embodiments, the data quality application server 172 and the data quality web server 174 may be implemented as a single server.
At block 202, the process 210 processes the obtained data for further analysis. In one embodiment, the data quality evaluation system 140 formats and standardizes the data using the data format manager 150 as discussed above. The data quality evaluation system 140 may further process the data sets to organize them into subsets based on a variety of categories within the data. It is recognized that a data set may be divided into subsets based on categories of the data set such as data type, account type, status of associated accounts, data furnisher type, data furnisher, age of the data entries, and so forth. For example, the data set may come from a data processor and include data from five banks, which each have first mortgage accounts and equity line of credit accounts. The data can be categorized by bank and further subcategorized by mortgage accounts and line of credit accounts. This categorization allows the data quality evaluation system 140 to conduct category specific analyses for the various subsets in the data set as well as vendor or data provider-specific analyses.
At block 204, the process 210 accesses data furnisher information stored in the data furnisher information database 160. The data furnisher information may include instructions for which services and metrics to run for the data furnisher for each of the different data types, historical information representing prior data quality metrics for the same data furnisher or data types, statistical information derived from data reported by the specific data furnisher, and other information associated with the specific data furnisher.
At block 205, the process 210 conducts a data quality evaluation and analysis of the processed data. The data quality evaluation may be conducted in accordance with the data furnisher's instructions stored in the data furnisher information database 160. The data quality evaluation system 140 calculates the requested one or more analyses and data quality metrics that represent the quality of the analyzed data set, which may include record-level metrics as well as an aggregation of metric data. The analyses may be based on the data furnisher, or they may also include comparative analyses using peer data.
At block 206, the process 210 generates any designated data quality reports that reflect the analyses and metrics calculated at block 206. The data quality reports can include result of comparative analysis, such as peer review, as well as data furnisher-specific summary and trend reports. The data quality reports may also be generated based on the data type, such that certain reports may be generated for mortgage data and other reports are generated for personal finance data. In addition, the data quality evaluation system 140 may provide suggestions for enhancing data quality and simulating of data quality if the suggestion is applied. The simulated data quality may be generated based on statistical analyses of the data furnishers' historical data quality as well as anonymized data from other data furnishers.
At blocks 212 and 213, the process 220 processes the data set to remove any data furnisher-specific changes and convert the data to the format used by the data quality evaluation system 140. The process 220 may exclude or ignore any data fields that are not used by the data quality evaluation system 140. For example, if the data set from the credit card company includes data about enrollment in a customer loyalty program as well as non-standard Metro 2 payment amount data, process 200 may eliminate the loyalty program information and modify the payment amount data to conform to standard Metro 2 format, variation 1.
At block 214, process 220 retrieves instructions, configuration information and for rules specific to the data furnisher, which may be stored in the data furnisher information database 160. The retrieved information may include data furnisher-specific (and/or data type specific) instructions for the data quality analyses. For example, Credit Card Company A may include specific configurations for evaluating fraud transaction disputes that are different from Credit Card Company B; and Collection Company C may not include any instructions for fraud transaction disputes since they may not be relevant to the collection company.
At block 215, the process 220 accesses historical records that correspond to the data set. The historical records may include previous metrics and/or analyses associated with the same data furnisher and/or the same data type, which may be stored in the data furnisher information database 160. The historical records may also include past anonymized peer data.
At block 216, the process 220 divides the data set into subsets based on categories of data within the data set, such as data type, account type, status of associated accounts, data furnisher type, data furnisher, age of the data entries, and so forth. For example, a data set from Bank A may include credit card account data and savings accounts data such that the data quality evaluation system 140 may divide the data set into two subgroups based on the account types for account type-specific analyses.
At block 217, the process 220 analyzes the subsets of the data set according to the configuration information and/or rules retrieved at block 214. Based on the analysis, the data quality evaluation system 140 may generate metrics or data quality indexes for the subsets of the data set.
At block 218, the process 220 determines whether the calculated data quality meets predetermined criteria so that it can be released and added to the credit database 130. By using predetermined criteria for updating credit database 130, the data quality evaluation system 140 prevents degradation of credit data quality by low quality data sets. In certain embodiments, the predetermined criteria may be set as a requirement that must be fulfilled before any data can be added to the credit database 130. For example, if the data quality analysis reveals that the data set reported by a data furnisher contains a certain level of suspicious data, the data quality evaluation system 140 may preclude the data set (and/or any data from the data furnisher) from being added to the credit database 130. In some embodiments, the predetermined criteria may include a requirement for data quality consistency by the data furnishers. For example, the data quality evaluation system 140 may preclude the data set from being added to the credit database 130 if sudden change of data quality is identified. For example, if the data set shows a very sharp increase in the numbers of data discrepancy disputes, the data set may be prevented from being added to the credit database 130 as that data set may include many potential discrepancies even though the data set meets another criterion regarding data integrity. It is recognized that the predetermined criteria may be different for different data furnishers as well as different for different data types.
At block 219, the process 220 generates data quality index reports for the data set and/or the data furnisher. The data quality index reports may include data furnisher-specific reports, data type-specific reports, internal reports, and/or legal reports. In certain embodiments, the data quality evaluation system 140 uses the analyses and reports to provide suggestions to a data furnisher to help enhance the data furnisher's data quality. Suggestions for enhancing data quality may include suggestion to update business rules and/or policies of the data furnisher or may flag problematic data types within the sets and/or potential third party data issues.
It is recognized that a variety of embodiments may be used to conduct data quality analyses and that some of the blocks above may be combined, separated into sub-blocks, and rearranged to run in a different order and/or in parallel. In addition, in some embodiments, the processes 210 and 220 may execute on the data quality evaluation system 140 and/or different blocks may execute on various components of the data quality evaluation system 140.
In
In
In
In
In some embodiments, any of the systems, servers, or components referenced herein may take the form of a computing system as shown in
In one embodiment, the computing system 900 comprises a server, a workstation, a mainframe, and a minicomputer. In other embodiments, the system may be a personal computer that is IBM, Macintosh, or Linux/Unix compatible, a laptop computer, a tablet, a handheld device, a mobile phone, a smart phone, a personal digital assistant, a car system, or a tablet. For example, a client may communicate with the data quality web server 174 via a tablet device and an analyst may communicate via a laptop computer. The servers may include a variety of servers such as database servers (for example, Oracle, DB2, Informix, Microsoft SQL Server, MySQL, or Ingres), application servers, data loader servers, or web servers. In addition, the servers may run a variety of software for data visualization, distributed file systems, distributed processing, web portals, enterprise workflow, form management, and so forth.
The computing system 900 may be generally controlled and coordinated by operating system software, such as Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8, Unix, Linux, SunOS, Solaris, Maemeo, MeeGo, BlackBerry Tablet OS, Android, webOS, Sugar, Symbian OS, MAC OS X, or iOS or other operating systems. In other embodiments, the computing system 900 may be controlled by a proprietary operating system. Conventional operating systems control and schedule computer processes for execution, perform memory management, provide file system, networking, I/O services, and provide a user interface, such as a graphical user interface (GUI), among other things.
The computing system 900 includes one or more commonly available input/output (I/O) devices and interfaces 910, such as a keyboard, mouse, touchpad, speaker, microphone, or printer. In one embodiment, the I/O devices and interfaces 910 include one or more display device, such as a touchscreen, display or monitor, which allows the visual presentation of data to a user. More particularly, a display device provides for the presentation of GUIs, application software data, and multimedia presentations, for example. The central processing unit 905 may be in communication with a display device that is configured to perform some of the functions defined by the computer-executable instructions. For example, some of the computer-executable instructions may define the operation of displaying to a display device, an image that is like one of the screenshots included in this application. The computing system may also include one or more multimedia devices 940, such as speakers, video cards, graphics accelerators, and microphones, for example. A skilled artisan would appreciate that, in light of this disclosure, a system including all hardware components, such as the central processing unit 905, display device, memory 930, and mass storage device 920 that are necessary to perform the operations illustrated in this application, is within the scope of the disclosure.
