System and method for a card payment program providing mutual benefits to card issuers and cardholders based on financial performance

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 7086586
  • Patent Number
    7,086,586
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, May 26, 2004
    20 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, August 8, 2006
    17 years ago
Abstract
The present invention comprises an apparatus and method for a card payment instrument providing that a share of program profits above a pre-designated level is returned to participating consumers at pre-designated intervals such as annually. Customers respond to an offer to participate in the mutual benefit program. After admission to the program, the card issuer tracks the performance according to the desired financial metric for the participating cardholders. At certain intervals, such as yearly, the card issuer reports out the financial performance for the period. If the financial performance exceeded the pre-designated threshold performance, then returns are distributed to participating cardholders according to a share methodology. The share methodology can provide that returns are allocated among participating cardholders according to various criteria, such as based on spending volume, finance charges, and so forth.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to a system and method for providing a payment instrument in which user-consumers of the payment card product receive returns at various intervals should the program exceed certain pre-disclosed financial performance metrics.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

It is increasingly common for consumers and small businesses to use payment card products such as charge cards, credit cards, debit cards, pre-paid cards, bankcards and stored value cards rather than using cash or checks. Consumers do this because it is more convenient than using cash or checks, offers greater payment flexibility (such as revolving credit payments at low annual percentage rates, the ability to have a deposit account automatically swept at the end of the month for a full or partial payment, etc.) and because card payment products are available so widely—giving consumers many opportunities to switch to a new payment account and making it easy to open a new account, transfer a balance from an existing account and begin usage immediately.


Marketing to offer such payment account products is increasingly prevalent in our society today. Competition to successfully sell such products is fierce. The card payment industry currently offers more than 4 billion such offers each year through direct mail to U.S. households (source: BAI Global/Mail Monitor, CSFB estimates). Industry experts estimate that payment card marketers utilize more than 55 billion Internet advertising “impressions” each year, more than 2 billion telemarketing telephone calls, and spend millions of dollars to promote card payments through other channels such as in-person sales, bundling with other financial products, and on-site event marketing.


The intense marketing focuses on a variety of messages about why the particular card payment product is more beneficial for users than other card products, such as:

    • Low introductory annual percentage rate (for first 1–24 months of product usage)
    • Low “go-to” loan rates following any introductory period
    • Account information access tools that are available such as via the Internet and telephone
    • Card face designs and artwork
    • Reward programs linked to the payment cards that reward card usage with travel awards, merchandise, cash back, or other enticements


As a result of the vast amount of information contained in the many offers that are received, consumers and small business decision makers are left unsure about which card payment products represent a sound choice for them based on their future spending levels, average sales transaction amount, revolving credit management, servicing options, lifestyle interests, and other personal parameters.


Also, consumers are often wary of the various financial institution practices related to such products, such as policies that dictate when accounts can be “re-priced” with a new annual percentage rate or when terms such as late fees and other penalty charges can be changed. Some consumers feel that the growing revenues reported by publicly-traded, large financial institutions are due to onerous lending and account offering terms aggressively pursued by these institutions, and/or overlay aggressive account management practices such as the imposition of late fees. Some consumers feel large financial institutions manage such programs to create a level of profitability for the institution that is “unfair” or takes more than a perceived reasonable share of consumer and merchant revenues derived from these card payment products.


There is a need for a system and method that assists institutions that offer such card payment products to stand out among the marketing clutter of the industry and allows consumers to evaluate card payment offers and gain assurances that the card payment provider is offering a fair deal. The customers should receive quality card payment products and high-level associated service at a reasonable cost, with the card payment product issuer receiving a reasonable, but not excessive, return.


It is known in the prior art that mutual insurance companies owned by their policyholders can provide funds back to policyholders at specific time periods after the company's operating, marketing, overhead and other costs and expenses are met. Similarly, other insurance companies (e.g., USAA) provide rebates to car insurance policyholders or home insurance policyholders on an annual basis. Also, U.S. Pat. No. 5,025,372 to Burton, et. al., and assigned to Meridian Enterprises, discloses providing rewards to a cardholder based on that cardholder achieving the cardholder's assigned level of performance. However, the prior art does not have card payment account product (e.g., credit card accounts) systems that manage to designated profit levels (or other aggregate financial targets) and provide returns to participating cardholders.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Accordingly, it is one object of the present invention to overcome one or more of the aforementioned and other limitations of existing systems and methods for the use of card payment instruments.


What is desired is a system and method for providing a card payment or payment account that provides returns to participating cardholders or accountholders when profits to the issuing institution exceed pre-designated levels at pre-designated intervals while the cardholder and financial institution maintain the payment product relationship so that cardholders can share in the financial benefits of operating such a program.


It is another object of the invention to provide such a system and method which allows the issuing institution to promote this benefit to prospective and current cardholders as a way to differentiate the issuing institution's payment card product from the myriad of other card payment account products on the market.


It is another object of the invention to provide such a system and method whereby such a return program encourages cardholders to remain loyal to the issuing institution by maintaining accounts and opening new accounts with the institution.


It is another object of the invention to provide such a system and method to consumers whereby such a program encourages cardholders to remain loyal to the payment account product by encouraging usage of the card payment account for the purchase of goods and services.


It is another object of the invention to provide such a system and method where the payment account issuer and a third-party company that participates in the program by offering the payment card product to its customers share some of the costs associated with the issuance of the payment product and/or the return above a certain level of profitability for the benefit of both institutions.


It is another object of the invention to provide such as system and method to extract profitability data from core, existing operating systems at the financial institution and derive profitability information for the group of participating accounts so that the rebate potential can be tracked and administered.


To achieve these and other objects of the present invention, and in accordance with the purpose of the invention, as embodied and broadly described, an embodiment of the present invention comprises an apparatus and method for a card payment instrument providing that a share of program profits above a pre-designated level is returned to participating consumers at pre-designated intervals such as annually.


According to one embodiment of the invention, messages in various advertising and direct prospective customer communications can highlight that fact that the issuer organization will only retain profits from the program up to a certain level for a specific time period. For example, the program profitability threshold could be placed at a return on outstanding loan dollars of 2.50%. Instead of (or in addition to) a threshold based on % of return on outstanding loans, other profitability metrics can be used such as pre-tax income, pre-tax and pre-marketing cost income, after-tax income, % of return on investment, % of return on equity, total finance charge collected, total fees collected, industry averages of any of the aforementioned, dollars of profit per cardholder, dollars of profit per account, and others. The threshold could be established so that the institution would return profits to account holders once the program exceeds the then-average profitability for other card payment programs (e.g., competing programs) in the marketplace. The profitability threshold could be established in other manners. Other aggregate financial metrics besides profitability could readily be employed.


According to one embodiment of the invention, profitability above the threshold would be distributed to cardholder program participants based on an established share methodology. The share methodology would determine how participants remain eligible and how much of the share they receive based on various account parameters (e.g., account usage).


