Patent Grant
7054464
This invention relates to apparatus and methods for controlling the scoring or grading of nonobjective assessment materials (such as essays handwritten on paper), using scorers or readers at diverse geographic locations. More particularly, the invention relates to apparatus and methods for allocating appropriate activities to scorers, distributing materials to scorers required for those activities, monitoring scorers' performance in those activities, and recording the results of the scorers' activities. The present invention provides improved control methods for scoring “on screen”, a technique marketed under the trademark “ScoreImage”. In general, the ScoreImage technique is described in the commonly assigned U.S. Pat. No. 5,672,060 (the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference).
Scorer Activities in On-screen Scoring
In on-screen scoring, nonobjective assessment materials are scored through the use of digitized images depicting the responses made for the assessment. Such digitized images are displayed on computer screens for scoring or other judgments of the assessment materials.
Through the use of captured images as the representation of the assessment materials, the need to manage and control large amounts of paper in a secure manner is eliminated. The assessment materials themselves can be kept secure at a scanning center, and need not be handled again for any part of the scoring process. Moreover, since no names or other identifying information are sent to scorers with the images of the materials to be scored, student anonymity is assured and a potential source of scorer bias is removed. Each scorer may work on a personal computer or terminal, while work for the scorer can be allocated to that scorer by an independent process.
When a scorer is ready to start or continue a session, the scorer can select from among three types of activities: training, qualifying, or scoring. For each activity, the system provides a particular “batch” or set of assessment items appropriate for that activity.
If supervisory personnel have assigned a scorer to a particular assessment, the scorer can select training and request or select a batch of assessment items appropriate for training or to help the scorer become proficient in assigning correct scores for items in that assessment. These so-called “training batches” consist exclusively of pre-scored items and may provide feedback to the scorer immediately after the scorer enters his or her score. Training batches can be pre-established or designated by supervisory personnel, and a copy of the batch can be made for the scorer, although, alternatively, training batches can be dynamically built upon request. The scorer's performance is recorded in appropriate detail and summary files so that supervisory personnel, that is, project leaders or managers, can identify scorers who are not correctly assessing the training items.
Once a scorer has completed the appropriate set of training activities, the scorer can request a so-called “qualifying batch” of assessment items, so that he or she can demonstrate his or her ability to properly score the particular assessment. “Qualifying batches” consist exclusively of pre-scored items and are used to ensure that the scorer has properly internalized the training so that the scorer provides accurate scores to assessment items. In accordance with the invention, qualifying batches are pre-established by supervisory personnel and a copy of the batch is made for the scorer, although qualifying batches may also be dynamically built upon request. When scoring qualifying batches, unlike training batches, the scorer is typically not informed of his or her performance until after scoring of the batch is completed. After scoring of the batch is completed, the scores entered by the scorer are compared to the predetermined scores, and the scorer's overall performance is compared to a pre-determined standard. The scorer's performance is recorded in appropriate detail and summary files and is made available or reported to project leaders or managers. It may then also be reported back to the scorer. After a scorer completes a required set of one or more qualifying batches, if the scorer's overall performance meets or exceeds the pre-determined standard, the scorer is deemed “qualified” to obtain batches of “live,” or unscored assessments to score. On the other hand, if the scorer fails to meet the pre-determined standard, the scorer may be required to perform additional training and take additional qualifying batches or be precluded from further participation. While most projects require that a scorer successfully meet the qualifying requirements once in any given assessment, other projects may require that the scorer take at least one qualifying batch and re-qualify each day or each scoring session.
When a scorer has become qualified, the scorer can request a batch of “live,” or unscored, assessment items. Either the entire set or a subset of the assessment items in a so-called “Assessment Scoring File” is examined to find a subset of items which can be assigned to the scorer. Typically, live items to be scored by the reader are randomly chosen from the resulting subset of items. Often, a fixed number or percentage of pre-scored so called “monitoring” items are also selected and are combined with the live assessment items to form a complete “batch” of items to be scored. The scorer then scores each of the assessment items in the batch as described in the above-mentioned application, and the resulting scores or judgments and other information are stored in a “Scorer Batch File”. As soon as the scorer completes scoring of a batch, the scored results are processed into the system. Scores given to live assessment items are stored in the appropriate assessment records, and scores given to prescored, or monitoring, items are compared to the predetermined correct score so that the scorer's accuracy and precision can be monitored.