In the embodiment of
Information may be provided to the computing system 900 over the network from one or more data sources including, for example, data furnishers 110, mainframe 120, or a credit database 130. In addition to the systems that are illustrated in
In the embodiment of
Embodiments can be implemented such that all functions illustrated herein are performed on a single device, while other embodiments can be implemented in a distributed environment in which the functions are collectively performed on two or more devices that are in communication with each other. Moreover, while the computing system has been used to describe one embodiment of a data quality system 100, it is recognized that the user systems may be implemented as computing systems as well.
In general, the word “module,” as used herein, refers to logic embodied in hardware or firmware, or to a collection of software instructions, possibly having entry and exit points, written in a programming language, such as, for example, Java, Lua, C or C++. A software module may be compiled and linked into an executable program, installed in a dynamic link library, or may be written in an interpreted programming language such as, for example, BASIC, Perl, or Python. It will be appreciated that software modules may be callable from other modules or from themselves, or may be invoked in response to detected events or interrupts. Software instructions may be embedded in firmware, such as an EPROM. It will be further appreciated that hardware modules may be comprised of connected logic units, such as gates and flip-flops, or may be comprised of programmable units, such as programmable gate arrays or processors. The modules described herein are preferably implemented as software modules, but may be represented in hardware or firmware. Generally, the modules described herein refer to logical modules that may be combined with other modules or divided into sub-modules despite their physical organization or storage.
It is recognized that the term “remote” may include systems, data, objects, devices, components, or modules not stored locally, that are not accessible via the local bus. Thus, remote data may include a system that is physically stored in the same room and connected to the computing system via a network. In other situations, a remote device may also be located in a separate geographic area, such as, for example, in a different location, country, and so forth.
Each of the processes, methods, and algorithms described in the preceding sections may be embodied in, and fully or partially automated by, code modules executed by one or more computer systems or computer processors comprising computer hardware. The code modules may be stored on any type of non-transitory computer-readable medium or computer storage device, such as hard drives, solid-state memory, optical disc, and/or the like. The systems and modules may also be transmitted as generated data signals (for example, as part of a carrier wave or other analog or digital propagated signal) on a variety of computer-readable transmission mediums, including wireless-based and wired/cable-based mediums, and may take a variety of forms (for example, as part of a single or multiplexed analog signal, or as multiple discrete digital packets or frames). The processes and algorithms may be implemented partially or wholly in application-specific circuitry. The results of the disclosed processes and process steps may be stored, persistently or otherwise, in any type of non-transitory computer storage such as, for example, volatile or non-volatile storage.
In addition, it is recognized that a feature shown in one figure may be included in a different display or interface, module, or system. Also, the reference numbers listed in the description are hereby incorporated by reference into the figures and the corresponding elements of the figures are deemed to include the corresponding reference numbers from the description.
The various features and processes described above may be used independently of one another, or may be combined in various ways. All possible combinations and sub-combinations are intended to fall within the scope of this disclosure. In addition, certain method or process blocks may be omitted in some implementations. The methods and processes described herein are also not limited to any particular sequence, and the blocks or states relating thereto can be performed in other sequences that are appropriate. For example, described blocks or states may be performed in an order other than that specifically disclosed, or multiple blocks or states may be combined in a single block or state. The example blocks or states may be performed in serial, in parallel, or in some other manner. Blocks or states may be added to or removed from the disclosed example embodiments. The example systems and components described herein may be configured differently than described. For example, elements may be added to, removed from, or rearranged compared to the disclosed example embodiments.
Conditional language, such as, among others, “can,” “could,” “might”, or “may,” unless specifically stated otherwise, or otherwise understood within the context as used, is generally intended 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. The term “including” means “included but not limited to”. The term “or” means “and/or”.
Any process descriptions, elements, or blocks in the flow or block 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 steps 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.
All of the methods and processes described above may be embodied in, and partially or fully automated via, software code modules executed by one or more general-purpose computers. For example, the methods described herein may be performed by the computing system and/or any other suitable computing device. The methods may be executed on the computing devices in response to execution of software instructions or other executable code read from a tangible computer readable medium. A tangible computer readable medium is a data storage device that can store data that is readable by a computer system. Examples of computer readable mediums include read-only memory, random-access memory, other volatile or non-volatile memory devices, CD-ROMs, magnetic tape, flash drives, and optical data storage devices.
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. The foregoing description details certain embodiments. It will be appreciated, however, that no matter how detailed the foregoing appears in text, the systems and methods can be practiced in many ways. For example, a feature of one embodiment may be used with a feature in a different embodiment. As is also stated above, it should be noted that the use of particular terminology when describing certain features or aspects of the systems and methods should not be taken to imply that the terminology is being re-defined herein to be restricted to including any specific characteristics of the features or aspects of the systems and methods with which that terminology is associated.
This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/910,892, filed on Dec. 2, 2013, entitled “Data Quality Monitoring Systems and Methods,” which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4163290 | Sutherlin et al. | Jul 1979 | A |
| 4827508 | Shear | May 1989 | A |
| 4868570 | Davis | Sep 1989 | A |
| 4935870 | Burk, Jr. et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
| 4989141 | Lyons et al. | Jan 1991 | A |
| 5216612 | Cornett et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
| 5247575 | Sprague et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
| 5325509 | Lautzenheiser | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5341429 | Stringer et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
| 5528701 | Aref | Jun 1996 | A |
| 5555409 | Leenstra, Sr. et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5590038 | Pitroda | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5621201 | Langhans et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5629982 | Micali | May 1997 | A |
| 5630070 | Dietrich et al. | May 1997 | A |
| 5640551 | Chu et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
| 5640577 | Scharmer | Jun 1997 | A |
| 5655129 | Ito | Aug 1997 | A |
| 5659731 | Gustafson | Aug 1997 | A |
| 5666528 | Thai | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5692107 | Simoudis et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5737732 | Gibson et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5739512 | Tognazzini | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5748098 | Grace | May 1998 | A |
| 5754632 | Smith | May 1998 | A |
| 5754939 | Herz et al. | May 1998 | A |
| 5765143 | Sheldon et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5768423 | Aref et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5774692 | Boyer et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5778405 | Ogawa | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5797136 | Boyer et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5812840 | Shwartz | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5822750 | Jou et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5822751 | Gray et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5825884 | Zdepski et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5828837 | Eikeland | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5832068 | Smith | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5835915 | Carr et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5844218 | Kawan et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5881131 | Farris et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5893090 | Friedman et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5905985 | Malloy et al. | May 1999 | A |
| 5956693 | Geerlings | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5961593 | Gabber et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5963932 | Jakobsson et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5966695 | Melchione et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 6014688 | Venkatraman et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6038551 | Barlow et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6070147 | Harms et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6073106 | Rozen et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6073140 | Morgan et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6085242 | Chandra | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6119103 | Basch et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6121901 | Welch et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6128602 | Northington et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6128624 | Papierniak et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6144957 | Cohen et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6151601 | Papierniak et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6157707 | Baulier et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6157927 | Schaefer et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6161139 | Win et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6178442 | Yamazaki | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6202053 | Christiansen et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6223171 | Chaudhuri et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6253202 | Gilmour | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6256630 | Gilai et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6263334 | Fayyad et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6263337 | Fayyad et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6275824 | O'Flaherty et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6304869 | Moore et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6311169 | Duhon | Oct 2001 | B2 |
