1. Field of Invention
This invention relates generally to parametric design software, and more particularly to systems and methods providing a human computer user interface for aesthetic design of a modular assembly.
2. Status of Prior Art
On festive occasions, such as an engagement, wedding, Bar Mitzvah, confirmation or birthday party, it is often the practice to adorn each table where the guests gather with a centerpiece in the form of a vase or bowl containing a bouquet of cut flowers. The flowers are normally distributed to only a single guest because of inherent transport limitations, e.g., that cut flowers require a vase with water. Distribution is further limited in that there is but one centerpiece typically provided per table, and also because the beauty of flowers is enhanced by their arrangement into a bouquet. Thus, if a host desires that each guest receive a party favor, a separate gift must be provided.
When the festive occasion is a birthday party for a child and many other guests are children, the tables are usually laden with candy. At the conclusion of the party, each person in attendance is given a small bag of candy as a parting gift, especially since children typically attach little value to flowers. Thus, in this case, flowers are inappropriate as a party favor, although they might still be provided as a centerpiece.
See, U.S. Pat. No. 5,683,762, expressly incorporated herein by reference.
One issue presented by such centerpiece designs described in the above patent is that there are a large number of degrees of freedom in the design. For example, a typical centerpiece has a base, 10 extending elements, each element having a candy-filled tube, an encircling spiral ribbon, a pom-pom, and a set of apical ribbons. Each element may have a different set of design parameters (e.g., colors), for the candy layers, pom-pom, encircling ribbon, and apical ribbons. The theoretical number of possibilities is in excess of billions. Given the large number of possibilities, it is difficult to envision the aesthetic effect of the color combinations without a suitable tool.
The present invention provides a software system which is usable for parametric display of modular aesthetic designs.
A preferred embodiment of the system comprises a client and a server. The client provides a user input for making selections of the design parameters, and a display for presenting a visual depiction of the resulting design. The server receives codes from the client, representing the parametric selections, and returns one or more files which together represent the aesthetic representation of the design.
The system is preferably interactive, that is, a user enters one parameter at a time, and the display updates in dependence thereon. Preferably, the display is a composite of a plurality of image component files, for example within a Macromedia Flash Player environment, such that a parameter change need only require updating of a portion of the files.
Advantageously, the image component files are pre-rendered for the various options, and selected by the server as required. Preferably, there are about twenty image component files which form a composite image. Further, the image component files are preferably rendered in planes, with on overlay plane obscuring portions of underlay planes.
The system may be used in conjunction with a recommender or guide, which assists a user in formulating an aesthetically pleasing result. This functionality may be implemented local to the user, at the server, or at another location.
For example, a user may define a color scheme for an event. These colors are then used to define a theme for the aesthetic design, which will generally include significant elements having corresponding colors, themes, and possibly other elements with suitably contrasting, complementary, alternating or neutral colors. In addition, these elements are automatically arranged in a suitable pattern and distribution of the color or theme elements, thereby achieving an optimal arrangement or composition as relates to contrasting, complementary or neutral colors. As a result, these elements are suitably organized in a pattern of distribution to achieve a complementary, contrasting, alternating or neutral color scheme, thereby reducing the likelihood of color discordance or color position asymmetry.
Further, the system preferably imposes various design constraints on the user to limit the scope of selections to a manageable number. For example, the maximum number of color choices presented may be less than the theoretical maximum. Likewise, arrangement of colored elements may be algorithmically determined rather than explicitly determined.
While a preferred embodiment of the invention is used for the aesthetic design of a manufactured system, a similar modular aesthetic design problem occurs in floral arrangement design (natural or artificial), and the present systems and methods can be applied to this venue as well. Thus, for example, a floral design may start with any of 10 standard baskets, having placement locations for 24 flower elements, each flower having a type, color (optional), stem length, and position. For example, for each of the 24 positions, there may be 25 different flower types, up to 12 different colors (e.g., carnations), 5 stem lengths. In theory, this leads to about 360,000 different combinations.
Another embodiment of the invention is employed for designing gift baskets. In this case, each element in the basket preferably is visible, but various basket contents have different shapes and sizes. Therefore, the basket area is divided into a grid, with some overlap possible. Each possible content is selected, with an organization optimizer to layout the contents for feasible placement in the most visually pleasing organization and spacing. In this case, a recommender may provide complementary items, such as cheese and crackers, or otherwise implement other design rules.
The present invention may also be used to model layouts of other types of manufactured items, such as cookie baskets and displays, other baked goods, fruit displays, and the like.
In some cases, the range of subcomponents is not predetermined in the system, and therefore arbitrary objects (so long as they are available in an appropriate data format) may be available for selection by a user. Thus, instead of expressly presenting all of the various options in menus and/or submenus, a search engine may be provided for use within the user interface to identify and select optional elements. In this embodiment, a user searches for elements, using words, colors, topics/classifications, or the like, and receives a menu or list of available options corresponding to the query. Typically, the response to the query will include an image of the object, and a retrieval of a record associated with a selected object will include one or more graphics files or models which are suitable for rendering, or to be rendered, within the user interface.
In some cases, the placement of the selected object within the assemblage can be contemplated, and therefore the graphics files pre-rendered for ready use. On the other hand, the assemblage may have an arbitrary shape and/or size, and the user may select various other objects, so it may be difficult to pre-render the graphic files. Therefore, a full three dimensional model of the object, or at least its exterior, is provided, which is then used as necessary to generate the images to be displayed on the user interface screen. It is noted that the user interface may itself support rendering of three dimensional models, and therefore the pre-rendering step is optional. Likewise, the search engine may be a cooperative system, providing a dedicated client-server relationship, or the client may search public search engines for the objects. Further, the search function and model acquisition may also be decoupled. For example, a user may search for objects to fill a gift basket, e.g., cheese and crackers, and may then select particular brands of cheese and crackers. After selecting these objects, a second retrieval operation may seek specific graphic or model files from a manufacturer's or distributor's website. These may be defined, for example, by SKU or other unambiguous code. The searched product subcomponent may have a readable code that classifies the item by ingredients (such as sugar free or low carbohydrate) or by size (number of ounces) or color or manufacturer, or country of origin or other characteristics that the user may deem important in searching for components to create the desired virtual representation and organization of the entire assemblage. This search engine functionality also permits an interface to various advertising subsidy systems, such as the Google Adsense® system, and further permits e-commerce integration and referrer compensation and product sponsorship revenue.