When the scorer completes work on any batch, the system creates several records that become part of the permanent project records. These records permit accounting for each scorer's activities, as well as permitting evaluation of scorers.
Remote Scoring
In the above-mentioned patent, procedures were disclosed involving the sending of batches to scorers at remove sites via diskettes, with the results of scoring communicated back to the central site via regular telephone lines and computer modems.
(a) Distributing Materials to be Scored
For most batches, the files containing the images for the assessments to be scored will not fit on a single diskette, so that on-screen scoring at remote sites based on sending to scorers diskettes of materials to be scored is somewhat difficult to control and not entirely satisfactory.
The present embodiments of the invention, therefore, provide apparatus and methods to ensure that the images and other files needed for scoring are readily available to scorers when the work is started. This aspect of the invention, then, relates to the distribution of materials to scorers for scorers in a variety of settings and for projects with a variety of special needs, with emphasis on the use of scorers at diverse locations.
(b) Controlling Materials and Accountability of Scorers
Another aspect of the present invention is in the area of controlling materials and providing techniques of holding scorers accountable for their activities. The time delays involved in sending out diskettes containing batches to be scored can sometimes hamper control and management of a scoring project. In order to provide control of the materials and oversight of the scorers and the materials, it is best to allocate work to a scorer immediately before the scorer begins that work, and important that the results of that work be processed and evaluated before additional work is allocated to the scorer, so that the scorer is held accountable for his or her activity. This step of evaluation before allocating additional work is important to avoid allocating additional work to a scorer who has not given correct scores to the items he or she has scored. The process of evaluation also permits supervisory personnel to timely identify scorers who need additional training and requalification, or scorers who should be removed from the project.
The present invention therefore provides as one of its aspects, apparatus and methods to allocate to each scorer items to be scored immediately before the scorer begins working on those items, and thereafter, only after processing and evaluating all work already completed by the scorer. In addition, the present invention provides apparatus and methods to collect information for proper management and control of the scoring process, and provides apparatus and methods to ensure proper security of all information used within a scoring project.
(c) Settings for Scorers
It has heretofore been suggested that the invention be implemented by an arrangement in which computers are connected together in a network and an alternative arrangement in which scorers use a series of independent (non-interconnected) computers, generally at diverse locations. As is described below, the present invention contemplates and can exploit to advantage several different settings for scorers. Such settings include both physical proximity to a central site and particular techniques for distribution of materials and control of the open ended scoring process.
(i) Network Scoring
The preferred embodiment of the above-mentioned patent was an apparatus and method based on a series of independent (non-interconnected) computers. An alternative embodiment utilized a local area network (“LAN”) in which all computers used by scorers are connected to a common LAN. In this so-called “Network Scoring” setting, the items to be scored are stored in a Scorer Batch File which is created as a file on the network. Within the Scorer Batch File, each record points directly to one or more images in the image database (the “ImageBase”) so there is no need to create a special file of the images to be scored in that batch. During scoring, then, the images are drawn directly from the ImageBase of assessment item images, and the scored results or judgments are stored directly into the Scorer Batch File. Security issues are addressed in the Network Scoring setting by providing workstations that can only be used by scorers for training, qualifying, and scoring functions. By providing only “diskless” computers that automatically connect to the network, scorers are blocked from making any copies of the programs or assessment materials, and carefully designed login scripts and menus restrict scorers to access only to specific programs and files.