Whatever profitability metric is selected as the basis for the threshold, it can be measured according to various time periods, such as an annual time period, semi-annual time period, a “cumulative since the program's inception” period, or other timeframe. According to one approach, the system of the present invention tracks the profit metric by accessing the financial institution's general accounting and financial reporting systems for all programs to create specialized reporting on profit and loss accounting entries related to these participating payment accounts as a group. Amounts above the threshold may be shared evenly with all participating account holders or cab be based on some other disclosed formula or share methodology (e.g., based on total dollars spent using the card during the period, minimal dollar amounts spent at merchants using the payment product, collected finance charge, annual fees, or some other share metric).


According to some embodiments of the invention, the computed return can be applied as a credit to the card payment account; provided in check format attached to the account statement or some other written communication from the financial institution; provided in check format separately in another form of communication to the accountholder; via automated clearing house (ACH) deposit into a pre-designated deposit or other account held by the accountholder; via electronic funds transfer (EFT) or money order or other form of direct payment.


According to yet another embodiment of the invention, the return is submitted in the form of a favorable change in account terms. For example, return can be provided as a reduction in annual percentage rate charged for the credit payment account; in the form of a reduction in an annual fee or other fees; in the form of enhanced or increased rewards, reward points or other non-financial currency from a frequency or loyalty reward program that is linked to the account; or in the form of spending or investing the funds on behalf of the consumer or other form of compensation.


The invention has many potential benefits and advantages. For example, the invention benefits the card issuing institution that is trying to attract new accountholders and retain existing ones. The prospective customer/existing cardholder can consider this “mutual benefit” when weighing the many options for payment instruments and is able to better understand the financial dynamics of this payment product offering due to the candid communication about profits versus other offerings in the market that do not address such subjects.


Additionally, on an ongoing basis, the financial institution can offer program options to participating cardholders to reduce program administration costs that, should many cardholders participate, will reduce program expense and allow for greater return to cardholders, result in lower borrowing rates or other benefits. Examples of such options include the promotion of low-cost servicing channel access such as Internet or email only (rather than contacting the financial institution for assistance by telephone), setting up auto-pay functionality so that the consumer's core deposit account is electronically accessed by the issuer for account payment, or an agreement not to request emergency rush replacement of lost of stolen cards or other account materials.


This new payment account and system (which herein may be referred as the Cardholder's Card™ or a “mutual benefit” product) is advantageous in a number of respects. It is beneficial to card payment issuers because it encourages the creation of new accounts, usage of existing accounts, and maintenance of existing accounts. It is beneficial to consumers and small businesses and other account holders because all participants will benefit if the program is successful (the product is used frequently, participants make payments on time) from a financial standpoint. At the most basic level, the system provides a way for financial institutions to communicate that its customers are being treated fairly in this commercial arrangement. The Cardholder's Card™ can also allow for partnerships between the issuing financial institution and other concerns that will want to offer such a product to their members or customers. This offering can be branded with both the name of the issuing financial institution and its partner.


The accompanying drawings are included to provide a further understanding of the invention and are incorporated in and constitute part of this specification, illustrate several embodiments of the invention and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention. It will become apparent from the drawings and detailed description that other objects, advantages and benefits of the invention also exist.


Additional features and advantages of the invention will be set forth in the description that follows, and in part will be apparent from that description, or may be learned by practice of the invention. The objectives and other advantages of the invention will be realized and attained by the system and methods, particularly pointed out in the written description and claims hereof as well as the appended drawings.





BRIEF DESCRPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The purpose and advantages of the present invention will be apparent to those of skill in the art from the following detailed description in conjunction with the appended drawings in which like reference characters are used to indicate like elements, and in which:



FIG. 1 is a flow chart according to an embodiment of the invention illustrating the process by which a card payment issuer can manage a portfolio of participating card payment accounts and distribute shares to participating cardholders when the portfolio performance exceeds pre-designate criteria.



FIG. 2 is a flow chart according to an embodiment of the invention illustrating the relationship between the account holder, the issuing financial institution, merchants that accept the card payment instruments for payment, and a partner.



FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating a system according to an embodiment of the invention for a card payment issuer to manage a portfolio of participating card payment accounts and distribute shares to participating cardholders when the portfolio performance exceeds pre-designate criteria.



FIG. 4 is a flow chart of a method according to an embodiment of the invention for tracking financial performance of a portfolio of participating accountholders in order to determine shares when performance exceeds a criteria.



FIG. 5 is a block diagram of the various financial performance criteria which cam be employed in evaluating portfolio performance according to an embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 6 is a block diagram according to an embodiment of the invention of the various cardholder parameters which can be considered in determining the shares issued to participating accountholders.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

As discussed in the Summary of the Invention, the present invention is directed to a system and method for a payment instrument that is associated with a cardholder consumer's account, which that consumer's account is one of many accounts in a portfolio of similar accounts, and whereby returns are issued or applied once pre-designated profitability metrics for the entire portfolio are satisfied.



FIG. 1 is a flow chart according to an embodiment of the invention illustrating the process by which a card payment issuer can process a portfolio of participating card payment accounts and distribute shares to participating cardholders when the portfolio performance exceeds pre-designated financial criteria. The card payment accounts could be for any of a variety of card payment products, such as charge cards, credit cards, debit cards, pre-paid cards, bankcards, and stored value cards. Preferably, the portfolio of participating accounts are credit card accounts.


At 100, a program offer is made to an existing accountholder or a prospective accountholder. The program offer may be made in a variety of manners, such as by direct mail, e-mail, a web page, unsolicited telephone call, an overture during a customer service call, handouts/flyers, print advertising, billboards, and so forth.


At 105, the offer communication preferably provides a product overview, an explanation that the offer relates to a managed profits product, and that the goal is a low cost structure to facilitate the profits goal and returns to participants. Preferably, the program offer includes information describing the “mutual benefit” nature of the card payment account offer that indicates that the card issuer will manage the portfolio to achieve pre-designated financial performance criteria, and if those criteria are met or exceeded, a share of returns will be provided to eligible participating cardholders. The offer may identify the financial performance criteria, as well as the interval(s) over which the performance will be measured. According to one embodiment, the offer may also set forth the so-called “share criteria” regarding the methodology for how returned shares will be determined/allocated. According to one embodiment, the offer may also set forth the manner in which shares are provided, such as (and discussed in more detail below) credits to the participating account, credits to another account, improved account terms, reward points, and so forth.


At 110, the customer (existing accountholder or prospective accountholder) submits an application for the mutual benefit product. The customer may make the application in any suitable manner, such as over the Internet (e.g., using a personal computer, personal digital assistant, or other computing device), over the telephone by submitting data to a human agent, over the telephone by submitting data to a machine agent (e.g., a voice response unit [VRU] or a voice recognition device), through the mail system by mailing in an application, and so forth.