It is therefore an object of the invention to provide a method for the aesthetic design of a modular assemblage, comprising the steps of providing a client graphic user interface for receiving an input for defining parameters of the modular assemblage, and for presenting an image of the defined modular assemblage; communicating a code to a server representing the defined parameters; at the server, in dependence on the communicated code, defining a set of graphic elements corresponding to the defined modular assemblage; communicating the graphic elements from the server to the client; and displaying, at the client, the graphic elements received from the server to represent the defined modular assemblage.
It is a further object of the invention to provide a method for the design of a parametric aggregation of a plurality of different components, comprising the steps of providing a graphic user interface for receiving an input for defining parameters of the parametric aggregation, and for presenting an image of the defined parametric aggregation; in dependence on the parameters, defining a layout of a set of graphic elements representing a physical organization of the parametric aggregation; displaying the layout of the graphic elements in the graphic user interface to represent the organization of the parametric aggregation; receiving user feedback relating to acceptance of the displayed layout; and storing information defining the accepted displayed layout sufficient for physical organization of the parametric aggregation in accordance therewith.
It is a still further object of the invention to provide a method for the design of an arrangement of a plurality of different components, comprising the steps of receiving an input from a user defining a selection of the plurality of components, the defined plurality of components having associated physical attributes; arranging the plurality of components into a composition in dependence on their physical attributes and an aesthetic criteria relating to the coordinating of at least one of an appearance, predominance, and distribution of the plurality of various components; visually presenting at least one composition from a plurality of available discrete layouts to the user; selecting, by the user, one of the plurality of available discrete compositions; and generating a description of the selected composition, the description being adapted for implementation thereof as a physical composition of the plurality of components.
Another object is to provide an arrangement of a plurality of different components, designed by a method comprising the steps of receiving an input from a user describing the plurality of components, each component having associated physical attributes; proposing a composed arrangement of the plurality of components in dependence on the physical attributes of each component and an aesthetic criteria relating to a coordinating of at least one of an appearance, predominance and distribution of the plurality of components; visually presenting the proposed composition to the user; receiving at least one of a confirmation and a modification of the proposed composition from the user; and generating a description of a confirmed composition, the arrangement being physically manufactured in accordance with the description.
It is a still further object to provide a computer readable storage medium, having thereon instructions for operating a programmable device adapted to design an arrangement of a plurality of different components, by performing the steps of receiving an input from a user defining a selection of the plurality of components, the defined plurality of components having associated physical attributes; arranging the plurality of components into a composition in dependence on their physical attributes and an aesthetic criteria relating to a coordinating of at least one of an appearance, predominance and distribution of the plurality of components; visually presenting at least one composition from a plurality of available discrete compositions to the user; selecting, by the user, one of the plurality of available discrete compositions; and generating a description of the selected composition, the description being adapted for implementation thereof as a physical composition of the plurality of components. The programmable device may store a history of user input and/or a history of user interaction. The programmable device may also create a user profile associated with a specific user.
A graphic user interface may receive a user query for communication with a remote search engine. The remote search engine may respond to a user query with available parameters, such as physical parameters, for at least one component. A component may be defined by a plurality of physical parameters. For example, the components to be employed may be undefined at the initiation of a session, and the user may employ the search engine to select components. On the other hand, one or more of the components may be selected, and a search engine may be employed to provides additional components which meet certain criteria appropriate for the ensemble. The search engine may employ both functional and aesthetic criteria to select components, and in some cases, the components may be parametrically or incrementally defined, according to functional and/or aesthetic criteria. For example, color, size, weight, shape, ornamentation, type, complementarity with other components which have been selected, or will be selected, may all be employed to assist in defining the component or a set of components from which a user may ultimately select. The plurality of components may be, for example, of similar kind with respectively different parameters. In many cases, a parametric search engine query will set bounds on component parameters, and therefore the response to the query should include the actual parameters of the component or an aggregate set of components. To the extent that aesthetic features are not physical in nature, these features are also preferably returned in the query. While an image of the component may be suitable, preferably, a model or encoded set of attributes (such as an XML document) is provided, so that the ensemble can be appropriately formulated from a plurality of components.
The search engine may comprise an index of items which have not been prescreened or otherwise validated for use as components (such as a regular Internet search engine), or a may comprise a catalog of available components which have been screened or approved or selected as being appropriate. The catalog or index may further comprise images of respective components and physical parameters thereof. For example, a search query parameter may represent a visual appearance of a component, such as a color or color scheme.
The graphic user interface may comprise a user-selectable palette for interactive modification of the components. The graphic user interface may communicate through the Internet (or other suitable network) with a server, and, for example, a software construct may respond to a parametric code to generate a display of the layout of the graphic elements. Thus, for example, the display of components is generated based on a set of codes defining individual components or sets of components, preferably along with logic which may be part of the software construct which automatically arranges or aggregates the components based on a set of rules, which may be aesthetic and/or functional in nature. The software construct, for example, runs locally on a user PC, on a server communicating through a network such as the Internet, or on another system. The software construct preferably interfaces through a graphic user interface, such as Microsoft Windows of Vista, or through a web browser such as Internet Explorer 7 or Firefox.
At least one of the plurality of components may be comestible and/or perishable. Such items may have a limited shelf life. In many cases, the ensemble is prepared ad hoc, and is not intended to be an inventoried item.