(ii) Remote Scoring in Groups
For groups, or clusters, of remote scorers, a Remote Network Scoring” setting can be used. This process is based on a semi-autonomous remote LAN for providing scoring. In this setting some or all of the ImageBase files and a copy of the Assessment Control File, are transferred from the primary scoring site to the remote network. Those skilled in the art will recognize that this transfer can be accomplished by high-speed data lines, magnetic tape, or other high volume storage devices. Once these files have been loaded in the remote LAN, the remote LAN and a central LAN at the primary scoring site (hereafter referred to as the “central site LAN”) are connected via a telephone link through a control program running as a node on the central site LAN which has access to files at the remote LAN. When processing, scorers at the remote network site have exactly the same interaction as scorers at a central site, but are not connected directly to the central site LAN. Requests from scorers are forwarded over telephone lines to the central site, batches are constructed at the central site, and the batches are stored directly on the remote LAN. From then on, all scoring functions are performed as they would be on a central Network Scoring system, and the images are drawn directly from the copies of the ImageBase files which have been copied to the remote network's file system.
In this setting, then, all file transfers are controlled and managed by computers at the central site LAN, and remote personnel are not given access to management files unless explicitly sent from the central site LAN to the remote LAN by project supervisory personnel.
(iii) Individual Remote Scoring
The present invention involves three distinct settings for individual remote scoring, each based on its own apparatus and method, and each appropriate for specific project needs. The first two are especially useful and desirable for projects requiring rapid responses and quick turnaround. The third is ideally suited for projects without such extreme time constraints but for which large numbers of assessments are prepared for scoring at one time.
[a] Individual Remote Scoring with Rapid Response
Some scoring projects require extremely rapid response, a need that cannot be met by diskettes or any physical delivery to scorers. Moreover, the bandwidth of standard analog telephone is often insufficient to transmit images quickly enough for viable scoring, so that file transfer by modem in lieu of diskettes is not a viable option. Projects requiring extremely rapid response might include applications in which scores are needed the same day as when the applicant is tested. The present invention therefore provides, in one of its aspects, apparatus and methods for two alternative settings whereby a centrally located computer system provides the distribution of materials to be scored to readers in a rapid fashion, so that scores can be quickly calculated with control over the distribution processing and security of the scoring process.
Fast Communications
One aspect of this invention, then, is based on the utilization of new technologies for the transfer of images for rapid response scoring projects. In this setting, new high-speed digital data lines (ISDN), highspeed connections to the Internet, or other technologies (e.g. cable systems) are used to transfer data in lieu of traditional dial-up telephone lines or diskettes.
Text in Lieu of Images
A second aspect of this invention capable of rapid scoring is based on the compressed character strings of text in lieu of bit-mapped images to transmit open ended assessments involving text materials. The assessment can either be created as text by the respondent typing the response directly into a computer, or the text can be derived from a captured image and converted to text by key-entry based on the image of the response at the central site as soon as the image of the written response is received. This procedure permits scoring based on images received by facsimile transmission as well as text received by direct electronic transfer from the testing site.
Once in text form, the written response is compressed, possibly using known secure encryption procedures, and then placed into a file similar to the files used to store bit-mapped images. A subset of the file is sent to the remote scorer using either standard telephone lines or other high speed alternatives. Using this method, then, the ImageBase is composed of compressed/encrypted text in lieu of bit-mapped images of handwriting, so that the size of the ImageBase needed for each scorer's batch is minimized and can easily be transferred using conventional analog telephone lines and conventional modems.
(a) Individual Remote Scoring with Large Image Files
For projects with few time constraints, but large files of bitmapped images, traditional telephone systems can be utilized if each scorer is provided with a large set of images that the scorer might need to score. The present invention therefore provides apparatus and methods to transfer large sets of responses to individual scorers using recordable CD-ROMS or other high capacity removable random access storage media. In this setting, each scorer is sent a CD-ROM with all the images that reader might need to view during any of the activities (training, qualifying, or scoring). Once the scorer inserts the appropriate storage media in the appropriate drive, such as a CD-ROM, all images are read directly from the storage media, thereby removing the need to receive transfer of images during processing.
