The present invention is generally related to scheduling employees of a company and, more particularly, is related to systems and methods for scheduling call center agents.
Existing forecasting and scheduling solutions allow call center managers to forecast workload and schedule the right number of skilled agents at the right times to meet their service goals. However, existing solutions do not factor quality of performance in determining a schedule. Therefore, call center supervisors have had to use inefficient manual processes, including manual scheduling of agents, to ensure that customers receive the desired service quality.
In addition, call centers have access to data about the quality of calls that are serviced. This data is collected based on a sophisticated set of voice recordings, forms filled out by supervisors, and other means for automatically and semi-automatically evaluating how well a call/customer was serviced. This data is kept as call details (e.g., time of day/date, type of call, customer information, etc.) and as agent details (e.g., name of agent, skills, experience, etc.). In addition, call centers can also have access to details regarding the actual schedule of agent operations (e.g., days, dates that agents worked, including their work shifts and break times, agent skills) and the actual record of call statistics overall (e.g., call service levels achieved, queue sizes, abandonment rates—all for various times of days, days of weeks, specific dates, etc.).
Systems and methods for scheduling call center agents are provided. Briefly described, one embodiment of such a system, among others, comprises an agent computing device that is capable of obtaining quality scores of agents and transmitting the quality scores of agents over a network. The quality score is a measurement of manager computing device that is capable of receiving the quality scores of agents over the network, receiving a scheduled interval, and receiving a quality goal for the scheduled interval. The quality goal is a desired measurement of quality that the agents collectively provide to the call center. The manager computing device is further capable of determining a quality goal score for the scheduled interval based on the received quality scores of agents, and determining a schedule for the agents based on the quality goal, the quality goal score, and the scheduled interval.
An embodiment of a method, among others, can be broadly summarized as comprising the steps of: obtaining quality scores of agents; defining a scheduled interval; defining a quality goal for the scheduled interval; determining a quality goal score for the scheduled interval based on the quality scores of the agents; and determining a schedule for the agents based on the quality goal, the quality goal score, and the scheduled interval.
Embodiments of the present invention can also be viewed as providing methods for optimizing call center performance. In this regard, one embodiment of such a method, among others, can be broadly summarized as comprising the steps of: obtaining quality performance of agents data that includes information on the quality of service and quality characteristics of the agent; obtaining call center operations data that includes information on statistics and details of a call center; correlating the quality performance of agents data and the call center operations data; identifying correlation-based discovery; and optimizing call center performance based on the correlation-based discovery.
Other systems, methods, features, and advantages of the present invention will be or become apparent to one with skill in the art upon examination of the following drawings and detailed description. It is intended that all such additional systems, methods, features, and advantages be included within this description, be within the scope of the present invention, and be protected by the accompanying claims.
Many aspects of the invention can be better understood with reference to the following drawings. The components in the drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon clearly illustrating the principles of the present invention. Moreover, in the drawings, like reference numerals designate corresponding parts throughout the several views.
Disclosed herein are systems and methods that involve the scheduling of call center agents. In particular, the scheduling of agents can be achieved using a quality goal for a scheduled interval. In some embodiments, a schedule can be generated using statistical correlation of historical data associated with a call center and the agents. In this regard, correlation-based discovery (or patterns) can be analyzed to help supervisors improve the quality of service provided by the agents. For example, the supervisors may be interested in how quality of service (poor versus good quality of service) may be correlated with other contact center statistics. These statistics can include agent skill group, schedule information (time of day, date, etc.), and queue load information, for example.
Exemplary systems are first discussed with reference to the figures. Although these systems are described in detail, they are provided for purposes of illustration only and various modifications are feasible. After the exemplary systems have been described, examples of display diagrams and operations of the systems are provided to explain the manner in which the scheduling of the call center agents and the correlation of historical data can be achieved.
Referring now in more detail to the figures,
The one or more user interface devices 55 comprise elements with which the user (e.g, agent) can interact with the agent computing device 29, 31, 33. Where the agent computing device 29, 31, 33 comprises a personal computer (e.g., desktop or laptop computer) or similar device, these components can comprise those typically used in conjunction with a PC such as a keyboard and mouse.
The one or more I/O devices 57 comprise components used to facilitate connection of the agent computing device to other devices and therefore, for instance, comprise one or more serial, parallel, small computer system interface (SCSI), universal serial bus (USB), or IEEE 1394 (e.g., Firewire™) connection elements. The networking devices 59 comprise the various components used to transmit and/or receive data over the network 36, where provided. By way of example, the networking devices 59 include a device that can communicate both inputs and outputs, for instance, a modular/demodular (e.g., modem), a radio frequency (RF) or infrared (IR) transceiver, a telephonic interface, a bridge, and a router, as well as a network card, etc.