The at least one composition may be automatically generated based on an aesthetic paradigm. Thus, for example, the components may be arranged, or other elements of the composition defined, based on a set of rules or an algorithm or another implicit or predefined scheme. This assists users in obtaining a composition which meets certain design rules, which may assure a desired aesthetic result or range. For example, the composition may be generated based on an automated algorithm sensitive to component color. More broadly, the composition may be generated based on an automated algorithm sensitive to at least one of: a color of at least one component, a dimension of at least one component, a temporal or spatial coordination of at least two components, a cost of at least one component, a visual relationship between at least two components, a weight of at least one component, and an availability of at least one component. With respect to dimensionality and weight, the composition may have predefined limits. For example, a container or shipping box may be predetermined, or a shipping class predefined, which sets a limit on the composition. Therefore, each element within the composition, and the aggregate set of elements, must meet the limits. On the other hand, some parameters may be aesthetically constrained. For example, certain color combinations may be preferred or undesirable. In other cases, a synchrony (relating to a temporal coordination of component system) and/or availability of elements may be considered. For example, a fresh fruit basket should generally be designed to employ concurrently available ripe fruits. Pricing and component pricing paradigm may also be relevant considerations. For example, in a fixed price arrangement, components must be selected (either individually or in the aggregate) which meet the pricing presumptions. The components and ensemble of components may have complementary attributes which are preferably considered. Thus, a selection of one component may influence the selection of another, such as cheese and crackers, or wine and wine glasses. The coordination, as discussed above, may include color, shape, size, weight, and the like.
A number of available compositions may be constrained in accordance with predetermined selection criteria. Thus, one aspect of the invention intentionally limits the available selections, and does not permit an unrestrained choice space. On the other hand, in the case of a search engine which responds to a user search engine query, which may search for items which may have been previously unknown, the choice space may be arbitrarily large.
The components are not limited to comestible or perishable goods, and for example, may include electronic devices.
For a better understanding of the invention as well as other objects and further features thereof, reference is made to the following detailed description to be read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein:
The decorative end closure preferably comprises a pom-pom, and more preferably a pom-pom having floral characteristics. The floral pom-pom provides an aesthetic similarity to a cut flower when attached to a hollow elongated member, and when a plurality of decorative containers arranged together provides an aesthetic substitute for a floral bouquet or centerpiece. Pom-pom decorative elements may also invoke other aesthetic significance. The pom-pom preferably has a set of apical ribbons extending therefrom, for example 6 ribbons, which may be the same or different colors.
A transparent elongated tube supports the pom-pom, and is filled with various materials, such as candy, nuts, or dried fruit, confetti, colored or flavored liquids or powders such as cosmetics, cookies, fabric, cigars, feathers and other decorative or consumable elements. The contents of the tube may be formed in layers, for example 6 layers over a one foot length. A spiral ribbon may encircle the tube. A number, for example ten, of the pom-poms are supported in a base. Each pom-pom can theoretically be different, alternating in a pattern or comprising the same color in every position, based on a number of assumptions.
The present provides software generating a human computer user interface, along with other relevant software that makes it possible to create virtual representations of a custom manufactured product over the internet or locally (in this case, a candy centerpiece), which can then be manufactured according to the exact specifications defined by the client. This “direct-from-design-to-manufacturing” process is based on a code, representing the design created by the user, which is readily translated into a design layout. For example, the code may be human readable, to permit a non-automated or semi-automated assemblage system, or a fully automated system may be implemented. When the design space is limited, preferably the limiting presumptions are applied to provide an even or distributed result. Thus, if there are ten pom-poms, the color space may be limited to 5 options, such that there are a minimum of two pom-poms of each selected color. If it is desirable to assist in assigning various colors to possible positions in the array, then the pom-poms may be automatically dispersed over the arrangement, based on a presumption that a concentration of a particular color in one location is desirable or undesirable. As the number of colors of pom-poms is increased, the arrangement is organized and reorganized to provide a proper distribution of the pom-pom colors.
The system preferably operates using an Internet communications system, wherein a client system uses a web browser and optionally plug-in software, such as Macromedia Flash player, using a simple control panel interface that in various steps completes the design. A preferred interface is shown in
A preferred architecture for the product to be designed, and the graphic representations thereof, breaks the product down into sufficient components and subcomponents to actually make it a custom-made product, and not just a selection from a few standard options. If there are only five options total, a parametric design system is superfluous.
A preferred “design tool” has a control panel with colored buttons that allow the user to select different colors for different sub components. The result is a centerpiece completely customized, with permutations calculated to be beyond quadrillions in number.
The preferred system supports the adding of color on a subcomponent basis, which includes increasing the frequency of subcomponents with certain colors or decreasing the frequency of subcomponents of another color in distributed patterns of contrasting, complementary, neutral or, alternating colors, or colors selected by the user according to their own preference. In addition to increasing or decreasing frequency of elements with a certain color, different subcomponent elements may be spatially repositioned to more realistically create a balance of colors. In other words, if we want to add more black pom-poms to the bouquet, the program knows, aesthetically speaking, to organize the black pom-poms in a random looking array so that all the black pom-poms are not just on one side of the bouquet. This has applications in virtual flower arranging and gift basket arranging as well.
The system supports online designing products from “scratch,” e.g., assembling components and subcomponents into a complete unit to the customer's liking. In order to properly represent the assemblage, a three dimensional model representation of each element or sub-element is provided, often achieved by automated rendering software. One of the requirements of this three dimensional model is that it visually represent what each subcomponent would look like if it were placed in different x, y and z coordinates in the arrangement (array). All these possible positions would be modeled and a file would have to be made for each component in each position in every possible color to have maximum design possibilities. This leads to the creation of hundreds, or even thousands of colored and spatially positioned subcomponent files. Of course, it is also possible to render the components or the entirety in real time, but this approach is computationally expensive, and difficult to scale. That is, the number of simultaneous users would be substantially limited. In contrast, the pre-rendered component files are readily called through a server file system, based on a translation of the arrangement code received from the client software, thus potentially supporting a large number of simultaneous users and also minimizing the download time.