(b) Security of Materials
In addition to the considerations of materials distribution and control of the scoring process, the present invention also provides apparatus and methods to control and secure all data and file access for scorers in all the settings, with special emphasis on data and file transfers for telecommunications using public telephone lines and modems in the various settings that are covered.
The present invention, therefore, provides apparatus and methods to connect users to a network while ensuring absolute security for the operation of the network and of the data on the network.
(i) Network Settings
For users on a LAN, diskless computers and tightly controlled access to programs and data files ensure that scorers have access only to files that they need and that scorers have no ability to view, copy, or modify any files except through the normal activities as described above.
(ii) Individual Remote User Settings
Traditional modem applications, either file transfer programs with or without bulletin boards or remote network connections, have inherent deficiencies for controlling remote scoring, and therefore the present invention utilizes novel apparatus to ensure security of materials.
Even with appropriate scripts, file transfer programs and bulletin boards require more expertise than many scorers can be expected to have, and there is the opportunity for scorers to make errors in the uploading and downloading of files. Furthermore, extensive procedures need to be implemented to ensure that each scorer has access only to his or her files, and to ensure that a sophisticated computer user could not modify a script to gain access to files that should remain secure.
Remote network connections involve security problems that arise when users control the execution of programs on the network, and extensive security precautions would be required to prevent sophisticated computer users from gaining access to files and programs that should be secure.
For individual remote users, then, in accordance with the present invention, all electronic communications are directly controlled by a program running on a node of the central network and acting as both a firewall against unauthorized access and as a manager of all communications to authorized scorers. This program handles all components of file access and control for all remote individual users; it ensures that only valid scorers are connected, and the program itself performs all file access to files on the network so that there can be no unauthorized access to project files. By using encrypted compressed text files when text is used in lieu of images, the system further ensures that no identifying information is transmitted in standard ASCII or text format.
There are seen in the drawings forms of the invention which are presently preferred (and which constitute the best mode contemplated for carrying the invention into effect), but is should be understood that the invention is not limited to the precise arrangements and instrumentalities shown.
Referring now to the drawings, wherein like reference numerals indicate like elements,
Referring now to
An assessment form 12, completed by a respondent, such as a test taking student, is scanned, at 14 using techniques heretofore disclosed or otherwise known to those skilled in the art.
In the preferred embodiment, two files are created in the scanning process: (a) a Scanned Data File 14, of information derived from OMR processing, and (b) a file 16 of captured images in digitized form (sometimes hereafter referred to as an “ImageBase File”). In the presently preferred embodiment, the scanned data records are stored in a fixed-record format.
In the scanning process, completed identification fields, such as those for respondent's name, date of birth, identification number and sex are typically processed, converted into characters representing the intended responses, and stored in the Scanned Data File 14.
As completed objective test item responses or other OMR fields for objective test items are scanned, they are converted into characters representing the intended responses, and also stored in the Scanned Data File 14.
For each assessment form 12 scanned, at least one captured image will be placed in the ImageBase File 16. It will be understood that each image in the ImageBase File 16 is stored in digitized bit-mapped or compressed bit-mapped format with appropriate header control information. The location of the header relative to the start of the ImageBase File 16, that is, the “offset” for that image, is stored in the Scanned Data File 14.
Referring again to
Referring again to
For convenience, the Scanned Data File 14, ImageBase File 16, Assessment Control File 18 and Scorer Resource File 22 may be referred to as “original files”.