At 115, the application for the mutual benefit product is processed. The application may be processed based on data submitted by the applicant and/or data acquired from a credit bureau. The application may be processed automatically without any human intervention, semi-automatically with limited human involvement, or with substantial human involvement. Preferably, the application processing is carried out by an application processor server component which can access remote credit bureau databases.


At 120, if the application is approved, the mutual benefit account is fulfilled. An account number, expiration date, credit limit (if applicable), account terms, and other account information may be established. At 125, a cardholder database is updated to reflect the new account information. In the case of an applicant who was not an existing accountholder, the database is updated with the typical account information for a new cardholder, as well as information which designates the account as participating in the mutual benefit program. In the case of an existing accountholder applicant, the existing account data may be updated with information which designates the account as a mutual benefit program participant. According to one embodiment of the invention, the card issuer may maintain “regular” accounts for those not participating in the mutual benefit program (e.g., because they did not choose to apply or because they were not given an offer to participate), as well as mutual benefit accounts. The cardholder database may maintain both types of accounts, and can identify the latter through an additional field, flag, or other suitable means for identifying participants.


According to one variation of the invention, mutual benefit program participants may be grouped as a single portfolio. In that scenario, the designated financial performance criteria is based on the performance of that portfolio of participating accounts.


According to another variation of the invention, mutual benefit program participants may be assigned to various sub-portfolios (groups). These assignments may be based on an applicant's selection or request to participate in a particular group. These assignments may be based on the rules imposed by the card issuer for each group. Different groups may have different financial performance criteria and/or different financial performance thresholds.


For example, a card issuer may offer five different groups, each having the same financial criteria based on pre-tax income per account, but each group having a different threshold. The level 1 group may have a threshold of $X/account of pre-tax income; the level 2 group may have a threshold of $X-5/account of pre-tax income; the level 3 group may have a threshold of $X-10/account of pre-tax income, and so forth.


The generalized concept is that accountholders can be segregated into different groups of participating accounts, each having their own criteria and/or threshold for returns. Moreover, at the end of the return interval, accountholders can be moved “up” or “down” to different groups depending on their account-level performance. For example, if an accountholder is a participant in a level 1 group directed to the highest level of performance, but that accountholder was not a high-level performer during the interval, he/she may be removed from the level 1 group and placed in another group or even expelled from the mutual benefit program entirely. The benefit to the card issuer, as well as the program participants, is that this can prevent low performers from undermining the overall performance of a group.


Accountholders may be removed from particular groups based on a variety of disqualifying behaviors. For example, the card issuer may disqualify an accountholder based on negative behaviors such as late payment problems, underspending, periods of inactivity, dramatic changes in credit scoring, and so forth.


Groups may also be based on different categories of financial criteria. For example, one group may be based on return on a % return on outstanding loans criteria, a second based on pre-tax income, a third based on account cost, and so forth. As indicated above, accountholders may be given the option to select which group they wish to participate in. The card issuer, of course, may have guidelines that govern which groups a given accountholder is eligible for.


At 130, the card issuer tracks financial metric performance. The card issuer may have a core financial systems operation that tracks basic financial parameters, such as revenue (various sources, such as interest income, fee income, merchant transaction income, outstanding balance, and so forth), costs (operating costs, marketing costs, overhead, and so forth), and profits. For example, each month, various inputs are collected from the points within the financial institution that track purchases, sales volumes, finance charge collected, account fees, revenue items, expenses, costs and other elements which impact the program. According to the invention, the returns provided to participating cardholders are based on a financial metric. Preferably, the financial metric is based on profitability. Whatever is selected as the financial metric, the core financial systems of the card issuer are employed at 130 to track the overall performance related to this financial metric.


At 135, the card issuer links the financial performance to participating mutual benefit accounts. In other words, based on aggregate financial performance parameters provided by core financial systems, at 135 the subsidiary financial performance parameters associated with the mutual benefit accounts are derived. This may be accomplish in various fashions. For example, revenue may be computed by reducing the aggregate revenue figures to remove non-participating accounts. Costs may be computed in the same manner, although certain cost figures (e.g., overhead) which are not amenable to allocation on an account-specific basis, may be allocated pro rata or another appropriate fashion. Based on 135, the card issuer generates a participating account portfolio performance measure for the selected financial metric. A variety of financial metrics are discussed below, but just for example, if the metric is % return on loans, the output of 135 might be 3.2% annualized.


If the mutual benefit program is implemented as a series of groups with different financial performance metrics, 130 and 135 are implemented to track the performance for each of these different metrics.


At 140, the card issuer may provide interim reports to the participating cardholders regarding the financial metric performance. Just by way of example, if the metric is % return on outstanding loans, the threshold is 2.5%, and the interim performance is 3.2% annualized, the card issuer may issue communications that the portfolio is on track to exceed the goal. The card issuer may issue these communications in statement messages, statement inserts, separate mailings, e-mails, website content, phone calls, on-hold messages, customer service representative (CSR) updates while the customer is on the phone, cardholder newsletters, or other suitable fashions. The interim reports are beneficial because they provide preliminary feedback to participants on the success of the program. If performance is behind the target, for example, due to higher costs, the communications may encourage the participants to modify their account behavior to improve performance (e.g., by reducing costs).


At 145, the card issuer computes the financial performance for the return period. The period could be any suitable pre-designated interval, such as annually, semi-annually, bi-annually, quarterly, and so forth. The computed financial performance reflects the actual performance of the portfolio for that period and reflects whether the target financial performance was achieved.


At 150, the card issuer compares the actual performance against the goal or threshold. If the goal was not achieved/exceeded, at 155 the card issuer reports out that there will be no share returns for the period. If the goal was achieved/exceeded, at 160 the card issuer computes a return for each participant based on the share methodology. The share methodology reflects how the return is to be allocated among participants. The share methodology can be very simple, such as each participant getting a fixed return amount (e.g., $25.00, 1000 reward points, a reduction/elimination of annual fees, a reduction in interest rate, an even share of the excess, or other return).


The share methodology can be more complex so that different participants get different returns. For example, a net return value may be computed by the card issuer (e.g., $5,000,000 value). That net return value may then be allocated across the participants based on (1) account behavior parameters and/or (2) qualifying criteria. Account behavior parameters (discussed further for FIG. 6) may relate to the volume of account activity (e.g., total charge volume and/or total interest paid). Thus, participants with higher volume accounts may receive proportionately higher share returns. Qualifying criteria related to minimum account behaviors to qualify for a return. For example, the card issuer may provide that only participants with a minimum of $25,000 net volume for the period qualify for a return.


Moreover, as discussed above, the invention is amenable to assigning cardholders to various different groups (each considered to be a portfolio), each group having its own financial performance metric and/or financial performance threshold. Thus, the aforementioned steps for tracking performance and determining whether a return is available due to satisfaction of the financial metric threshold may be carried out for each of the various groups.