It is noted that, in some cases, it may be desirable to communicate a three dimensional model to the client, including each component. This architecture permits client-side rendering of various views and lighting conditions.
Each image of every component in possible positions is assigned to a graphic file, such as a “.png” file, which allows sufficient transparency or opacity properties that layers can be built up from the components. These layers have to be mapped to make sure that files representing the objects closest to the viewer are on top of the layers further away.
A control panel is provided to manipulate these layers of subcomponent image files in accordance with algorithms that define the aesthetic of the end product. For example, in a preferred embodiment, when the client requests to have two different color pom-poms, the program reorganizes the pom-poms accordingly to a distributed pattern. When a third color pom-pom is added to the mix, such as in a red, white and blue bouquet, then the pom-poms are again reorganized. And when a fourth color pom-pom is added, once more all the pom-pom colors for each position are reorganized again to reflect a predetermined parameter of color balance that is desirable. Alternatively, the system could be requested to allow more user control over exact positioning.
Using similar principles to design a virtual gift basket, we take into consideration the three dimensional special requirements of each product in the gift basket as well as the optimal aesthetic look—should all the tall items be on one side of the basket or should they be arrayed according to some other principle?
The system also preferably calculates which type and class of subcomponents are added and how that will affect cost, shipping, weight, etc. The design software therefore preferably interfaces with e-commerce software, to facilitate cost estimation and ordering.
Another possible feature of the preset system provides subcomponents which are of sufficient granularity to allow for the user to achieve gradual changes as opposed to visually sudden graphic color changes. This kind of control is referred to as color blending or subcomponent feature accrual when applied to shape and size of the composited component. According to an embodiment of the present invention, the end user is provided with color blending control, which means that by manipulating subcomponents the user can affect gradation of color changes as opposed to a discrete color choice. Advantageously, the user may be provided with a user interface element which acts like an analog control for example a slider or knob, to adjust the value(s), which are then interpreted by the system to define the blending, length or size. The interpretation of the input control need not be linear, and therefore logical elements may be provided to assist the user in formulating aesthetically pleasing results while reducing the interface complexity and decision-making complexity.
The method according to a preferred embodiment of the invention is as follows:
Subcomponents are identified that can vary by pattern of color, shape, position, composition, mixing, blending, timing, quantity and other factors that can be distributed in a pattern that affects the overall product appearance, shape, composition, and other factors. For example, pom-poms can be arranged in any available color in any of several defined positions. Initially, all the pom-pom subcomponent elements may be presented in the same color or some other initial state as defined by the system such as a default color composition or a saved version of the user's choice. Additional color pom-poms can be introduced, and the system will have to accommodate this new color into the pattern. Similarly, if one or more pom-pom colors are introduced, the system must accommodate those added colors in a new pattern that takes into account the design logic that is defined for the aggregated product.
Patterns can also be created by breaking down a sub element, like tassels (e.g., apical ribbons), into component parts which are combined together to produce the desired overall affect in the subcomponent. In order to simplify the user interface, and to impose design constraints, some aspects of the design are constrained by the system, for example in a manner designed to achieve an aesthetically pleasing result. For example, an even distribution of elements throughout an arrangement may be preferred over one which is asymmetric or polarized.
In this way, all like subcomponents (e.g., tassels combinations) can be created from combining layers of subcomponent elements which create a composite. For example, each tassel subcomponent element can specified for a specific color. There are six separate subcomponent tassel elements that comprise the entire tassel assembly. By layering into multiple subcomponents that are composite, a degree of color control that is referred to as color blending.
For example, all six layers can be royal blue. Or if we wish to introduce a splash of white, we can choose to make one of the layers as white. And then if we want more white, we can change another of the six blue layers white. Such a system requires a way of changing one subcomponent element at a time.
A feature is provided that allows all the subcomponent elements to be set or reset at once to a particular color or feature, as well as being able to fine tune the composite by selecting individual layers for change, for example, features such as color, shape, position, quantity etc., may be set or reset.
The patterns are affected by the distribution and balance of colors as different color pom-poms or subcomponent elements are added to the mix. The overall appearance of the aggregated product is affected by changes in subcomponent patterns. Separate subcomponents are placed in different layers, facilitating their rendering and display through the graphic user interface. For example, 8-12 layers may be provided for pom-poms; one layer for each position. Each layer is populated by a graphic component file, selected from ones rendered in a particular color, and specific for a particular position in the arrangement.
Subcomponents are separated into small subcomponent elements, where possible, to create even more variability in the final aggregated product.
For example, the preferred embodiment provides a formula of 36 subcomponent tassel elements, six in each layer. The finer the definition, the more control over the final aggregated product.
For the candy, a maximum of two colors per tube was imposed as a limitation. These include bottom layer candies, top layer candies and tubes with candies of all one type. It is also possible to mix the candies, rather than to layer them.
A projection of a three dimensional model of each subcomponent, rendered in each color option and position, is created and stored. The server software selects appropriate stored files for communication to the client. Images files may have transparent or semitransparent portions, and employ image formats such as “.png”.
The stored files have an encoded filename, allowing the server to specify the desired files by their parametrically encoded filenames.
The client defines an arrangement by way of a code, which defines every selected option. Preferably, this code is human-readable, and employs 1-3 characters to represent every attribute. Blank attributes are indicated by “X”s. The code, in addition to being usable by the server to define the image components, may also be used to define the manufacturing parameters, and by an e-commerce engine to permit pricing and ordering.
Various logic modules may be designed for organizing, reorganizing, positioning, and repositioning subcomponent or subcomponent elements into an arrangement of layers that adhere to the design instructions of the user through the interface, as well as possibly organizing, reorganizing, position and repositioning subcomponents and subcomponent elements according to a predefined logic that optimizes characteristics important to the final aggregated product such as color balance or color harmony, relative position of subcomponents, and minimization of aesthetic or positional or other conflicts between elements that can occur when no logic is applied.