As shown in
If desired, respective separate ImageBase Files 16a and Assessment Scoring Files 24a can be maintained, as the case may be, for “live” assessment items to be scored, for training items, for qualifying items and/or validity or monitoring items. Whether stored in a common Assessment Scoring File 24 or in multiple such files, the assessments, training items, qualifying items and validity items must be properly identified within scorer batches and the appropriate locations of the corresponding images must be determined from the batch. In the currently preferred embodiment, all unscored assessments are stored in the Assessment Scoring File 24 and corresponding ImageBase 16, while all pre-scored items are stored in a separate Assessment Scoring File 24a and all corresponding images are copied into a corresponding pre-scored ImageBase File 16a. Other arrangements will occur to those skilled in the art. For reasons of simplicity,
In all of the embodiments shown in
In the embodiment shown in
Referring now to
Each scorer's “batch” may consist of a series of images stored in a single Batch Image File 34, or other equivalent arrangements may be used. A companion file, called the Scorer Batch File 32, is suitable for traditional data processing, and typically contains one record corresponding to each image. This companion file 32 provides sequencing and identifying information for each image as well as the location of the corresponding image in the Scorer Batch-Image File 34, copied from the diskette 28, and the locations in which the scorer's judgments can be stored. As indicated above, the batch typically includes training, qualifying and validity items, in addition to “live” assessment items.
Sets of assessments are selected for each scorer from Assessment Scoring File 24. At least one set typically will be made up exclusively of training items so that the scorer can become familiar with the scoring criteria. Another set typically will be made up predominantly of validity items so that the scorer can demonstrate mastery of the scoring procedures so that they become eligible to be sent materials for actual scoring. The requirements will vary from project to project, but will typically require at least 80% correct scoring of the validity items.
After a scorer has demonstrated mastery by correctly scoring training items, the scorer is given access to assessment materials to score. Referring again to
At the same time that the Scorer Batch File 32 is created, the student information in the Assessment Scoring File 24 is used to access the corresponding records in the Scanned Data File 14. From the Scanned Data File 14, the offsets for each image are obtained. Based on these offsets, the corresponding records are read from the ImageBase File 16 and these images are then stored in a Scorer ImageBase File 34. The corresponding new offset for each image in the Scorer ImageBase File 34 is saved in the corresponding record of the Scorer Batch File 32.
The present invention provides, in each of its embodiments, a process of recording judgments using the same computer on which the image is displayed. In this process, when a scorer or reader is ready to record his or her judgment, the scorer presses a key on the computer keyboard to call up a “window” in which judgments can be displayed. Then, by entering appropriate digits or codes using the keyboard, the scorer can record the judgments. The entered judgments are simultaneously displayed with appropriate identifying information in the window on the computer screen.
Once all items have been scored, the Scorer Batch File 32 is returned to the central office, preferably through telecommunications. When the file is received, summary statistics will be calculated and posted to the corresponding scorer record in a Scorer Summary File 36. Only if performance on embedded validity items is in an acceptable range is the scorer deemed to be reliable and the assessment judgments (scores) on live assessment items are transferred to the Assessment Scoring File 24.
When a scorer is ready to perform an activity, the scorer makes a request for a batch, and the scorer's request is stored in Project Request Queue 40. When a scorer wants to complete a training batch, he or she selects an appropriate template batch, and then processes or scores that batch. When a scorer wants to complete a qualifying batch an appropriate template is copied to become a scorer-specific qualifying batch, or scorer batch file 32. When a scorer requests a batch of “live” assessments, the Scorer Resource File 22 is examined to determine the scorer's eligibility (that is, qualification) to score items, and then some or all of the items in the Assessment Scoring File 24 are examined to identify items that the scorer is qualified to score. The Scorer Batch File 32 sent to the network scorer is made up of live assessment items to be scored, with or without previously scored validity items which may be included to test the ongoing accuracy of the scorer.