Based on the share methodology, the returns are distributed at 165. The returns may be distributed in any suitable fashion, such as by credits to the participating account, credits to different accounts, a favorable change in account terms, reward points, paper check, and so forth. The cardholder may be given the option of how the return is to be provided, such that some accountholders may wish to receive an account credit, while others receive a credit to a different account, while others get a reduction in interest rate, and so forth.


The consumer's selection of how the return is to be provided may be made available when the consumer first applies to participate the in the mutual benefit program. For example, the option could be given as a radio button to select or box to check when applying over the Internet. Alternatively, the consumer's selection may be provided at the end of the computing interval. For example, the financial institution could give each consumer the option once it is determined that a return is available. This approach would allow consumers to revise how the benefit is to be provided from interval to interval.


As previously described, based on the individual performance for the interval, accountholders may be removed from their existing groups or removed from the program entirely. For example, poor individual performers may be moved to lower performance goal groups. Or they may be removed from the program entirely. On the other hand, excellent performers may be moved into higher performance goal groups.



FIG. 2 is a flow chart according to an embodiment of the invention illustrating the relationship between the account holder, the issuing financial institution, merchants that accept the card payment instruments for payment, and a partner. Payment card product issuer 200 issues the mutual benefit card payment accounts of the present invention. Preferably, issuer 200 is a financial institution. Many of issuer 200's processes are internal operations, although some operations may be carried out by third parties as appropriate. For example, credit bureau data may be maintained by a third party credit bureau. Account building/card fulfillment and transaction processing operations may be carried out by a third party account fulfillment/card processor. Generally, card issuer 200 interfaces with each account holder 220 for various operations, such as for receiving applications 202, card fulfillment 204, billing statements 206, payments 212, and account servicing 214. For participants in the mutual benefit card payment account of the invention, the issuer 200 issues interim and final reports 208 regarding financial performance of the portfolio, as well as share returns 210.


As described above, issuer 200 will access a core financial accounting system 245 to derive the performance of the portfolio. Both issuer 200 and core financial system 245 may interface with a data extractor module 250 which computes, extracts, or otherwise derives the performance of the portfolio of accounts from the aggregate account data. Core financial accounting system 245 may include one or more networked computers which can access financial data inputs in order to track revenue, costs, profits, and/or other financial performance parameters. The data extractor module 250 can be a process implemented within the core financial accounting system 245, or it may be implemented as a separate process on a stand-alone computer.


Issuer 200 may interface with a card association/interchange 235 (e.g., VISA™, MasterCard™; and/or American Express™ and Discover™ who are now offering access to their platforms by other institutions) in order to process transactions for the card payment accounts. Issuer 200 may also interface with a partner 250, which may be a co-brand entity, partner, or other financial institution, which sponsors the card payment instruments jointly with the card issuer. Partner 250 may market the product to its existing customers, including potentially marketing the product with the name and mark of partner 250. According to one embodiment, the partner and the card issuer share the costs of mutual benefit program. For example, both the partner and card issuer can contribute to the share returns provided to the participants. According to another embodiment, the share returns are issued as value redeemable with the partner, such as points (e.g., frequent flyer miles, rental miles, etc.) or other value that can be used against the partner's goods or services.


Accountholder 220 interfaces with merchants 225 to make payments for goods or services using the card payment instrument. The payments can be made as point-of-sale (POS) transactions, transactions over the Internet, the phone, and so forth. Merchants 225 make transaction requests which are provided to a merchant acquirer/processor 230, which may forward them through an card association/interchange 235, which in turn may forward them on to the issuer 200 for approval/denial. Results from merchant transaction requests are returned back to the merchants 225 so that sales can be completed. The card association/interchange 235, of course, may interface with other financial institutions 240.



FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating a system according to an embodiment of the invention for a card payment issuer to manage a portfolio of participating card payment accounts and distribute shares to participating cardholders when the portfolio performance exceeds pre-designate criteria for the selected financial performance metric. At 305, an offer generator module 305 of the card issuer issues offers for the mutual benefit account over multiple channels to existing cardholders or prospective cardholders 310. The multiple channels may include offers in statements for existing cardholders, direct mailings, Internet web page offers, e-mail offers, phone solicitations, and so forth. Applications are submitted to application processor system 315, which may access one or more credit bureau databases 320 and one or more decisioning engines 325 to arrive at a decision. If the application is approved, an account fulfillment system 330 establishes the new mutual benefit account or updates the information for an existing account to reflect the change in status. The fulfillment is reflected in entries made or changes made to account database 335.


Card transaction processor 340 processes transactions against the accounts, which may include charge transactions, payments, and so forth. Processor 340 could be an operation that is internal to the card issuer or it could be an external operation carried out by an agent. The account database 335 is updated based on the transactions.


Core financial accounting system 345 monitors transactions, fees (both annual-type fees and merchant transaction fees), payments, costs, and the like in order to track financial performance for the issuer. Mutual benefit program data extractor 350 interfaces with (or can be implemented within as a sub-process) core financial accounting system 345 in order to compute, extract, or otherwise derive the performance of the portfolio of mutual benefit accounts according to the pre-designated financial metric. Core financial system 345 and/or data extractor 350 may be implemented as one or more computers in a networked system.


Share methodology processor 355 accepts the portfolio performance data and applies a pre-designated share methodology in order to allocate share returns when measured financial performance satisfies or exceeds the threshold. When the threshold is satisfied or exceeded, return issuer system 365 issues the share returns to participating accountholders according to the share methodology. As described previously, the share methodology may set minimum account behavior benchmarks to qualify for a return, and/or may allocate the aggregate determined return based on account behavior parameters. The returns can be issued to participants over various channels as described previously, such as via electronic credits to the accounts, electronic transfers to other accounts, electronic awards of points, checks issued with account statements or by separate mailings, and so forth.


Financial performance report generator 360 may issue interim and final reports over various channels as previously described.



FIG. 4 is a flow chart of a method according to an embodiment of the invention for tracking financial performance of a portfolio of participating accountholders in order to determine shares when performance exceeds a threshold. FIG. 4 illustrates just one approach for determining the performance of participating accounts from the aggregate financial performance for the card issuer. Other approaches could easily be taken without departing the spirit and scope of the present invention. At 405, the revenue for all accounts is determined. At 410 the costs for all accounts is determined. At 415, a net profit for all accounts is determined. At 420, the portion of revenue associated with participating accounts is determined. At 425, the portion of costs for participating accounts is determined. At 430, a net profit for participating accounts is determined. Interim reports may be issued. At 435, the determined net profit for the participating accounts is compared to a threshold.


As described previously, the threshold can be established in a variety of fashions. For example, it may be a fixed threshold, such as X % profit, $XX total profit, $XX profit/account, $XX profit/cardholder, and so forth. Or it may be a relative threshold, such as a ratio to (or delta over) some performance benchmark, such as the performance of the issuer's entire portfolio of card accounts, the performance of the issuer's non-participating portfolio, the performance of other issuers in the industry, and so forth.