A database of arrays is created for holding subcomponent and subcomponent element files for the purpose of being manipulated by the design logic modules. The database remembers what was created by a user, so that changes can be saved. If desirable, a system of having a user login and password is implemented whereby the server can record the status of a user session. User attributes such as name, email address, name of design or other user or design information are thus enabled. Likewise, a method of tracking designs, design updates and changes, and designer activity is also enabled. A system of administering the various users may be implemented whereby an administrator can allow or disallow access to the system, or various features thereof, by users according to date, class of user, such as a party planner or end user or other parameters made available to the administrator. In addition, such an administrative tool can allow the administrator to manage user accounts, view designs created by users, record or monitor changes, customer orders, updates, patterns of use, and other tools to enable an administrator to comprehensively oversee and monitor system usage. This tool further permits pricing and discounts to be dependent on a user identity or classification.
The system can also be enabled to communicate with an inventory-type database that can automatically advise the server as to which component or subcomponent color elements are currently available. In the preferred embodiment, the component or subcomponent elements which are not available are removed from the menu or color selections available to the user in the interface. Likewise, if certain combinations are already in inventory, these may be differentially priced as “catalog” instead of “custom”.
The system permits calculation of costs, availability, production time and other factors relevant to the production and purchasing of the assembled product. The information may be efficiently communicated to a factory, assembly area or warehouse, to facilitate manufacturing and coordinate between the various centers within the production process.
Of the plurality of components, some categories of components can be coordinated by a class of features, such as ribbons 4 as referred to in
The entire composition can be arranged based on a presentation context such as a theme or overall packaging, unifying packaging and containers can be organized based on preference from the selectable palate. The base 5 element is selectable based on its color or decoration 13. It can also be adapted automatically according to contextual information such as room presentation.
The parametric arrangement of the plurality of components may be coordinated according to the appearance, predominance and distribution of the components. The tassel 2′, 2″, 2′″, features of different instances of a respective component, as shown in
While there have been shown and described preferred embodiments of a centerpiece assembly simulating floral bouquet in accordance with the invention, it will be appreciated that many changes and modifications may be made therein without, however, departing from the essential spirit thereof.
The present application is a Continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/969,825, filed Jan. 4, 2008, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,212,805, issued Jul. 3, 2012, which claims benefit of priority from U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/883,595, filed Jan. 5, 2007, the entirety of which is expressly incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3590434 | Watts, Jr. et al. | Jul 1971 | A |
4149246 | Goldman | Apr 1979 | A |
4232334 | Dyson | Nov 1980 | A |
4258478 | Scott et al. | Mar 1981 | A |
4261012 | Maloomian | Apr 1981 | A |
4297724 | Masuda et al. | Oct 1981 | A |
4434467 | Scott | Feb 1984 | A |
4514178 | Noto et al. | Apr 1985 | A |
4526116 | Mannel | Jul 1985 | A |
4539585 | Spackova et al. | Sep 1985 | A |
4546434 | Gioello | Oct 1985 | A |
4723209 | Hernandez et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4731743 | Blancato | Mar 1988 | A |
4796201 | Wake | Jan 1989 | A |
4839743 | Best et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4843574 | Gerber | Jun 1989 | A |
4845636 | Walker | Jul 1989 | A |
4849902 | Yokoe et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
4854880 | Nasby | Aug 1989 | A |
4872056 | Hicks et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
4873643 | Powell et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
4876651 | Dawson et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
4885844 | Chun | Dec 1989 | A |
4897867 | Foster et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
4931929 | Sherman | Jun 1990 | A |
4964043 | Galvin | Oct 1990 | A |
4991005 | Smith | Feb 1991 | A |
5030117 | Delorme | Jul 1991 | A |
5053956 | Donald et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5088052 | Spielman et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
5111392 | Malin | May 1992 | A |
5117354 | Long et al. | May 1992 | A |
5119188 | McCalley et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5122873 | Golin | Jun 1992 | A |
5129719 | Dombrosky | Jul 1992 | A |
5163006 | Deziel | Nov 1992 | A |
5163007 | Slilaty | Nov 1992 | A |
5195030 | White | Mar 1993 | A |
5195092 | Wilson et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5197016 | Sugimoto et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5204947 | Bernstein et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5206804 | Thies et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5214755 | Mason | May 1993 | A |
5220420 | Hoarty et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5236199 | Thompson, Jr. | Aug 1993 | A |
5244131 | Hollingsworth | Sep 1993 | A |
5251209 | Jurkevich et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5265248 | Moulios et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5274715 | Hsu | Dec 1993 | A |
5274794 | Ewing et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5276789 | Besaw et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5283819 | Glick et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5325423 | Lewis | Jun 1994 | A |
5339252 | White et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5339415 | Strout, II et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5351276 | Doll, Jr. et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5355472 | Lewis | Oct 1994 | A |
5359710 | Aono et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5363482 | Victor et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5420572 | Dolin, Jr. et al. | May 1995 | A |
5420801 | Dockter et al. | May 1995 | A |
5437032 | Wolf et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5438658 | Fitzpatrick et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5440479 | Hutton | Aug 1995 | A |
5442771 | Filepp et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5469536 | Blank | Nov 1995 | A |
5487167 | Dinallo et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5495568 | Beavin | Feb 1996 | A |
5495576 | Ritchey | Feb 1996 | A |
RE35184 | Walker | Mar 1996 | E |
5504845 | Vecchione | Apr 1996 | A |
5508940 | Rossmere et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5510846 | Guichard et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5515268 | Yoda | May 1996 | A |
5517621 | Fukui et al. | May 1996 | A |
5519435 | Anderson | May 1996 | A |
5524197 | Uya et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5530652 | Croyle et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5530852 | Meske, Jr. et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5539677 | Smith | Jul 1996 | A |
5550746 | Jacobs | Aug 1996 | A |
5550976 | Henderson et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5551021 | Harada et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5553221 | Reimer et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5553222 | Milne et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5555496 | Tackbary et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5557538 | Retter et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5559714 | Banks et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5561791 | Mendelson et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5564001 | Lewis | Oct 1996 | A |
5568595 | Yosefi et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5570291 | Dudle et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5577180 | Reed | Nov 1996 | A |
5577258 | Cruz et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5581783 | Ohashi | Dec 1996 | A |
5593072 | Hester et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5598344 | Dangelo et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5603043 | Taylor et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5608852 | Hashimoto et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5611730 | Weiss | Mar 1997 | A |
5619710 | Travis, Jr. et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5625781 | Cline et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5631974 | Lau-Kee et al. | May 1997 | A |
5633768 | Watanabe | May 1997 | A |
5649186 | Ferguson | Jul 1997 | A |
5657460 | Egan et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5680314 | Patterson et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5680528 | Korszun | Oct 1997 | A |
5682220 | Sherman et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5682441 | Ligtenberg et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5683762 | Banschick | Nov 1997 | A |
5684963 | Clement | Nov 1997 | A |
5687259 | Linford | Nov 1997 | A |
5692192 | Sudo | Nov 1997 | A |
5694551 | Doyle et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5701451 | Rogers et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5708838 | Robinson | Jan 1998 | A |
5708845 | Wistendahl et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5710831 | Beernink et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5710835 | Bradley | Jan 1998 | A |