| 6339769 | Cochrane et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6366903 | Agrawal et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6397197 | Gindlesperger | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6405173 | Honarvar et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6446200 | Ball et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6448980 | Kumar et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6453353 | Win et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6457012 | Jatkowski | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6463533 | Calamera et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6496819 | Bello et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6496931 | Rajchel et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6505168 | Rothman et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6523021 | Monberg et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6523022 | Hobbs | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6523041 | Morgan et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6543683 | Hoffman | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6564210 | Korda et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6574623 | Leung et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6574736 | Andrews | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6581059 | Barrett et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6601173 | Mohler | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6601234 | Bowman-Amuah | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6647383 | August et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6651220 | Penteroudakis et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6658393 | Basch et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6708166 | Dysart et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6714944 | Shapiro et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6725381 | Smith et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6738748 | Wetzer | May 2004 | B2 |
| 6748426 | Shaffer et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6750985 | Rhoads | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6754665 | Futagami et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6766327 | Morgan, Jr. et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6766946 | Iida et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6782379 | Lee | Aug 2004 | B2 |
| 6804346 | Mewhinney | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6804701 | Muret et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6816871 | Lee | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6845448 | Chaganti et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
| 6850895 | Brodersen et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6910624 | Natsuno | Jun 2005 | B1 |
| 6928487 | Eggebraaten et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 6934714 | Meinig | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 6947989 | Gullotta et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6950858 | Ogami | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6954757 | Zargham et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6976056 | Kumar | Dec 2005 | B1 |
| 6983379 | Spalink et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
| 6983478 | Grauch et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
| 6985887 | Sunstein et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
| 6999941 | Agarwal | Feb 2006 | B1 |
| 7003504 | Angus et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
| 7016907 | Boreham et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7028001 | Muthuswamy et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
| 7028052 | Chapman et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7035855 | Kilger et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
| 7039176 | Borodow et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7043476 | Robson | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7047251 | Reed et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7050982 | Sheinson et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7050989 | Hurt et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7062475 | Szabo et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
| 7069240 | Spero et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7076475 | Honarvar | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7082435 | Guzman et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
| 7092898 | Mattick et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
| 7117172 | Black | Oct 2006 | B1 |
| 7124144 | Christianson et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7133935 | Hedy | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7155739 | Bari et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7167907 | Shaffer et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7184974 | Shishido | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7185016 | Rasmussen | Feb 2007 | B1 |
| 7200602 | Jonas | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7219107 | Beringer | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7222369 | Vering et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7234160 | Vogel et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
| 7240059 | Bayliss et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7243369 | Bhat et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7246067 | Austin et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7249048 | O'Flaherty | Jul 2007 | B1 |
| 7272591 | Ghazal et al. | Sep 2007 | B1 |
| 7277900 | Ganesh et al. | Oct 2007 | B1 |
| 7315837 | Sloan et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
| 7328233 | Salim et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7340679 | Botscheck et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7346703 | Cope | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7366694 | Lazerson | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7367011 | Ramsey et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7370044 | Mulhern et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7373335 | Cleghorn et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7376603 | Mayr et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
| 7383215 | Navarro et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
| 7383988 | Slonecker, Jr. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
| 7395273 | Khan et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
| 7403942 | Bayliss | Jul 2008 | B1 |
| 7421322 | Silversmith et al. | Sep 2008 | B1 |
| 7421442 | Gelb et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7424439 | Fayyad et al. | Sep 2008 | B1 |
| 7433864 | Malik | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7451113 | Kasower | Nov 2008 | B1 |
| 7460857 | Roach, Jr. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7467127 | Baccash et al. | Dec 2008 | B1 |
| 7467401 | Cicchitto | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7475118 | Leiba et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7478157 | Bohrer et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7483842 | Fung et al. | Jan 2009 | B1 |
| 7490356 | Lieblich et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
| 7505938 | Lang et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7529698 | Joao | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7533179 | Tarquini et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7536346 | Aliffi et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7543739 | Brown et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
| 7546266 | Beirne et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
| 7546271 | Chmielewski et al. | Jun 2009 | B1 |
| 7552089 | Bruer et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
| 7556192 | Wokaty, Jr. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
| 7559217 | Bass | Jul 2009 | B2 |
| 7562093 | Gelb et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
| 7562184 | Henmi et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
| 7562814 | Shao et al. | Jul 2009 | B1 |
| 7571473 | Boydstun et al. | Aug 2009 | B1 |
| 7577934 | Anonsen et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7584126 | White | Sep 2009 | B1 |
| 7584146 | Duhon | Sep 2009 | B1 |
| 7587366 | Grim, III et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7593889 | Raines et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7596512 | Raines et al. | Sep 2009 | B1 |
| 7596716 | Frost et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7603701 | Gaucas | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7606725 | Robertson et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7613600 | Krane | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7634737 | Beringer et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7647344 | Skurtovich, Jr. et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7653592 | Flaxman et al. | Jan 2010 | B1 |
| 7653688 | Bittner | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7668840 | Bayliss et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
| 7672833 | Blume et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7672924 | Scheurich et al. | Mar 2010 | B1 |
| 7672926 | Ghazal et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7676751 | Allen et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7685209 | Norton et al. | Mar 2010 | B1 |
| 7689505 | Kasower | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7698163 | Reed et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7698445 | Fitzpatrick et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7707059 | Reed et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7707164 | Kapochunas et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7707271 | Rudkin et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7711635 | Steele et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7730078 | Schwabe et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7739139 | Robertson et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7742982 | Chaudhuri et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7747480 | Agresta et al. | Jun 2010 | B1 |