At 440, the share methodology is applied such that an aggregate return is allocated across the participating accountholders. The aggregate return may be determined based on the level of performance above the threshold. For example, the aggregate return may be the total profit above the threshold. Alternatively, the aggregate return can be determined in other fashions. For example, it could be a fixed amount, such as $5,000,000 to be distributed regardless of how much the threshold is exceeded. The aggregate return could be computed based on an incentive formula. For example, the incentive formula could provide that some portion of the excess is distributed. For example, the formula could provide that 50% of all profits above a profits threshold are distributed. Other approaches for computing the aggregate return could be employed without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention.


At 445, the returns are issued based on the share methodology.



FIG. 5 is a block diagram of the various financial performance criteria which can be employed in evaluating portfolio performance according to an embodiment of the invention. FIG. 5 is merely illustrative, and a variety of other financial performance criteria could easily be employed without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Exemplary criteria include return on loans (e.g., % return on outstanding loans) 505, pre-tax income 510, pre-marketing cost income 515, after-tax income 520, return on investment 525, return on equity 530, finance charge collected 535, fees collected 540, ratio to entire portfolio 545, ratio to industry average 550, account cost 555, dollars profit per cardholder or dollars profit per account 560. Other financial performance metrics could be employed. It is understood that a plurality of the criteria in FIG. 5 can be combined so that multiple criteria are employed.



FIG. 6 is a block diagram according to an embodiment of the invention of the various cardholder parameters which can be considered in determining the shares issued to participating accountholders. FIG. 6 relates to the share methodology discussed above. The share methodology may include cardholder behavior parameters that determine how large the return share is for that cardholder. The share methodology may also include minimum qualifying parameters that must be satisfied to qualify for a share in the first instance. The share methodology may also include disqualifying parameters that may result in the cardholder being removed from the portfolio (or moved to a different portfolio). The cardholder behavior parameters considered may include spending volume 605, spending volume minimum (as a qualifying parameter) 610, total finance charge 615, finance charge minimum (as a qualifying parameter) 620, fees 625 (e.g., merchant fees paid on the account and/or annual fees paid), costs 630 (costs imposed on the card issuer by the account), and electronic payment 635 (as a qualifying parameter).


Electronic payment 635 may be a qualifying parameter tied to whether the cardholder has authorized the account to be automatically paid each month using a linked checking account, for example. Additionally, on an ongoing basis, the financial institution can offer program options to participating cardholders to reduce program administration costs that, so that if many cardholders participate will reduce program expense and allow for greater return to cardholders, result in lower borrowing rates or other benefits. Examples of such options include the promotion of low-cost servicing channel access such as Internet or email only (rather than contacting the financial institution for assistance by telephone), setting up auto-pay functionality so that the consumer's core deposit account is electronically accessed by the issuer for account payment, or an agreement not to request emergency rush replacement of lost of stolen cards or other account materials. Such “low cost options” can be considered by the share methodology either as a qualifying parameter, or can be used to enhance the return provided to accountholders who select those options.


Elements 640655 refer so so-called disqualifying parameters that can result in the accountholder being removed from his/her group and placed in another group, or removed from the mutual benefit program altogether. Late payments 640 may result in disqualification if the accountholder has been late a specified number of times. Underspending 645 may result in disqualification if the accountholders total spending on the card account has been unacceptably low. Inactive periods 650 may result in disqualification if there is one or more long periods of time without any account activity. Credit scoring changes 655 may result in disqualification if the accountholder's credit score significantly drops. Other parameters 660 could be considered for disqualification.


Other embodiments and uses of this invention will be apparent to those having ordinary skill in the art upon consideration of the specification and practice of the invention disclosed herein. The specification and examples given should be considered exemplary only, and it is contemplated that the appended claims will cover any other such embodiments or modifications as fall within the true scope of the invention.


Those of skill in the art should appreciate that the allocation of the elements in the various figures is exemplary and functional, the purpose here being to explain the present invention most clearly. The functions performed by said elements could be allocated differently, such that the elements could be combined or further divided depending on the requirements of specific implementation into hardware and or software. Additionally, the elements of the system need not to be co-located, but could reside at geographically distinct locations ad could interface using communications technologies well known in the art, such as direct-dial connections, hardware link, the Internet or various Internet protocol standards, satellite, microwave, cellular networks and so on.

Claims
  • 1. A computer-implemented method, comprising: establishing in a computer database a card payment account for an accountholder which provides returns to the accountholder based on a performance of a card issuer according to a pre-designated financial threshold;wherein said returns are provided based on a portfolio of like accounts demonstrating a performance meeting or exceeding a pre-designated financial threshold during a pre-designated interval;tracking performance of the portfolio during the interval;computing the performance of the portfolio for the interval;comparing the performance of the portfolio during the interval to the pre-designated financial threshold and computing a net return if the threshold is met or exceeded;computing a share of the net return for each participating accountholder based on a pre-designated formula; andproviding the share to each participating accountholder.
  • 2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising the step of establishing in said computer database a plurality of portfolios of cardholders, the plurality of portfolios having different financial thresholds or different financial metrics.
  • 3. The computer-implemented method of claim 2, further comprising the step of computing the performance of an individual cardholder and disqualifying the cardholder from the cardholder's portfolio based on a disqualifying parameter.
  • 4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the financial threshold is based on the profitability to the card issuer of the portfolio.
  • 5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said card payment account comprises a credit card account, a stored value card account, a debit card account, a multi-featured credit-on-debit account, a charge account, or a pre-paid account.
  • 6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said card payment account is a credit card account.
  • 7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein a computed share is provided as a credit to the account of a participating accountholder.
  • 8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein a computed share is provided as a deposit to a separate account of a participating accountholder.
  • 9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein a computed share is provided by issuing a paper check to a participating accountholder.
  • 10. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein a computed share is provided by issuing revised account terms more favorable to the accountholder.
  • 11. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein a computed share is provided as reward points.
  • 12. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: issuing one or more interim reports regarding the performance of the portfolio during the interval to the participating accountholders.
  • 13. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: issuing card payment account statements to participating cardholders that include information of account activity and information of portfolio performance.
  • 14. The computer-implemented method of claim 13, wherein the card payment account statements further include information of a projected net return or a projected share return.
  • 15. A system for monitoring card account portfolio performance and issuing performance-based returns, comprising: an account database storing data of a portfolio of card payment accounts which are eligible for a return based on the portfolio meeting a pre-designated financial threshold for a card issuer over a pre-designated interval;a card transaction processor for processing transactions against said card payment accounts;a financial accounting system for maintaining financial performance information for the card issuer including revenue, cost, and profit data;a data extractor module for deriving financial performance data for participating accountholders having eligible accounts and comparing derived financial performance data to said financial threshold;a share allocation module for allocating a net return based on results of the comparison across the participating accountholders based on a share formula; anda return issuer system for providing the allocated shares of the net return to the participating accountholders.
  • 16. The system of claim 15, wherein said account database stores data of a plurality of portfolios of card payment accounts, the plurality of portfolios having different financial metrics or different financial thresholds.
  • 17. The system of claim 16, wherein the share allocation module computes the performance of an individual cardholder and disqualifies the cardholder from the cardholder's portfolio based on a disqualifying parameter.
  • 18. The system of claim 15, wherein said financial threshold is based on the profitability of the portfolio to the card issuer.
  • 19. The system of claim 15, wherein the account database includes information of accountholders participating in the program making them eligible for a return as well as accountholders not participating in said program.
  • 20. The system of claim 15, wherein said card payment accounts are credit card accounts.
  • 21. The system of claim 15, wherein the allocated shares are provided as credits to the card payment accounts.
  • 22. The system of claim 15, wherein the allocated shares are provided as deposits to separate accounts of the accountholders.
  • 23. The system of claim 15, wherein the allocated shares are provided as checks issued to the accountholders.
  • 24. The system of claim 15, wherein the allocated shares are provided as revised account terms more favorable to the accountholders.
  • 25. The system of claim 15, wherein the allocated shares are provided as reward points.
  • 26. The system of claim 15, wherein the allocated shares are provided based on an accountholder selection, the accountholder selection including options for at least two or more of a credit to the card payment account, a deposit to a separate account, a paper check, revised account terms which are more favorable, and reward points.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application asserts priority to and fully incorporates by reference the prior application filed as 60/494,559, on Aug. 13, 2003, in the name of inventor Kevin Sullivan, entitled “Cardholder's Card”.