5710918 | Lagarde et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5715823 | Wood et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5724522 | Kagami et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5729699 | Hashimoto et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5729741 | Liaguno et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5732216 | Logan et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5737599 | Rowe et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5737619 | Judson | Apr 1998 | A |
5737729 | Denman | Apr 1998 | A |
5740801 | Branson | Apr 1998 | A |
5742931 | Spiegelhoff et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5745681 | Levine et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5745908 | Anderson et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5745910 | Piersol et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5752031 | Cutler et al. | May 1998 | A |
5754434 | Delfer et al. | May 1998 | A |
5754850 | Janssen | May 1998 | A |
5758110 | Boss et al. | May 1998 | A |
5760783 | Migdal et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5761655 | Hoffman | Jun 1998 | A |
5764235 | Hunt et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5768591 | Robinson | Jun 1998 | A |
5774670 | Montulli | Jun 1998 | A |
5781714 | Collins et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5791992 | Crump et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5793029 | Goodwin, III | Aug 1998 | A |
5793964 | Rogers et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5793966 | Amstein et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5802380 | Bangs et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5802530 | Van Hoff | Sep 1998 | A |
5806046 | Curran et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5808617 | Kenworthy et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5815645 | Fredlund et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5819261 | Takahashi et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5819302 | Nielsen | Oct 1998 | A |
5822216 | Satchell, Jr. et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5822436 | Rhoads | Oct 1998 | A |
5822511 | Kashyap et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5822739 | Kara | Oct 1998 | A |
5823781 | Hitchcock et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5828887 | Yeager et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5831590 | Ikedo | Nov 1998 | A |
5832271 | Devanbu | Nov 1998 | A |
5832499 | Gustman | Nov 1998 | A |
5835911 | Nakagawa et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5838991 | Shipman | Nov 1998 | A |
5845084 | Cordell et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5845263 | Camaisa et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5845279 | Garofalakis et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5845299 | Arora et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5845303 | Templeman | Dec 1998 | A |
5848291 | Milne et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5848399 | Burke | Dec 1998 | A |
5848427 | Hyodo | Dec 1998 | A |
5850222 | Cone | Dec 1998 | A |
5850466 | Schott | Dec 1998 | A |
5852809 | Abel et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5854850 | Linford et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5860068 | Cook | Jan 1999 | A |
5860073 | Ferrel et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5861881 | Freeman et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5862325 | Reed et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864337 | Marvin | Jan 1999 | A |
5864851 | Breitbart et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5870140 | Gillberry | Feb 1999 | A |
5870552 | Dozier et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5870559 | Leshem et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5870718 | Spector | Feb 1999 | A |
5870771 | Oberg | Feb 1999 | A |
5875108 | Hoffberg et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5880740 | Halliday et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5880974 | Tarumi et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5881234 | Schwob | Mar 1999 | A |
5884029 | Brush, II et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5884056 | Steele | Mar 1999 | A |
5886709 | Willman | Mar 1999 | A |
5890170 | Sidana | Mar 1999 | A |
5890175 | Wong et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5892946 | Woster et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5895454 | Harrington | Apr 1999 | A |
5895476 | Orr et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5895477 | Orr et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5903892 | Hoffert et al. | May 1999 | A |
5905973 | Yonezawa et al. | May 1999 | A |
5907617 | Ronning | May 1999 | A |
5909914 | Imai et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5914713 | Nario et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5920830 | Hatfield et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5923324 | Berry et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5926179 | Matsuda et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5930769 | Rose | Jul 1999 | A |
5930810 | Farros et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5933813 | Teicher et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5937160 | Davis et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5937391 | Ikeda et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5943680 | Shimizu et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5946665 | Suzuki et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5950165 | Shaffer et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5950173 | Perkowski | Sep 1999 | A |
5956038 | Rekimoto | Sep 1999 | A |
5956737 | King et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5968120 | Guedalia | Oct 1999 | A |
5970471 | Hill | Oct 1999 | A |
5974400 | Kagami et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5974438 | Neufeld | Oct 1999 | A |
5978570 | Hillis | Nov 1999 | A |
5978833 | Pashley et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5983200 | Slotznick | Nov 1999 | A |
5983201 | Fay | Nov 1999 | A |
5983267 | Shklar et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5986670 | Dries et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987480 | Donohue et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991739 | Cupps et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991781 | Nielsen | Nov 1999 | A |
5991792 | Nageswaran | Nov 1999 | A |
5995943 | Bull et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6002855 | Ladner et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6006235 | Macdonald et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6009410 | LeMole et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6009413 | Webber et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6009436 | Motoyama et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6011536 | Hertzmann et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6014638 | Burge et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6016504 | Arnold et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6017157 | Garfinkle et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6020884 | MacNaughton et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6021218 | Capps et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6026368 | Brown et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6026376 | Kenney | Feb 2000 | A |
6026377 | Burke | Feb 2000 | A |
6029141 | Bezos et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6029142 | Hill | Feb 2000 | A |
6037936 | Ellenby et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6047268 | Bartoli et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6052729 | Robinson | Apr 2000 | A |
6058417 | Hess et al. | May 2000 | A |
6061686 | Gauvin et al. | May 2000 | A |
6061710 | Eickemeyer et al. | May 2000 | A |
6064978 | Gardner et al. | May 2000 | A |
6072944 | Robinson | Jun 2000 | A |
6076104 | McCue | Jun 2000 | A |
6081906 | Nishizawa et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6083267 | Motomiya et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6085126 | Mellgren, III et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6089424 | Colquhoun | Jul 2000 | A |
6091417 | Lefkowitz | Jul 2000 | A |
6094644 | Hillson et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6098092 | Padzensky | Aug 2000 | A |
6101293 | McKenzie | Aug 2000 | A |
6108715 | Leach et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6125352 | Franklin et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6134392 | Gove | Oct 2000 | A |
6134593 | Alexander et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6141446 | Boliek et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6141686 | Jackowski et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6144388 | Bornstein | Nov 2000 | A |
6144974 | Gartland | Nov 2000 | A |
6148336 | Thomas et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6154577 | Warnick et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6163536 | Dunn et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6167442 | Sutherland et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6170017 | Dias et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6175879 | Shah et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6175966 | Wiesenthal | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6177936 | Cragun | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6195101 | Ghislain Bossut et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6196146 | Goldberg et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6212573 | Lim et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6226412 | Schwab | May 2001 | B1 |
6230170 | Zellweger et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6232951 | Miyamoto | May 2001 | B1 |
6236979 | Kawabata | May 2001 | B1 |