| 7747559 | Leitner et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7752236 | Williams et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7756789 | Welker et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7765166 | Beringer et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7765311 | Itabashi et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7769696 | Yoda | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7774270 | MacCloskey | Aug 2010 | B1 |
| 7783515 | Kumar et al. | Aug 2010 | B1 |
| 7788040 | Haskell et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7797252 | Rosskamm et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7797725 | Lunt et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7801812 | Conlin et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7801956 | Cumberbatch et al. | Sep 2010 | B1 |
| 7810036 | Bales et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7814005 | Imrey et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7818228 | Coulter | Oct 2010 | B1 |
| 7818229 | Imrey et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7832006 | Chen et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7836111 | Shan | Nov 2010 | B1 |
| 7841008 | Cole et al. | Nov 2010 | B1 |
| 7844604 | Baio et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7853518 | Cagan | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 7877304 | Coulter | Jan 2011 | B1 |
| 7908242 | Achanta | Mar 2011 | B1 |
| 7912865 | Akerman et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7930242 | Morris et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
| 7975299 | Balducci et al. | Jul 2011 | B1 |
| 7983932 | Kane | Jul 2011 | B2 |
| 7991688 | Phelan et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 7991901 | Tarquini et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 7996912 | Spalink et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8001153 | Skurtovich, Jr. et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8001235 | Russ et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8005759 | Hirtenstein et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8024264 | Chaudhuri et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8060424 | Kasower | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8065233 | Lee et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8065264 | Achanta | Nov 2011 | B1 |
| 8095458 | Peterson et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8099341 | Varghese | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8104679 | Brown | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8127986 | Taylor et al. | Mar 2012 | B1 |
| 8131777 | McCullough | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8161104 | Tomkow | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8175889 | Girulat et al. | May 2012 | B1 |
| 8201257 | Andres et al. | Jun 2012 | B1 |
| 8214238 | Fairfield et al. | Jul 2012 | B1 |
| 8224723 | Bosch et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8234498 | Britti et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8271378 | Chaudhuri et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8280805 | Abrahams et al. | Oct 2012 | B1 |
| 8285656 | Chang et al. | Oct 2012 | B1 |
| 8296229 | Yellin et al. | Oct 2012 | B1 |
| 8312033 | McMillan | Nov 2012 | B1 |
| 8321339 | Imrey et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
| 8321952 | Spalink et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
| 8326672 | Haggerty et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8364518 | Blake et al. | Jan 2013 | B1 |
| 8386377 | Xiong et al. | Feb 2013 | B1 |
| 8392334 | Hirtenstein et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
| 8458074 | Showalter | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8463919 | Tarquini et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8468198 | Tomkow | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8478674 | Kapczynski et al. | Jul 2013 | B1 |
| 8498930 | Chung | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8515828 | Wolf et al. | Aug 2013 | B1 |
| 8515862 | Zhang et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8560434 | Morris et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8560436 | Ingram et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8566141 | Nagdev et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
| 8572083 | Snell et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
| 8583593 | Achanta | Nov 2013 | B1 |
| 8606666 | Courbage et al. | Dec 2013 | B1 |
| 8639616 | Rolenaitis et al. | Jan 2014 | B1 |
| 8639920 | Stack et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
| 8705718 | Baniak et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8725613 | Celka et al. | May 2014 | B1 |
| 8732004 | Ramos | May 2014 | B1 |
| 8738515 | Chaudhuri et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8738516 | Dean et al. | May 2014 | B1 |
| 8768914 | Scriffignano et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8775299 | Achanta et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8781953 | Kasower | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8782217 | Arone et al. | Jul 2014 | B1 |
| 8818888 | Kapczynski et al. | Aug 2014 | B1 |
| 8949981 | Trollope et al. | Feb 2015 | B1 |
| 8954459 | McMillan et al. | Feb 2015 | B1 |
| 8966649 | Stack et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
| 8972400 | Kapczynski et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
| 9147042 | Haller et al. | Sep 2015 | B1 |
| 9152727 | Balducci et al. | Oct 2015 | B1 |
| 9268803 | Kapochunas et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
| 9342783 | Chang et al. | May 2016 | B1 |
| 20010000536 | Tarin | Apr 2001 | A1 |
| 20010029470 | Schultz et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010029482 | Tealdi et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010037332 | Miller et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20010039532 | Coleman, Jr. et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20010049274 | Degraeve | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20010049620 | Blasko | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020004736 | Roundtree et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020010664 | Rabideau et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020010701 | Kosciuszko et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020013827 | Edstrom et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020026507 | Sears et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020026519 | Itabashi et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020033846 | Balasubramanian et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020049701 | Nabe et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020049738 | Epstein | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020052884 | Farber et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020069122 | Yun et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020077964 | Brody et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020091650 | Ellis | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020091706 | Anderson et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020099628 | Takaoka et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020099824 | Bender et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020099936 | Kou et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020103809 | Starzl et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020103933 | Garon et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020111816 | Lortscher et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020111910 | Walsh | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020120757 | Sutherland et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020128962 | Kasower | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020131565 | Scheuring et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020133504 | Vlahos et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020138297 | Lee | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020138470 | Zhou | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020143943 | Lee et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020147801 | Gullotta et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020156676 | Ahrens et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020161496 | Yamaki | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020161664 | Shaya et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020165757 | Lisser | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020169747 | Chapman et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020173984 | Robertson et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184255 | Edd et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020188544 | Wizon et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020198800 | Shamrakov | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020198824 | Cook | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030002671 | Inchalik et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030009418 | Green et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030018549 | Fei et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030018578 | Schultz | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030023531 | Fergusson | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030041050 | Smith et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030046311 | Baidya et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030050882 | Degen et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030055931 | Cravo De Almeida | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030069839 | Whittington et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030069943 | Bahrs et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030097342 | Whittingtom | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030097380 | Mulhern et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030101111 | Dang et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030101344 | Wheeler et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030105728 | Yano et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030105733 | Boreham et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030105742 | Boreham et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030153299 | Perfit et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030158749 | Olchanski | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030158776 | Landesmann | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030163513 | Schaeck et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030171942 | Gaito | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030191731 | Stewart et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030200151 | Ellenson et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030204429 | Botscheck et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030212654 | Harper et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030229892 | Sardera | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040006488 | Fitall et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040010458 | Friedman | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040019799 | Vering et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040030649 | Nelson et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040044673 | Brady et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040083215 | de Jong | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040088237 | Moenickheim et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040088255 | Zielke et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040098625 | Lagadec et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040103147 | Flesher et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040107250 | Marciano | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040111359 | Hudock | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040117358 | Von Kaenel et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040122696 | Beringer | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040128150 | Lundegren | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040128156 | Beringer et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040128230 | Oppenheimer et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133509 | McCoy et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133513 | McCoy et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133515 | McCoy et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040139025 | Coleman | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040141005 | Banatwala et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040143546 | Wood et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040143596 | Sirkin | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040153330 | Miller et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040153448 | Cheng et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040153521 | Kogo | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040176995 | Fusz | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040193538 | Raines | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040199456 | Flint et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040199789 | Shaw et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040204948 | Singletary et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040220865 | Lozowski et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040220896 | Finlay et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040220918 | Scriffignano et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040221043 | Su et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040225099 | Hohberg et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040225594 | Nolan, III et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040225596 | Kemper et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040225643 | Alpha et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040230534 | McGough | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040243588 | Tanner | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040254935 | Chagoly et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040267714 | Frid et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050005168 | Dick | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050010513 | Duckworth et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050010555 | Gallivan | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050027995 | Menschik et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050038737 | Norris | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050049991 | Aggarwal et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050055231 | Lee | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050060332 | Bernstein et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050071328 | Lawrence | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050091164 | Varble | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050097039 | Kulcsar et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050102180 | Gailey et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050108396 | Bittner | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050108631 | Amorin et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050113991 | Rogers et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050114335 | Wesinger et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050114344 | Wesinger et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050114345 | Wesinger et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050137899 | Davies et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050144452 | Lynch et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050154664 | Guy et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050154769 | Eckart et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050187948 | Monitzer et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050192008 | Desai et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050208461 | Krebs et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050226224 | Lee et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050246338 | Bird | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050257250 | Mitchell et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050262158 | Sauermann | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050273849 | Araujo et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050288998 | Verma et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060015425 | Brooks | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060020611 | Gilbert et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060032909 | Seegar | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060036543 | Blagg et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060036748 | Nusbaum et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060041670 | Musseleck et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060074991 | Lussier et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060079211 | Degraeve | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060080233 | Mendelovich et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060080251 | Fried et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060085361 | Hoerle et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060085454 | Blegen et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060129419 | Flaxer et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060136330 | DeRoy et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060136595 | Satyavolu | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060149674 | Cook et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060155573 | Hartunian | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060155780 | Sakairi et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060161554 | Lucovsky et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060179050 | Giang et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060184440 | Britti et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060184585 | Grear et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060195688 | Drissi et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060235935 | Ng | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060242047 | Haggerty et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060276171 | Pousti | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060277089 | Hubbard et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060277092 | Williams | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060277141 | Palmer | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060282359 | Nobili et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060282429 | Hernandez-Sherrington et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060282819 | Graham et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060288090 | Kraft | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060293979 | Cash et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060294199 | Bertholf | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070011020 | Martin | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070022141 | Singleton et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070022297 | Britti et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070027778 | Schellhammer et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070030282 | Cash et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070038483 | Wood | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070038497 | Britti et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070047714 | Baniak et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070067437 | Sindambiwe | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070094230 | Subramaniam et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070094241 | M. Blackwell et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070094264 | Nair | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070112668 | Celano et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070118393 | Rosen et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070130070 | Williams | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070156554 | Nikoley et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070156589 | Zimler et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070185797 | Robinson | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070204338 | Aiello et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070208640 | Banasiak et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070214000 | Shahrabi et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070220611 | Socolow et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070226010 | Larsen | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070226093 | Chan et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070226129 | Liao et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070244782 | Chimento | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070250441 | Paulsen et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070250459 | Schwarz et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070261114 | Pomerantsev | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070282730 | Carpenter et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070282736 | Conlin et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070288360 | Seeklus | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070299759 | Kelly | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080010206 | Coleman | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080021804 | Deckoff | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080027858 | Benson | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080033742 | Bernasconi | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080033956 | Saha et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080052244 | Tsuei et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080059224 | Schechter | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080059449 | Webster et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080072316 | Chang et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080082536 | Schwabe et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080109875 | Kraft | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080115191 | Kim et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080120569 | Mann et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080177655 | Zalik | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080183504 | Highley | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080183564 | Tien et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080184270 | Cole et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080201401 | Pugh et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080205655 | Wilkins et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080208735 | Balet et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080208873 | Boehmer | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080249869 | Angell et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080263058 | Peden | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080270209 | Mauseth et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080270294 | Lent et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080288283 | Baldwin, Jr. et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080301016 | Durvasula et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080301188 | O'Hara | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080306750 | Wunder et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080312969 | Raines et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080319889 | Hammad | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080320575 | Gelb et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090006475 | Udezue et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090018996 | Hunt et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090024428 | Hudock, Jr. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090024505 | Patel et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090031426 | Dal Lago et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090043691 | Kasower | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090048877 | Binns et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090055894 | Lorsch | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090060343 | Rosca | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090094237 | Churi et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090094674 | Schwartz et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090106846 | Dupray et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090112650 | Iwane | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090113532 | Lapidous | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090119169 | Chandratillake et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090132347 | Anderson et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090138335 | Lieberman | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090144102 | Lopez | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090150166 | Leite et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090150238 | Marsh et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090164232 | Chmielewski et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090164380 | Brown | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090183259 | Rinek et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090210807 | Xiao et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090216640 | Masi | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090228918 | Rolff et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090234665 | Conkel | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090234876 | Schigel et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090240609 | Cho et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090249440 | Platt et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090254375 | Martinez et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090254656 | Vignisson et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090254971 | Herz et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090271265 | Lay et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090313049 | Joao et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090313562 | Appleyard et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090327120 | Eze et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090328173 | Jakobson et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20100010935 | Shelton | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100011428 | Atwood et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100023434 | Bond | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100030578 | Siddique et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100030677 | Melik-Aslanian et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100042583 | Gervais | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100049803 | Ogilvie et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100094704 | Subramanian et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100094758 | Chamberlain et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100114724 | Ghosh et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100145836 | Baker et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100169159 | Rose et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100169264 | O'Sullivan | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100185546 | Pollard | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100188684 | Kumara | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100205076 | Parson et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100211445 | Bodington | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100211636 | Starkenburg et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100217837 | Ansari et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100250338 | Banerjee et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100250410 | Song et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100250411 | Ogrodski | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100250497 | Redlich et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100250509 | Andersen | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100268660 | Ekdahl | Oct 2010 | A1 |
| 20100293090 | Domenikos et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20110009707 | Kaundinya et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110016042 | Cho et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110023115 | Wright | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110078073 | Annappindi et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110113084 | Ramnani | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110113086 | Long et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110125595 | Neal et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110126275 | Anderson et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110137760 | Rudie et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110137789 | Kortina et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110142213 | Baniak et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110161218 | Swift | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110164746 | Nice et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110166988 | Coulter | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110178899 | Huszar | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110179139 | Starkenburg et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110184838 | Winters et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110196791 | Dominguez | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110202474 | Mele et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110211445 | Chen | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110219421 | Ullman et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110238566 | Santos | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110258050 | Chan et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110264566 | Brown | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20120011056 | Ward et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120029956 | Ghosh et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120030216 | Churi et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120030771 | Pierson et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120054592 | Jaffe et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120072464 | Cohen | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120078932 | Skurtovich, Jr. et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120101939 | Kasower | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120106801 | Jackson | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120110467 | Blake et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120124498 | Santoro et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120136763 | Megdal et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120136774 | Imrey et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120158654 | Behren et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120173339 | Flynt et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120179536 | Kalb et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120198556 | Patel et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120215682 | Lent et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120216125 | Pierce | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120226916 | Hahn et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
| 20120265607 | Belwadi | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120290660 | Rao et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20130031109 | Routson et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130125010 | Strandell | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130132151 | Stibel et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130173481 | Hirtenstein et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130185293 | Boback | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130226783 | Haggerty | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130268357 | Heath | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130279676 | Baniak et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130293363 | Plymouth | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130332338 | Yan et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140025562 | Rothrock | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140032265 | Paprocki et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140032300 | Zhang et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140040182 | Gilder | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140136422 | Jung et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140164112 | Kala | Jun 2014 | A1 |