US Referenced Citations (410)
Number Name Date Kind
3634669 Soumas et al. Jan 1972 A
3946206 Darjany Mar 1976 A
4047033 Malmberg Sep 1977 A
4465206 Sorel et al. Aug 1984 A
4545838 Minkus Oct 1985 A
4582985 Lofberg Apr 1986 A
4594663 Nagata et al. Jun 1986 A
4614861 Pavlov et al. Sep 1986 A
4634845 Hale et al. Jan 1987 A
4642768 Roberts Feb 1987 A
4689478 Hale et al. Aug 1987 A
4700055 Kashkashian Oct 1987 A
4746787 Suto et al. May 1988 A
4750119 Cohen Jun 1988 A
4752676 Leonard et al. Jun 1988 A
4754418 Hara Jun 1988 A
4766293 Boston Aug 1988 A
4766539 Fox Aug 1988 A
4789928 Fujisaki Dec 1988 A
4822985 Boggan et al. Apr 1989 A
4831242 Englehardt May 1989 A
4831526 Luchs May 1989 A
4868376 Lessin et al. Sep 1989 A
4870259 Boggan et al. Sep 1989 A
4882675 Nichtberger Nov 1989 A
4897533 Lyszczarz Jan 1990 A
4906826 Spencer Mar 1990 A
4908521 Boggan et al. Mar 1990 A
4923288 Allen et al. May 1990 A
4928001 Masada May 1990 A
4941090 McCarthy Jul 1990 A
4943707 Boggan Jul 1990 A
4953085 Atkins Aug 1990 A
4954985 Yamazaki Sep 1990 A
4961142 Elliott et al. Oct 1990 A
4968873 Dethloff et al. Nov 1990 A
4975840 DeTore et al. Dec 1990 A
4978401 Bonomi Dec 1990 A
4992940 Dworkin Feb 1991 A
5025372 Burton Jun 1991 A
5049728 Rovin Sep 1991 A
5055662 Hasegawa Oct 1991 A
5080748 Bonomi Jan 1992 A
5095194 Barbanell Mar 1992 A
5117355 McCarthy May 1992 A
5175416 Mansvelt Dec 1992 A
5180901 Hiramatsu Jan 1993 A
5192947 Neustein Mar 1993 A
5202286 Nakatani Apr 1993 A
5202826 McCarthy Apr 1993 A
5206803 Vitagliano Apr 1993 A
5218631 Katz Jun 1993 A
5247190 Friend et al. Sep 1993 A
5276311 Hennige Jan 1994 A
5287268 McCarthy Feb 1994 A
5287269 Dorrough Feb 1994 A
5297026 Hoffman Mar 1994 A
5311594 Penzias May 1994 A
5326959 Perazza Jul 1994 A
5326960 Tannenbaum Jul 1994 A
5328809 Holmes et al. Jul 1994 A
5339239 Manabe et al. Aug 1994 A
5349633 Katz Sep 1994 A
5350906 Brody et al. Sep 1994 A
5359183 Skodlar Oct 1994 A
5365575 Katz Nov 1994 A
5383113 Knight et al. Jan 1995 A
5397881 Mannik Mar 1995 A
5399502 Friend et al. Mar 1995 A
5401827 Holmes et al. Mar 1995 A
RE34915 Nichtberger et al. Apr 1995 E
5424524 Ruppert Jun 1995 A
5450477 Amarant Sep 1995 A
5453601 Rosen Sep 1995 A
5455407 Rosen Oct 1995 A
5459306 Stein Oct 1995 A
5465206 Hilt Nov 1995 A
5466919 Hovakimian Nov 1995 A
5471669 Lidman Nov 1995 A
5477038 Levine Dec 1995 A
5477040 Lalonde Dec 1995 A
5479494 Clitherow Dec 1995 A
5482139 Rivalto Jan 1996 A
5483444 Heintzman Jan 1996 A
5483445 Pickering Jan 1996 A
5500514 Veeneman Mar 1996 A
5511114 Stimson Apr 1996 A
5512654 Holmes et al. Apr 1996 A
5513102 Auriemma Apr 1996 A
5521363 Tannenbaum May 1996 A
5530232 Taylor Jun 1996 A
5530235 Stefik Jun 1996 A
5537314 Kanter Jul 1996 A
5544086 Davis Aug 1996 A
5544246 Mandelbaum Aug 1996 A
5553120 Katz Sep 1996 A
5577109 Stimson Nov 1996 A
5578808 Taylor Nov 1996 A
5581064 Riley et al. Dec 1996 A
5585787 Wallerstein Dec 1996 A
5590038 Pitroda Dec 1996 A
5592560 Deaton et al. Jan 1997 A
5604542 Dedrick Feb 1997 A
5608785 Kasday Mar 1997 A
5612868 Off Mar 1997 A
5621787 McKoy et al. Apr 1997 A
5621812 Deaton et al. Apr 1997 A
5637845 Kolls Jun 1997 A
5638457 Deaton et al. Jun 1997 A
5642279 Bloomberg et al. Jun 1997 A
5642485 Deaton et al. Jun 1997 A
5644723 Deaton et al. Jul 1997 A
5644727 Atkins Jul 1997 A
5649114 Deaton et al. Jul 1997 A
5649117 Landry Jul 1997 A
5649118 Carlisle Jul 1997 A
5653914 Holmes et al. Aug 1997 A
5664110 Green Sep 1997 A
5664157 Takahira et al. Sep 1997 A
5665953 Mazzamuto Sep 1997 A
5672678 Holmes et al. Sep 1997 A
5675607 Alesio Oct 1997 A
5675662 Deaton et al. Oct 1997 A
5677955 Doggett Oct 1997 A
5684291 Taskett Nov 1997 A
5687322 Deaton et al. Nov 1997 A
5689100 Carrithers Nov 1997 A
5689650 McClelland Nov 1997 A
5692132 Hogan Nov 1997 A
5696907 Tom Dec 1997 A
5699528 Hogan Dec 1997 A
5703344 Bezy Dec 1997 A
5704046 Hogan Dec 1997 A
5705798 Tarbox Jan 1998 A
5708422 Blonder Jan 1998 A
5710458 Iwasaki Jan 1998 A
5710886 Christensen Jan 1998 A
5710887 Chelliah Jan 1998 A
5710889 Clark et al. Jan 1998 A
5715399 Bezos Feb 1998 A
5721768 Stimson Feb 1998 A
5721781 Deo et al. Feb 1998 A
5727153 Powell Mar 1998 A
5728998 Novis et al. Mar 1998 A
5729693 Holda-Fleck Mar 1998 A
5734154 Jachimowicz et al. Mar 1998 A
5734838 Robinson Mar 1998 A
5736728 Matsubara Apr 1998 A
5737421 Audebert Apr 1998 A
5740549 Reilly et al. Apr 1998 A
5742775 King Apr 1998 A
5745049 Akiyama et al. Apr 1998 A
5745706 Wolfberg et al. Apr 1998 A