6247010 | Doi et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6247011 | Jecha et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6260024 | Shkedy | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6260058 | Hoenninger et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6269366 | Romano et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272235 | Bacus et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6281874 | Sivan et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6285381 | Sawano et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6285468 | Cok et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6286003 | Muta | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6293284 | Rigg | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6301044 | Huber et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6304851 | Kmack et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6304855 | Burke | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6304898 | Shiigi | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6307568 | Rom | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6310627 | Sakaguchi | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6311185 | Markowitz et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6317192 | Silverbrook et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6317722 | Jacobi et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6317757 | Sakamaki | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6321211 | Dodd | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6331858 | Fisher | Dec 2001 | B2 |
6336136 | Harris | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6339763 | Divine et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6343264 | Fenton et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6344853 | Knight | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6348923 | Murata | Feb 2002 | B2 |
6349300 | Graf et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6353770 | Ramsey et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6356264 | Yasui et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6366910 | Rajaraman et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6381583 | Kenney | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6393135 | Girardi et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397230 | Carmel et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6404426 | Weaver | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6405175 | Ng | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6405176 | Toohey | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6414693 | Berger et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6417861 | Deering et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6437782 | Pieragostini et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6449660 | Berg et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6453300 | Simpson | Sep 2002 | B2 |
6456305 | Qureshi et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6456938 | Barnard | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6463445 | Suzuki et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6483540 | Akasawa et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6483851 | Neogi | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6484149 | Jammes et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6493736 | Forcier | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6496849 | Hanson et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6496856 | Kenner et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6532312 | Corkran | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6535294 | Arledge, Jr. et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6535878 | Guedalia et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6543870 | Kakutani | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6556243 | Dotsubo et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6556659 | Bowman-Amuah | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6563517 | Bhagwat et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6567837 | Robinson | May 2003 | B1 |
6587118 | Yoneda | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6589292 | Langford-Wilson | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6591280 | Orr | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6596032 | Nojima et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6606744 | Mikurak | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6609123 | Cazemier et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6614433 | Watts | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6615247 | Murphy | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6615279 | Robinson | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6623529 | Lakritz | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6625805 | Lam et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6626956 | Ramaley et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6643663 | Dabney et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6671387 | Chen et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6677967 | Sawano et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6680749 | Anderson et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6690364 | Webb | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6697824 | Bowman-Amuah | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6724913 | Chen et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6727928 | Richter | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6734873 | Herf et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6763373 | Shiigi | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6771801 | Fisher et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6775407 | Gindele et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6779178 | Lloyd et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785671 | Bailey et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6792575 | Samaniego et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6795585 | Parada et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6803923 | Hamburg | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6844885 | Anderson et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6857102 | Bickmore et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6891536 | Smith | May 2005 | B2 |
6894686 | Stamper et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6903756 | Giannini | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6909708 | Krishnaswamy et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6912572 | Fischer | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6915273 | Parulski | Jul 2005 | B1 |
6915484 | Ayers et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
6938073 | Mendhekar et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6940518 | Minner et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6961069 | Hashimoto | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6961905 | Cover et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6964009 | Samaniego et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6980668 | Naito et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6980963 | Hanzek | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6983416 | Bae et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7000195 | Komuro | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7013290 | Ananian | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7016977 | Dunsmoir et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7047281 | Kausik | May 2006 | B1 |
7050654 | Lunetta et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7099040 | Cooper et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7107540 | Carroll | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7120634 | Jecha et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7120860 | Imataki | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7139976 | Kausik et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7155482 | Shinohara et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7159014 | Kausik et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7177448 | Sah | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7188309 | Simmons et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7191145 | Lunetta et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7197698 | Takata et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7236647 | Lunetta et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7240284 | Jaeger | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7246044 | Imamura et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7251774 | Sunata | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7263182 | Allen et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7265763 | Bossut et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7271814 | Anwar et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7283277 | Li | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7284201 | Cohen-Solal | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7286145 | Sunata | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7302114 | Lunetta et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7310687 | Psounis et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7313361 | Steelberg et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7315659 | Lunetta et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7337133 | Bezos et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7343320 | Treyz et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
7343555 | Ko et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7355608 | Beach | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7360159 | Chailleux | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7366684 | Douglas | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7406434 | Chang et al. | Jul 2008 | B1 |
7447616 | Wang et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7447738 | Andrews et al. | Nov 2008 | B1 |
7454085 | Cazier et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7454699 | Altman et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7456993 | Walker, Jr. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7477688 | Zhang et al. | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7489322 | Beach | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7495796 | Keane et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7496554 | Kaplan | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7506245 | Jaeger | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7516183 | Shiigi | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7516403 | Fisher et al. | Apr 2009 | B1 |