| 20140164519 | Shah | Jun 2014 | A1 |
| 20140244353 | Winters | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140279329 | Dancel | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20150326580 | McMillan et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 0 419 889 | Apr 1991 | EP |
| 0 458 698 | Nov 1991 | EP |
| 0 559 358 | Sep 1993 | EP |
| 0 977 128 | Feb 2000 | EP |
| 0 772 836 | Dec 2001 | EP |
| 1 850 278 | Oct 2007 | EP |
| 1 322 809 | Jul 1973 | GB |
| 10-222559 | Aug 1998 | JP |
| 10-261009 | Sep 1998 | JP |
| 10-293732 | Nov 1998 | JP |
| 2000-331068 | Nov 2000 | JP |
| 2001-297141 | Oct 2001 | JP |
| 2001-344463 | Dec 2001 | JP |
| 2001-357256 | Dec 2001 | JP |
| 2002-149778 | May 2002 | JP |
| 2002-163498 | Jun 2002 | JP |
| 2002-259753 | Sep 2002 | JP |
| 2003-271851 | Sep 2003 | JP |
| 2003-316881 | Nov 2003 | JP |
| 10-2000-0036594 | Jul 2000 | KR |
| 10-2000-0063995 | Nov 2000 | KR |
| 10-2001-0016349 | Mar 2001 | KR |
| 10-2001-0035145 | May 2001 | KR |
| 10-2002-0007132 | Jan 2002 | KR |
| 10-2004-0078798 | Sep 2004 | KR |
| 2 181 216 | Apr 2002 | RU |
| WO 9534155 | Dec 1995 | WO |
| WO 9600945 | Jan 1996 | WO |
| WO 9841931 | Sep 1998 | WO |
| WO 9841932 | Sep 1998 | WO |
| WO 9841933 | Sep 1998 | WO |
| WO 9849643 | Nov 1998 | WO |
| WO 9917225 | Apr 1999 | WO |
| WO 9917226 | Apr 1999 | WO |
| WO 9938094 | Jul 1999 | WO |
| WO 0004465 | Jan 2000 | WO |
| WO 0028441 | May 2000 | WO |
| WO 0055778 | Sep 2000 | WO |
| WO 0065469 | Nov 2000 | WO |
| WO 0109752 | Feb 2001 | WO |
| WO 0109792 | Feb 2001 | WO |
| WO 0110090 | Feb 2001 | WO |
| WO 0184281 | Nov 2001 | WO |
| WO 2004031986 | Apr 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004088464 | Oct 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004114160 | Dec 2004 | WO |
| WO 2006050278 | May 2006 | WO |
| WO 2008022289 | Feb 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008042614 | Apr 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008054403 | May 2008 | WO |
| WO 2009117518 | Sep 2009 | WO |
| WO 2010132492 | Nov 2010 | WO |
| WO 2013009920 | Jan 2013 | WO |
| WO 2014018900 | Jan 2014 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/705,489, filed Feb. 12, 2010, Bargoli et al. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/705,511, filed Feb. 12, 2010, Bargoli et al. |
| Actuate, “Delivering Enterprise Information for Corporate Portals”, White Paper, 2004, pp. 1-7. |
| Akl, Selim G., “Digital Signatures: A Tutorial Survey,” Computer, Feb. 1983, pp. 15-24. |
| Aktas et al., “Personalizing PageRank Based on Domain Profiles”, WEBKDD workshop: Webmining and Web Usage Analysis, Aug. 22, 2004, pp. 83-90. |
| Aktas et al., “Using Hyperlink Features to Personalize Web Search”, WEBKDD workshop: Webmining and Web Usage Analysis, Aug. 2004. |
| Bitran et al., “Mailing Decisions in Catalog Sales Industry”, Management Science (JSTOR), vol. 42, No. 9, pp. 1364-1381, Sep. 1996. |
| Brick, et al. “Unit and Item Response, Weighting, and Imputation Procedures in the 1993 National Household Education Survey (NHES:93)” U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics, Working Paper No. 97-05, Washington, D.C., pp. 30, Feb. 1997. |
| Burr Ph.D., al., et al “Utility Payments as Alternative Credit Data: A Reality Check”, Asset Builders of America, Inc., Oct. 5, 2006, pp. 1-18, Washington, D.C. |
| Buxfer, http://www.buxfer.com/ printed Feb. 5, 2014 in 1 page. |
| Cáceres, et al., “Measurement and Analysis of IP Network Usage and Behavior”, IEEE Communications Magazine, pp. 144-151, May 2000. |
| Census Geography, Excerpted from the Geographic Reference Manual, Nov. 1994, pp. 5. |
| Check, http://check.me/ printed Feb. 5, 2014 in 3 pages. |
| “Consumer Reports Finds American-Made Vehicles Close Reliability Gap with European-Made Vehicle—As Japanese Continue to Set New Benchmarks for the Industry”, Consumer Reports: Consumers Union, Yonkers, NY, Apr. 2003. |
| Cohen et al., “Optimizer: IBM's Multi Echelon Inventory System for Managing Service Logistics”, Interfaces, vol. 20, pp. 65-82, Jan.-Feb. 1990. |
| “D&B Corporate Family Linkage”, D&B Internet Access for U.S. Contract Customers, https://www.dnb.com/ecomp/help/linkage.htm as printed Dec. 17, 2009, pp. 1. |
| “Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Software”, http://www.symantec.com/data-loss-prevention/ printed Apr. 8, 2013 in 8 pages. |
| “Data Protection”, http://compliantprocessing.com/data-protection/ printed Apr. 8, 2013 in 4 pages. |
| Davies, Donald W., “Applying the RSA Digital Signature to Electronic Mail,” Computer, Feb. 1983, pp. 55-62. |
| “Debt Settlement: Watch Video on how to Pay Your Debt Faster”, http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/debt-settlement.html printed Jan. 9, 2013 in 6 pages. |
| Elmasri et al., “Fundamentals of Database Systems, Third Edition (Excerpts)”, Jun. 2000, pp. 253, 261, 268-270, 278-280, 585, 595. |
| Ettorre, “Paul Kahn on Exceptional Marketing,” Management Review, vol. 83, No. 11, Nov. 1994, pp. 48-51. |
| Experian: Improve Outcomes Through Applied Customer Insight, Brochure, Nov. 2009, pp. 20. |
| Experian: Mosaic Geodemographic Lifestyle Segmentation on ConsumerView [Data Card], as printed from http://datacards.experian.com/market?page=research/datacard—print&prin, Apr. 6, 2012, pp. 4. |
| Experian: Mosaic Public Sector 2009 Launch, 2009, pp. 164. |
| Experian: Mosaic United Kingdom, Brochure, Jun. 2009, pp. 24. |
| Experian: Mosaic UK—Optimise the Value of Your Customers and Locations, Now and in the Future, Brochure, Jun. 2010, pp. 24. |
| Experian: Mosaic UK—Unique Consumer Classification Based on In-Depth Demographic Data, as printed from http://www.experian.co.uk/business-strategies/mosaic-uk.html, Jul. 30, 2012, pp. 2. |
| Experian: Mosaic USA, Brochure, May 2009, pp. 14. |
| Experian: Mosaic USA—Consumer Lifestyle Segmentation [Data Card], Dec. 2009, pp. 2. |
| Experian: Public Sector, as printed form http://publicsector.experian.co.uk/Products/Mosaicpublicsector.aspx, 2012, pp. 2. |
| Experian, “Experian Rental Payment Data,” http://www.experian.com/rentbureau/rental-data.html printed Nov. 22, 2013 in 2 pages. |
| Fenner, Peter, “Mobil Address Management and Billing for Personal Communications”, 1st International Conference on Universal Personal Communications, 1992, ICUPC '92 Proceedings, pp. 253-257. |
| “Fictitious Business Name Records”, Westlaw Database Directory, http://directoy.westlaw.com/scope/default.asp?db=FBN-ALL&RS-W&VR=2.0 as printed Dec. 17, 2009, pp. 5. |
| Fisher, Joseph, “Access to Fair Credit Reports: Current Practices and Proposed Legislation,” American Business Law Journal, Fall 1981, vol. 19, No. 3, p. 319. |
| Garcia-Molina, “Database Systems: The Complete Book”, Prentice Hall, 2002, pp. 713-715. |
| “GLBA Compliance and FFIEC Compliance” http://www.trustwave.com/financial-services.php printed Apr. 8, 2013 in 1 page. |
| Haffar, Imad, “‘SPAM’: A Computer Model for Management of Spare-Parts Inventories in Agricultural Machinery Dealerships”, Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, vol. 12, Issue 4, Jun. 1995, pp. 323-332. |
| Handfield, Robert B. et al., “Managing Component Life Cycles in Dynamic Technological Environments”, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, Tempe, vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 20-28, Spring 1994, ProQuest ID 590096. |
| Herron, Janna, “Social Media-Based Credit Score?”, http://www.bankrate.com/financing/credit-cards/social-media-based-credit-score/, posted Score Friday, Jan. 13, 2012, printed Nov. 22, 2013 in 2 pages. |
| Ideon, Credit-Card Registry that Bellyflopped this Year, Is Drawing some Bottom-Fishers, The Wall Street Journal, Aug. 21, 1995, pp. C2. |
| Inderfurth et al., “Decision Support for Spare Parts Acquisition in Post Product Life Cycle”, Central European Journal of Operations Research, vol. 16, pp. 17-42, 2008 [Initially published online Dec. 21, 2007]. |
| “Intelligent Miner Applications Guide”, IBM Corp., Apr. 2, 1999, Chapters 4-7, pp. 33-132. |
| “Japan's JAAI system appraises used cars over internet”, Asia Pulse, Mar. 3, 2000. |
| Jaro, Matthew A., “Probabilistic Linkage of Large Public Health Data Files,” Statistics in Medicine,1995, vol. 14, pp. 491-498. |
| Käki, Anssi, “Forecasting in End-Of-Life Spare Parts Procurement”, Master's Thesis—Helsinki University of Technology System Analysis Laboratory, Jul. 27, 2007. |
| Kim, Bowon et al., Optimal Pricing, EOL (End of Life) Warranty, and Spare Parts Manufacturing Strategy Amid Product Transition, European Journal of Operation Research, vol. 188, pp. 723-745, 2008 [Initially published online May 1, 2007]. |
| Klein, et al., “A Constant-Utility Index of the Cost of Living”, The Review of Economic Studies, pp. 84-87, vol. XV-XVI, Kraus Reprint Corporation, New York, 1960. |
| Klein, et al., “An Econometric Model of the United States: 1929-1952”, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1955, pp. 4-41. |
| Klein, Lawrence R., “The Keynesian Revolution”, New York, The MacMillan Company, 1947, pp. 56-189. |
| Krupp, James A.G.; “Forecasting for the Automotive Aftermarket”; The Journal of Business Forecasting Methods & Systems; Winter 1993-1994; 12, 4; ABI/Inform Global; pp. 8-12. |
| Lanubile, et al., “Evaluating Empirical Models for the Detection of High-Risk Components: Some Lessons Learned”, 20th Annual Software Engineering Workshop, Nov. 29-30, 1995, Greenbelt, Maryland, pp. 1-6. |
| Lapide, Larry, “New Developments in Business Forecasting”, The Journal of Business Forecasting, pp. 12- 14, Spring 2002. |
| LendingTree.com, “Lender Ratings & Reviews,” http://web.archive.org/web/20091015043716/http://www.lendingtree.com/lender-reviews/, Oct. 15, 2009, in 21 pages. |
| Li et al., “Automatic Verbal Information Verification for User Authentication”, IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, vol. 8, No. 5, Sep. 2000, pp. 585-596. |
| Lobo, Jude, “MySAP.com Enterprise Portal Cookbook,” SAP Technical Delivery, Feb. 2002, vol. 1, pp. 1-13. |
| Loshin, Intelligent Enterprise: Better Insight for Business Decisions, “Value-Added Data: Merge Ahead”, Feb. 9, 2000, vol. 3, No. 3, 5 pages. |
| Manilla, http://www.manilla.com/how-it-works/ printed Feb. 5, 2014 in 1 page. |
| McNamara, Paul, “Start-up's pitch: The Envelope, please,” Network World, Apr. 28, 1997, vol. 14, No. 17, p. 33. |