5749075 Toader et al. May 1998 A
5760381 Stich et al. Jun 1998 A
5765141 Spector Jun 1998 A
5770843 Rose Jun 1998 A
5770849 Novis et al. Jun 1998 A
5774870 Storey Jun 1998 A
5777305 Smith Jul 1998 A
5777306 Masuda Jul 1998 A
5777903 Piosenka et al. Jul 1998 A
5778067 Jones et al. Jul 1998 A
5787156 Katz Jul 1998 A
5787404 Fernandez-Holmann Jul 1998 A
5789733 Jachimowicz et al. Aug 1998 A
5794207 Walker Aug 1998 A
5799087 Rosen Aug 1998 A
5802176 Audebert Sep 1998 A
5805719 Pare et al. Sep 1998 A
5806042 Kelly Sep 1998 A
5806044 Powell Sep 1998 A
5806045 Biorge Sep 1998 A
5807627 Friend et al. Sep 1998 A
5809478 Greco Sep 1998 A
5815657 Williams et al. Sep 1998 A
5815658 Kuriyama Sep 1998 A
5819234 Slavin et al. Oct 1998 A
5819237 Garman Oct 1998 A
5832457 O'Brien Nov 1998 A
5835061 Stewart Nov 1998 A
5835576 Katz Nov 1998 A
5839113 Federau et al. Nov 1998 A
5845259 West Dec 1998 A
5845260 Nakano et al. Dec 1998 A
5852811 Atkins Dec 1998 A
5852812 Reeder Dec 1998 A
5857079 Claus Jan 1999 A
5857175 Day Jan 1999 A
5857709 Chock Jan 1999 A
5859419 Wynn Jan 1999 A
5864609 Cross Jan 1999 A
5864828 Atkins Jan 1999 A
5864830 Armetta Jan 1999 A
RE36116 McCarthy Feb 1999 E
5870718 Spector Feb 1999 A
5870721 Norris Feb 1999 A
5875437 Atkins Feb 1999 A
5883377 Chapin, Jr. Mar 1999 A
5883810 Franklin Mar 1999 A
5884271 Pitroda Mar 1999 A
5884278 Powell Mar 1999 A
5884285 Atkins Mar 1999 A
5887065 Audebert Mar 1999 A
5890138 Godin et al. Mar 1999 A
5890140 Clark et al. Mar 1999 A
H1794 Claus Apr 1999 H
5897620 Walker et al. Apr 1999 A
5905246 Fajkowski May 1999 A
5911135 Atkins Jun 1999 A
5911136 Atkins Jun 1999 A
5920629 Rosen Jul 1999 A
5920844 Hotta et al. Jul 1999 A
5920847 Kolling et al. Jul 1999 A
5923734 Taskett Jul 1999 A
5926800 Baronowski Jul 1999 A
5930217 Kayanuma Jul 1999 A
5931764 Freeman et al. Aug 1999 A
5933817 Hucal Aug 1999 A
5937068 Audebert Aug 1999 A
5940811 Norris Aug 1999 A
5940844 Cahill et al. Aug 1999 A
5952641 Korshun Sep 1999 A
5953423 Rosen Sep 1999 A
5953710 Fleming Sep 1999 A
5955961 Wallerstein Sep 1999 A
5963648 Rosen Oct 1999 A
5970479 Shepherd Oct 1999 A
5970480 Kalina Oct 1999 A
5974399 Giuliani et al. Oct 1999 A
RE36365 Levine et al. Nov 1999 E
5984180 Albrecht Nov 1999 A
5984191 Chapin, Jr. Nov 1999 A
5987434 Libman Nov 1999 A
5988509 Taskett Nov 1999 A
5991413 Arditti et al. Nov 1999 A
5991748 Taskett Nov 1999 A
5991750 Watson Nov 1999 A
6000608 Dorf Dec 1999 A
6000832 Franklin et al. Dec 1999 A
6002383 Shimada Dec 1999 A
6003762 Hayashida Dec 1999 A
6004681 Epstein et al. Dec 1999 A
6006988 Behrmann et al. Dec 1999 A
6009415 Shurling et al. Dec 1999 A
6014636 Reeder Jan 2000 A
6014638 Burge et al. Jan 2000 A
6014645 Cunningham Jan 2000 A
6014749 Gloor et al. Jan 2000 A
6016482 Molinari et al. Jan 2000 A
6016954 Abe et al. Jan 2000 A
6019284 Freeman et al. Feb 2000 A
6026370 Jermyn Feb 2000 A
6029139 Cunningham et al. Feb 2000 A
6029890 Austin Feb 2000 A
6032136 Brake, Jr. et al. Feb 2000 A
6036099 Leighton Mar 2000 A
6038292 Thomas Mar 2000 A
6038552 Fleischl et al. Mar 2000 A
6041315 Pollin Mar 2000 A
6045042 Ohno Apr 2000 A
6047067 Rosen Apr 2000 A
6049463 O'Malley et al. Apr 2000 A
6049773 McCormack et al. Apr 2000 A
6049782 Gottesman et al. Apr 2000 A
6058378 Clark et al. May 2000 A
6064985 Anderson May 2000 A
6065675 Teicher May 2000 A
6068183 Freeman et al. May 2000 A
6070147 Harms et al. May 2000 A
6070153 Simpson May 2000 A
6076068 DeLapa et al. Jun 2000 A
6076072 Libman Jun 2000 A
6078888 Johnson, Jr. Jun 2000 A
6078891 Riordan et al. Jun 2000 A
6091817 Bertina et al. Jul 2000 A
6092056 Tull, Jr. et al. Jul 2000 A
6095412 Bertina et al. Aug 2000 A
6095416 Grant et al. Aug 2000 A
6098053 Slater Aug 2000 A
6105011 Morrison, Jr. Aug 2000 A
6105865 Hardesty Aug 2000 A
6115458 Taskett Sep 2000 A
6119932 Maloney et al. Sep 2000 A
6122623 Garman Sep 2000 A
6128598 Walker et al. Oct 2000 A
6128599 Walker et al. Oct 2000 A
6129274 Suzuki Oct 2000 A
6134536 Shepherd Oct 2000 A
6138917 Chapin, Jr. Oct 2000 A
6145741 Wisdom et al. Nov 2000 A
6148297 Swor et al. Nov 2000 A
6161096 Bell Dec 2000 A
6163770 Gamble et al. Dec 2000 A
6164533 Barton Dec 2000 A
6167385 Hartley-Urquhart Dec 2000 A
6169975 White et al. Jan 2001 B1
6173267 Cairns Jan 2001 B1
6182048 Osborn et al. Jan 2001 B1
6182894 Hackett et al. Feb 2001 B1
6186793 Brubaker Feb 2001 B1
6189787 Dorf Feb 2001 B1
6195644 Bowie Feb 2001 B1
6202053 Christiansen et al. Mar 2001 B1
RE37122 Levine et al. Apr 2001 E
6227447 Campisano May 2001 B1