In network scoring as depicted in
As shown in
In individual remote scoring with high speed electronic distribution (
Referring now to
A significant aspect of the present invention is the fact that all activities by scorers are duly recorded and stored in appropriate files. Every significant event initiated by a scorer, from logging into the system to signing out, is recorded with appropriate date and time information in the Project Log File 42, so that all scorer activities and their times are accurately accounted for. In Network Scoring (FIG. 2), the information is written directly to the Project Log File 42. In Remote Network Scoring (FIG. 5), the information is written to the Local Scorer Event File 54, which is then transferred to the central network Project Log File 42. For Individual Remote Scoring (
For any given batch of items, information on each assessment item to be scored is stored in the Scorer Batch File (designated by the reference numerals 32 and 52, respectively, for scorers scoring on networks in
In the preferred embodiments of Individual Remote Scoring (
It will be seen in
Once a connection has been established and the caller's identity verified, the Remote Control Program 72 first copies all logs of scorer activities to the central file system, taking records from the local Scorer Event File 68 and distributing them to the appropriate files such as the Project Log File 42, the Project Request Queue 40, and the central system Scorer Event File 44. Then the Remote Control Program 72 copies completed batches of scored data from the Scorer Batch File 58 of the scorer's computer to the Scorer Batch File 32 of the central system and instructs the scorer's computer to erase the completed files. For each completed file, the Remote Control Program 72 posts a request in the Project Request Queue 40 so that the information in the completed batch will be processed. In addition to any additional housekeeping tasks, and logging all transmissions in the Project Log File 42, the Remote Control Program 72 transmits any new Scorer Batch Files 32 to the scorer and copies are stored on the scorer's computer at 58. If the scorer is providing Individual Remote Rapid Response Scoring (described above in relation to FIGS. 7 and 9), the Remote Control Program 72 also copies corresponding Scorer Batch Image Files 56 for each Scorer Batch File 32 from the central system onto the scorer's personal computer at 60. Once all activities are done, the Remote Control Program 72 terminates the communication link.
The above-described process is desirable in that it provides a “firewall” to prevent unauthorized access by unauthorized users to any of the files on the central network. Even if an unauthorized user were to establish communication connection with the network, such a user would still be unable to read from or write to files on the network since only the Remote Control Program 72 actually performs any record transactions to or from the files stored on the network.
The present invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from its spirit or essential attributes. Accordingly, reference should be made to the claims rather than the foregoing specification as indicating the scope of the invention.
This application is a continuation of application Ser. No. 09/862,116, filed May 21, 2001, and now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 6,466,683; which was a continuation of application Ser. No. 09/405,953 filed on Sep. 27, 1999, and now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 6,256,399; which was a continuation of application Ser. No. 08/610,584 filed on Mar. 7, 1996 and now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 5,987,149; which was a continuation-in-part of application Ser. No. 08/345,214, filed Nov. 28, 1994, and now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 5,672,060; which was a continuation of application Ser. No. 07/911,663, filed Jul. 8, 1992, abandoned; which applications are incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3405457 | Bitzer | Oct 1968 | A |
| 3538626 | Frank | Nov 1970 | A |
| 3762072 | From | Oct 1973 | A |
| 3932948 | Goddard et al. | Jan 1976 | A |
| 4004354 | Yamauchi | Jan 1977 | A |
| 4151659 | Lien et al. | May 1979 | A |
| 4205780 | Burns et al. | Jun 1980 | A |
| 4358277 | Moyers et al. | Nov 1982 | A |
| 4478584 | Kaney | Oct 1984 | A |
| 4518267 | Hepp | May 1985 | A |
| 4518361 | Conway | May 1985 | A |
| 4553261 | Froessl | Nov 1985 | A |
| 4627818 | Von Fellenberg | Dec 1986 | A |
| 4648062 | Johnson et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
| 4671772 | Slade et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
| 4694352 | Ina et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
| 4705479 | Maron | Nov 1987 | A |
| 4708503 | Poor | Nov 1987 | A |
| 4715818 | Shapiro et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
| 4741047 | Sharpe, II | Apr 1988 | A |
| 4760246 | Shepard | Jul 1988 | A |
| 4764120 | Griffin et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
| 4785472 | Shapiro | Nov 1988 | A |
| 4789543 | Linder | Dec 1988 | A |
| 4798543 | Spiece | Jan 1989 | A |
| 4845739 | Katz | Jul 1989 | A |
| 4867685 | Brush et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
| 4878175 | Norden-Paul et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
| 4895518 | Arnold et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
| 4908759 | Alexander, Jr. et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
| 4930077 | Fan | May 1990 | A |
| 4937439 | Wanninger et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
| 4958284 | Bishop et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
| 4978305 | Kraft | Dec 1990 | A |
| 4996642 | Hey | Feb 1991 | A |