7523411 | Carlin | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7529649 | Lee et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7562032 | Abbosh et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7562492 | Mueller | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7577901 | Hull et al. | Aug 2009 | B1 |
7603483 | Psounis et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7619638 | Walker, Jr. et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7627503 | Champagne et al. | Dec 2009 | B1 |
7627658 | Levett et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7631252 | Hertzfeld et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7631253 | Hertzfeld et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7633510 | Hertzfeld | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7634175 | Seo et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7634715 | Hertzfeld et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7673063 | Xie et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7683916 | Bossut et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7712035 | Giannini | May 2010 | B2 |
7725604 | Levenberg | May 2010 | B1 |
7746358 | Eilers | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7746491 | Ikeda et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7769479 | Iida et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7778884 | Bamborough et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7802014 | Psounis et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
RE41902 | Kaplan | Oct 2010 | E |
7835591 | Lunetta et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7870012 | Katz et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7920149 | Hertzfeld | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7925689 | Guedalia et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7945855 | Altman et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7970818 | Guedalia et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
8004584 | Craig et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8065284 | Kaplan | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8073900 | Guedalia et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8161368 | Hertzfeld et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8200502 | Wedwick | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8230318 | Hertzfeld et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8233009 | Hertzfeld | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8245123 | Hertzfeld et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8286073 | Jaeger | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8326930 | Patrick et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8381110 | Barger et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
20010031102 | Lunetta et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010056457 | Kikuchi et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020010794 | Stanbach Jr. et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020015044 | Edge et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020019859 | Watanabe | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020026349 | Reilly et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020062264 | Knight | May 2002 | A1 |
20020063717 | Minner et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020073214 | Iinuma | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020076219 | Uchino | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020109737 | Jaeger | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020149630 | Kitainik et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020152240 | Kitainik et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020156650 | Klein et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030051255 | Bulman et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030067560 | Suzuki | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030069560 | Adamis et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030088609 | Guedalia et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030088831 | Bauer et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030098862 | Hunt et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030110211 | Danon | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030113038 | Spencer et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030146920 | Tezuka et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030225568 | Salmonsen | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040001106 | Deutscher et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040025141 | Nanda et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040025176 | Franklin et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040030719 | Wei | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040062437 | Luo et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040133561 | Burke | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040148375 | Levett et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040148576 | Matveyenko et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040169880 | Nakanishi et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040215525 | Keane et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040215719 | Altshuler | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040217985 | Ries et al. | Nov 2004 | A9 |
20040250083 | Schwab | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040258308 | Sadovsky et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040263640 | Silverbrook | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050035944 | Itoh | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050071764 | Jaeger | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050078123 | Jaeger | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050088684 | Naito et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050102629 | Chen et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050102630 | Chen et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050198567 | Vermeulen et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050237567 | Morris | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050238251 | Lunetta et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050255852 | Steelberg et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050259883 | Lunetta et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050278794 | Leinonen et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060015580 | Gabriel et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060026504 | Balinsky | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060031392 | Lunetta et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060069984 | Jaeger | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060125819 | Hakansson | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060127059 | Fanning | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060179405 | Chao et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060188137 | Bacus et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060200761 | Judd et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060236254 | Mateescu et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070005581 | Arrouye et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070030506 | Takabayashi et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070061198 | Ramer et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070089053 | Uhlig et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070112857 | Guedalia | May 2007 | A1 |
20070136374 | Guedalia | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070192210 | Lunetta et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070239788 | Cunningham et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070260979 | Hertzfeld et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080140705 | Luo | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080155230 | Robbins et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080195938 | Tischer et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080205389 | Fang et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080207182 | Maharajh et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080225057 | Hertzfeld et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080225058 | Hertzfeld et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080275922 | Hertzfeld | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090013347 | Ahanger et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090070485 | Barger et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090240569 | Ramer et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090254672 | Zhang | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100110092 | Hertzfeld et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100110104 | Hertzfeld et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100111406 | Hertzfeld et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100153495 | Barger et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20110142361 | Hertzfeld | Jun 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO9636023 | Nov 1996 | WO |
WO9708638 | Mar 1997 | WO |
WO9808176 | Feb 1998 | WO |
WO0104840 | Jan 2001 | WO |
WO9409440 | Apr 2001 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Ijiri et al, Floral Diagrams and Inflorescences: Interactive Flower Modeling using Botanical Structural Constraints; SIGGRAPH 2006, pp. 1-6, Jul. 2006. |
Boudon et al, Interactive Design of Bonsai Tree Models, Eurographics, pp. 1-10, 2003. |
Donoghue, CoolCards: Simple Software, pp. 19-26, 1998. |
Kenneth et al, E-Commerce: Business, Technology, and Society, second edition, published by Prentice Hall, pp. 194-247, 2005. |
Belmonte, Óscar, Sergio Sancho, and José Ribelles. “Multiresolution Modeling Using Fractal Image Compression Techniques.” Journal of WSCG 11.2 (2003): 370-378. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60883595 | Jan 2007 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11969825 | Jan 2008 | US |
Child | 13540589 | US |