6243688 Kalina Jun 2001 B1
6263316 Khan et al. Jul 2001 B1
6265977 Vega et al. Jul 2001 B1
6278981 Dembo et al. Aug 2001 B1
6295522 Boesch Sep 2001 B1
6298336 Davis et al. Oct 2001 B1
6308268 Audebert Oct 2001 B1
6336099 Barnett et al. Jan 2002 B1
6341724 Campisano Jan 2002 B1
6343743 Lamla Feb 2002 B1
6345261 Feidelson et al. Feb 2002 B1
6345766 Taskett et al. Feb 2002 B1
6349291 Varma Feb 2002 B1
6360954 Barnardo Mar 2002 B1
6366220 Elliott Apr 2002 B1
6373969 Adler Apr 2002 B1
6385591 Mankoff May 2002 B1
6386444 Sullivan May 2002 B1
6397202 Higgins et al. May 2002 B1
6402039 Freeman et al. Jun 2002 B1
6405182 Cuervo Jun 2002 B1
6422459 Kawan Jul 2002 B1
6422462 Cohen Jul 2002 B1
6429927 Borza Aug 2002 B1
6434259 Hamid Aug 2002 B1
6446210 Borza Sep 2002 B1
6450407 Freeman et al. Sep 2002 B1
6463039 Ricci et al. Oct 2002 B1
6467684 Fite et al. Oct 2002 B1
6473500 Risafi et al. Oct 2002 B1
6484144 Martin et al. Nov 2002 B1
6484148 Boyd Nov 2002 B1
6498861 Hamid Dec 2002 B1
6505168 Rothman et al. Jan 2003 B1
6560578 Eldering May 2003 B1
6574603 Dickson et al. Jun 2003 B1
6581839 Lasch et al. Jun 2003 B1
6601761 Katis Aug 2003 B1
6609111 Bell Aug 2003 B1
RE38255 Levine et al. Sep 2003 E
6615189 Phillips et al. Sep 2003 B1
6615190 Slater Sep 2003 B1
6625582 Richman et al. Sep 2003 B1
6631849 Blossom Oct 2003 B1
6641049 Luu Nov 2003 B1
6641050 Kelley et al. Nov 2003 B1
6675127 LaBlanc et al. Jan 2004 B1
6693544 Hebbecker Feb 2004 B1
6745938 Sullivan Jun 2004 B1
6802008 Ikefuji et al. Oct 2004 B1
6805287 Bishop Oct 2004 B1
6865547 Brake, Jr. et al. Mar 2005 B1
6868426 Mankoff Mar 2005 B1
20010011243 Dembo et al. Aug 2001 A1
20010027441 Wankmueller Oct 2001 A1
20010034682 Knight et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010044293 Morgan Nov 2001 A1
20010047342 Cuervo Nov 2001 A1
20010054003 Chien et al. Dec 2001 A1
20010056398 Scheirer Dec 2001 A1
20020019803 Muller Feb 2002 A1
20020026418 Koppel et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020046255 Moore et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020062235 Wahlbin et al. May 2002 A1
20020077978 O'Leary et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020091572 Anderson et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020091631 Usui Jul 2002 A1
20020095365 Slavin Jul 2002 A1
20020104878 Seifert et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020116271 Mankoff Aug 2002 A1
20020120627 Mankoff Aug 2002 A1
20020143703 Razvan et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020147662 Anderson Oct 2002 A1
20020165820 Anvekar et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020174016 Cuervo Nov 2002 A1
20030004828 Epstein Jan 2003 A1
20030023549 Ames et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030028518 Mankoff Feb 2003 A1
20030033246 Slater Feb 2003 A1
20030046249 Wu Mar 2003 A1
20030053609 Risafi et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030101119 Persons et al. May 2003 A1
20030105672 Epstein et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030135462 Brake, Jr. et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030140004 O'Leary et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030144935 Sobek Jul 2003 A1
20030154125 Mittal et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030163403 Chen et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030163416 Kitajima Aug 2003 A1
20030172040 Kemper et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030195808 Brown et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030200143 Walker et al. Oct 2003 A9
20030200180 Phelan et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030216965 Libman Nov 2003 A1
20040024672 Brake, Jr. et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040030626 Libman Feb 2004 A1
20040039588 Libman Feb 2004 A1
20040098351 Duke May 2004 A1
20040243498 Duke Dec 2004 A1
20050027649 Cech Feb 2005 A1
20050071230 Mankoff Mar 2005 A1
20050075932 Mankoff Apr 2005 A1
20050091138 Awatsu Apr 2005 A1
20050171898 Bishop et al. Aug 2005 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (13)
Number Date Country
2293321 Jun 1998 CA
959440 Nov 1999 EP
2376787 Dec 2002 GB
2377071 Dec 2002 GB
2377314 Jan 2003 GB
WO 9429112 Dec 1994 WO
WO 9741673 Nov 1997 WO
WO 9905633 Feb 1999 WO
WO 0169347 Sep 2001 WO
WO 0169347 Sep 2001 WO
WO 0169347 Sep 2001 WO
WO 2005043277 May 2005 WO
WO 2005043277 May 2005 WO
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60494559 Aug 2003 US