| Medick et al., “German Agency to Mine Facebook to Assess Creditworthiness”, Jun. 7, 2012, http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-credit-agency-plans-to-analyze-individual-facebook-pages-a-837539.html printed Nov. 22, 2013 in 2 pages. |
| MicroBilt, “PRBC Credit Reporting Agency—Payment Reporting Builds Credit,” http://www.microbilt.com/nontraditional-credit-report.aspx and corresponding “Sample Report,” retrieved from http://www.microbilt.com/pdfs/PRBC%20Sample%20Report%20(complete).pdf printed Nov. 21, 2013 in 8 pages. |
| Microfinance Africa, “Philippines: Microfinance Players to get Their Own Credit Info Bureau,” Apr. 5, 2011, http://microfinanceafrca.net/microfinance-around-the-world/philippines-microfinance-players-to-get-their-own-credit-info-bureau/ printed Nov. 22, 2013 in 2 pages. |
| Microsoft, “Expand the Reach of Your Business,” Microsoft Business Solutions, 2004, in 16 pages. |
| Miller, Joe, “NADA used-car prices go online”, Automotive News, Jun. 14, 1999, p. 36. |
| Mint.com, http://www.mint.com/how-it-works/ printed Feb. 5, 2013 in 2 pages. |
| Moore, John R., Jr. “Forecasting and Scheduling for Past-Model Replacement Parts” Management Science, Application Series, vol. 18, No. 4, Part 1, Dec. 1971, pp. B200-B213. |
| “Mosaic” (geodemography), available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic (geodemography), as last modified Jul. 13, 2012. pp. 4. |
| Mvelopes, http://www.mvelopes.com/ printed Feb. 5, 2014 in 2 pages. |
| MyReceipts, http://www.myreceipts.com/, printed Oct. 16, 2012 in 1 page. |
| MyReceipts—How it Works, http://www.myreceipts.com/howItWorks.do, printed Oct. 16, 2012 in 1 page. |
| “Name Availability Records”, Westlaw Database Directory, http://directoy.westlaw.com/scope/default.asp?db=NA-ALL&RS=W&VR=2.0 as printed Dec. 17, 2009, pp. 5. |
| Organizing Maniac's Blog—Online Receipts Provided by MyQuickReceipts.com, http://organizingmaniacs.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/online-receipts-provided-by-myquickreceipts-com/ dated Jan. 12, 2011 printed Oct. 16, 2012 in 3 pages. |
| Packer, A. H., “Simulation and Adaptive Forecasting an Applied to Inventory Control”, Operations Research, vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 660-679, Jul. 1965. |
| “Parse”, Definition from PC Magazine Encyclopedia, http://www/pcmag.com/encyclopedia—term—0,2542,t=parse&i=48862,00.asp as downloaded Mar. 5, 2012. |
| PersonalCapital.com, http://www.personalcapital.com/how-it-works printed Feb. 5, 2014 in 5 pages. |
| Peters, Peter-Paul, “A Spare Parts Configurator for the European Service Business” (Graduation Report); Honeywell, Industrial Service Logistic Center; Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 80 Pgs.; Mar. 2000. |
| Planet Receipt—Home, http://www.planetreceipt.com/home printed Oct. 16, 2012 in 1 page. |
| Planet Receipt—Solutions & Features, http://www.planetreceipt.com/solutions-features printed Oct. 16, 2012 in 2 pages. |
| Ponniah, Paulraj, “Data Warehousing Fundamentals: A Comprehensive Guide for It Professionals”, Wiley-Interscience Publication, pp. 257-289, 377-397, Aug. 3, 2001. |
| Porter, G. Zell, “An Economic Method for Evaluating Electronic Component Obsolescence Solutions”, Retrieved from the web at www.gidep.org/data/dmsms/library/zell.pdf, May 1998, pp. 1-9. |
| “PostX to Present at Internet Showcase”, PR Newswire, Apr. 28, 1997, pp. 2. |
| PostX, “PostX® Envelope and ActiveView”, http://web.archive.org/web/19970714203719/http://www.postx.com/priducts—fm.html, Jul. 14, 1997 (retrieved Nov. 7, 2013) in 2 pages. |
| “PremierGuide Announces Release 3.0 of Local Search Platform”, Business Wire, Mar. 4, 2004, Palo Alto, CA, p. 5574. |
| “Qualifying for Debt Settlement”, http://www.certifieddebt.com/debt/settlement-qualifications.shtml printed Jan. 9, 2013 in 2 pages. |
| Rahm, et al. “Data Cleaning: Problems and Current Approaches”, Bulletin of the IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on Data Engineering, Dec. 2000, vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 11. |
| Raman, et al., “Potter's Wheel: An Interactive Data Cleaning System”, Proceedings of the 27th VLDB Conference, Roma, Italy, 2001, pp. 10. |
| “Resolve Debt for Less: With Help from Freedom Financial” http://www.debtsettlementusa.com/ printed Jan. 9, 2013 in 6 pages |
| Roos, Gina, “Web-Based Service Helps OEMs Cure Parts Obsolescence Blues”, Electronic Engineering Times, p. 86, Oct. 8, 2001, Dialog 09056737 78968668. |
| Santarini, Michael, “Forecasts the Probable Obsolescence of Components—Module Predicts Parts Life”, Electronic Engineering Times, Jan. 11, 1999, p. 48(1), Dialog 0607160353548246. |
| SAS, “SAS® Information Delivery Portal”, Fact Sheet, 2008, in 4 pages. |
| Sawyers, Arlena, “NADA to Offer Residual Guide”, Automotive News, May 22, 2000, p. 3. |
| Sax, Michael M., Data Collection and Privacy Protection: An International Perspective, Presentation: Managing Online Risk and Liability Conference, Aug. 31, 1999, pp. 58. |
| Schneier, B. “Applied Cryptography”, John Wiley & Sons, Second Edition, pp. 435-447, 1996. |
| “Settling Your Debts—Part 1 in Our Debt Settlement Series”, http://www.creditinfocenter.com/debt/settle—debts.shtml printed Jan. 9, 2013 in 6 pages. |
| ShoeBoxed, https://www.shoeboxed.com/sbx-home/ printed Oct. 16, 2012 in 4 pages. |
| Smith, Richard M., “The Web Bug FAQ”, Nov. 11, 1999, Version 1.0, pp. 4. |
| Smith, Wendell R., “Product Differentiation and Market Segmentation as Alternative Marketing Strategies”, The Journal of Marketing, The American Marketing Association, Brattleboro, Vermont, Jul. 1956, vol. XXI, pp. 3-8. |
| Stallings, W. “Cryptography and Network Security Principles and Practice”, Prentice Hall, Second Edition, pp. 295, 297, Jul. 15, 1998. |
| Stone, “Linear Expenditure Systems and Demand Analysis: An Application to the Pattern of British Demand”, The Economic Journal: The Journal of The Royal Economic Society, Sep. 1954, pp. 511-527, vol. LXIV, Macmillan & Co., London. |
| Sullivan, Laurie, “Obsolete-Parts Program Thriving”, EBN, Manhasset, Issue 1296, p. 26, Jan. 2002, ProQuest 10 101195090. |
| Tao, Lixin, “Shifting Paradigms with the Application Service Provider Model”; Concordia University, IEEE, Oct. 2001, Canada. |
| Various Posts from the http://www.2p.wrox.com Forums: http://web.archive.org/web/2005045221950/http://p2p.wrox.com/topic.asp?TOPIC—ID=6513 , dated Nov. 15, 2003-Oct. 7, 2004. |
| “WashingtonPost.com and Cars.com launch comprehensive automotive web site for the Washington area”, PR Newswire, Oct. 22, 1998. |
| Web Page posted at: http://web.archive.org/web20040805124909/http://www.oracle.com/technology/sample—codete/tech/pl—sql/htdocs/x/Case/start.htm, pp. 1 and 4 of the webpages posted on Jan. 7, 2003. |
| Web Pages printed Nov. 2, 2004 of Internet Draft entitled “Tunneling SSL Through a WWW Proxy”, Luotonen, Ari, Netscape Communications Corporation (Dec. 14, 1995); 4 pages, http://muffin.doit.org/docs/rfc/tunneling.sub.--ssl.html. |
| Webpage printed out from http://www.jpmorgan.com/cm/ContentServer?c=TS—Content&pagename=jpmorgan%20Fts%2FTS—Content %2FGeneral&cid=1139403950394 on Mar. 20, 2008, Feb. 13, 2006, New York, NY. |
| Webpage printed out from http://www.fairisaac.com/NR/rdonlyres/AC4C2F79-4160-4E44-B0CB-5C899004879A/0/ScoreNetnetworkBR.pdf on Mar. 4, 2008. |
| Webster, Lee R., “Failure Rates & Life Cycle Costs”, Consulting-Specifying Engineer; 23, 4; ABI/INFORM Global, Apr. 1998, p. 42. |
| Williams, Mark, “Results of the 1998 NASFAA Salary Survey”, News from NASFAA, 1998. |
| Working, Holbrook, “Statistical Laws of Family Expenditure”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, pp. 43-56, vol. 38, American Statistical Association, Washington, D.C., Mar. 1943. |
| Yodlee | Money Center, https://yodleemoneycenter.com/ printed Feb. 5, 2014 in 2 pages. |
| You Need a Budget, http://www.youneedabudget.com/features printed Feb. 5, 2014 in 3 pages. |
| Declaration of Paul Clark, DSc. for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,504,628 (Symantec Corporation, Petitioner), dated Jan. 15, 2014 in 76 pages. |
| Exhibit D to Joint Claim Construction Statement, filed in Epsilon Data Management, LLC, No. 2:12-cv-00511-JRG (E.D. Tex.) (combined for pretrial purposes with RPost Holdings. Inc., et al. v. Experian Marketing Solutions. Inc., No. 2:12-cv-00513-JRG (E.D. Tex.)) Filed Jan. 14, 2014 in 9 pages. |
| First Amended Complaint in Civil Action No. 2:12-cv-511-JRG (Rpost Holdings, Inc. and Rpost Communications Limited V. Constant Contact, Inc.; et al.) filed Feb. 11, 2013 in 14 pages. |
| First Amended Complaint in Civil Action No. 2:12-cv-511-JRG (Rpost Holdings, Inc. and Rpost Communications Limited V. Epsilon Data Management, LLC.) filed Sep. 13, 2013 in 9 pages. |
| First Amended Complaint in Civil Action No. 2:12-cv-513-JRG (Rpost Holdings, Inc. and Rpost Communications Limited V. Experian Marketing Solutions, Inc.) filed Aug. 30, 2013 in 9 pages. |
| Petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review in U.S. Pat. No. 8,161,104 (Experian Marketing Solutions, Inc., Epsilon Data Management, LLC, and Constant Contact, Inc., v. Rpost Communications Limited) dated Jan. 29, 2014 in 90 pages. |
| Source Code Appendix attached to U.S. Appl. No. 08/845,722 by Venkatraman et al., Exhibit A, Part 1 & 2, pp. 32. |
| Chiba et al., “Mobility Management Schemes for Heterogeneity Support in Next Generation Wireless Networks”, 3rd EuroNGI Conference on, 2007, pp. 143-150. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion in PCT Application No. PCT/US07/76152, dated Mar. 20, 2009. |
| Official Communication in Australian Patent Application No. 2012281182, dated Jul. 8, 2014. |
| Official Communication in Australian Patent Application No. 2012281182, dated May 19, 2015. |
| Official Communication in Chinese Patent Application No. 201280041782.2, dated Mar. 4, 2016. |
| Official Communication in European Patent Application No. 12811546.6, dated Nov. 25, 2014. |
| Official Communication in European Patent Application No. 12811546.6, dated Sep. 18, 2015. |
| Official Communication in Russian Patent Application No. 2014101674/08, dated Dec. 15, 2014. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/046316, dated Sep. 28, 2012. |
| International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/046316, dated Jan. 14, 2014. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US09/60393, dated Dec. 23, 2009. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US09/37565, dated May 12, 2009. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2010/034434, dated Jun. 23, 2010. |
| International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/US2010/034434, dated Feb. 4, 2014. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2013/052342, dated Nov. 21, 2013. |
| International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/US2013/052342, dated Feb. 5, 2015. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61910892 | Dec 2013 | US |