| 5002491 | Abrahamson et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
| 5003613 | Lovelady et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
| 5011413 | Ferris et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
| 5023435 | Deniger | Jun 1991 | A |
| 5035625 | Munson et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
| 5038392 | Morris et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
| 5054096 | Beizer | Oct 1991 | A |
| 5058185 | Morris et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
| 5059127 | Lewis et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
| 5072383 | Brimm et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
| 5086385 | Launey et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
| 5100329 | Deesen et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
| 5101447 | Sokoloff et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
| 5103490 | McMillin | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5105354 | Nishimura | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5119433 | Will | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5134669 | Keogh et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
| 5140650 | Casey et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
| 5147205 | Gross et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5151948 | Lyke et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5176520 | Hamilton | Jan 1993 | A |
| 5180309 | Egnor | Jan 1993 | A |
| 5195033 | Samph et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
| 5204813 | Samph et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
| 5211564 | Martinez et al. | May 1993 | A |
| 5258855 | Lech et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5259766 | Sack et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5261823 | Kurokawa | Nov 1993 | A |
| RE34476 | Norwood | Dec 1993 | E |
| 5267865 | Lee et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
| 5294229 | Hartzell et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
| 5302132 | Corder | Apr 1994 | A |
| 5310349 | Daniels et al. | May 1994 | A |
| 5318450 | Carver | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5321611 | Clark et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5344132 | LeBrun et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
| 5376007 | Zirm | Dec 1994 | A |
| 5379213 | Derks | Jan 1995 | A |
| 5387104 | Corder | Feb 1995 | A |
| 5416312 | Lamoure | May 1995 | A |
| 5418865 | Bloomberg | May 1995 | A |
| 5433615 | Clark | Jul 1995 | A |
| 5437554 | Clark et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
| 5437555 | Ziv-El | Aug 1995 | A |
| 5452379 | Poor | Sep 1995 | A |
| 5458493 | Clark et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
| 5466159 | Clark et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
| 5496175 | Oyama et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
| 5544255 | Smithies et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
| 5558521 | Clark et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5565316 | Kershaw et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
| 5596698 | Morgan | Jan 1997 | A |
| 5634101 | Blau | May 1997 | A |
| 5647017 | Smithies et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5672060 | Poor | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5690497 | Clark et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5691895 | Kurtzberg et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5709551 | Clark et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5716213 | Clark et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5718591 | Clark et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5735694 | Clark et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5752836 | Clark et al. | May 1998 | A |
| 5987149 | Poor | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5987302 | Driscoll et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5991595 | Romano et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6042384 | Loiacono | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6155839 | Clark et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6157921 | Barnhill | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6159018 | Clark et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6168440 | Clark et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6183261 | Clark et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6193521 | Clark et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6256399 | Poor | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6466683 | Poor | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6558166 | Clark et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6749435 | Clark et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 20040063087 | Clark et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040086841 | Clark et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040202991 | Clark et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 0 171 663 | Feb 1986 | EP |
| 2 274 932 | Aug 1994 | GB |
| 56-10634 | Jan 1978 | JP |
| 3-1709 | May 1984 | JP |
| 5-74825 | Feb 1987 | JP |
| 62-75578 | Apr 1987 | JP |
| 404147288 | May 1992 | JP |
| WO 9005970 | May 1990 | WO |
| WO 9906930 | Feb 1999 | WO |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20030086586 A1 | May 2003 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 09862116 | May 2001 | US |
| Child | 10272469 | US | |
| Parent | 09405953 | Sep 1999 | US |
| Child | 09862116 | US | |
| Parent | 08610584 | Mar 1996 | US |
| Child | 09405953 | US | |
| Parent | 07911663 | Jul 1992 | US |
| Child | 08345214 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 08345214 | Nov 1994 | US |
| Child | 08610584 | US |