Memory 43 comprises various programs (in software and/or firmware), including an operating system (O/S) 46 and an agent scheduling application 49. The O/S 46 controls the execution of programs, including the agent scheduling application 49, and provides scheduling, input-output control, file and data management, memory management, communication control and related services. The agent scheduling application 49 facilitates the process for transmitting quality scores of agents. Typically, the process involves receiving evaluations corresponding to the agents and transmitting the evaluations via the network 36, and receiving the schedule of the agents based on configured quality goals and calculated correlation-based discovery. Operation of the agent scheduling application 49 is described in relation to
The architecture for the manager computing device 39 is similar to the architecture of the agent computing device 29, 31, 33 described above. That is, the manager computing device 39 includes a processing device 61, one or more user interface devices 75, one or more I/O devices 77, and one or more networking devices 79, each of which is connected to a local interface 73. The user interface device 75 is connected to a display device 76, which includes a display diagram 78. Examples of the display diagrams 78 are further described in
The memory 63 includes agent performance database 62, quality performance database 64, call center operations database 65, quality score database 67, manager scheduling application 69, and performance correlation application 70. Typically, the agent schedule database 62 includes, but is not limited to, information on shift details and shift-related information of the agents; the quality performance database 64 includes, but is not limited to, information on the quality of service and quality characteristics of the agent; the call center operation database 65 includes, but is not limited to, information on statistics and details of a call center; and the quality score database 67 includes, but is not limited to, the quality scores of the agents.
The performance correlation application 70 provides statistical correlation of historical data associated with a call center and the agents. Correlation-based discovery (or patterns) is then analyzed to help supervisors improve the quality of service provided by the agents. Operation of the performance correlation application 70 is described in relation to
By selecting option “Quality Score Calculator” 86, display diagram 78b entitled “Configure: Quality Score Calculator” is displayed. This diagram is used for configuring the calculation of quality scores of the agents. The Quality Score Calculator display diagram 78b includes a “Look Back Days” option 89 and “Quality Score Calculation Mode” option 91. The look back days option 89 enables the user to calculate quality scores of the agents in the past days, for example, for the past seven days. In other embodiments, the quality score can be calculated over past hours, weeks, a specific queue of the day, a specific day of the week, holidays, and events, for example.
In this example, each agent is evaluated on a daily basis based on evaluations and is given a quality score for each day. The quality score is stored in the quality score database 67 of the manager computing device 39. The agent could also be evaluated on different types of work or evaluated on one type of work performed in multiple intervals. Hence, an agent can receive a single quality score for one type of work or multiple quality scores for different types of work. For example, an agent might provide high quality when interacting during English language calls, but low quality when interacting during Spanish language calls.
The quality score calculation mode 91 enables the user to configure a mode of calculating the quality scores of the agents for the number of days entered in the “look back days” option 89. For example, the mode of calculation can be the average score of the agents during the previous 7-day interval. Other modes of calculation include, but are not limited to, medium score, lowest score, and highest score, for example.
In service goal section 109, a “Make Goal Constant” option 113 enables the supervisor to set the same goal for the specified intervals being scheduled. A service level option 116 enables the supervisor to configure a level of service that the agents should be providing during the specified intervals. For example, the supervisor can specify that the agents should answer 80% (option 119) of the incoming calls within 30 seconds (option 121) or that each agent should answer a call on average (option 123) within, for example, two seconds of an incoming call (option 126).
A quality goal section 111 enables a user to schedule, for example, 2 agents (option 131) or a percentage of the agents (option 133) having at least a quality score of 80 (option 136) during the past working 7-day period. As mentioned above, the quality score is calculated based on evaluations of performance given to each agent. In this example, the quality score indicates the quality of service that the agents have demonstrated during the past 7-day period. The display diagram 78f further includes action features 139 such as “Ok”, “Cancel”, “Apply”, and “Help”.
After the supervisor completes configuring the parameters used in calculating a schedule, the user can select the “Ok” button of the action features 139 to start calculating the schedule for the agents. The operation of scheduling agents based on quality data and correlation-base discovery is further described in relation to
The Gantt chart 78h provides various activities for each employee, which can be color coded. For example, employee 10 should come into work at 5:30 am and begin answering calls (130), get a break (132) from 8:00-8:30 am, answer calls (130) from 8:30-10:30 am, and should attend a manager meeting (134) from 10:30-11:00 am. There is no intention to limit the invention to this particular type of activity. Other types of activities may include training and installation of an application, for example. The staffing with quality section 120 provides a total number of agents staffed for a 15-minute interval who are meeting their quality goal. Exclamation marks 135 next to the employees 10 and 7 indicate that they have not met their quality goal. The supervisor can click on an exclamation mark for more information.
The general issues folder 144 can include, for example, problem 146 indicating that only three agents are scheduled on Jul. 4, 2005 at 7:30 am, but that a corresponding minimum quality agents constraint requires 4 agents. Additionally, problem 149 indicates that only two agents are scheduled on Jul. 5, 2005 at 7:00 am, but the minimum quality agents constraint requires 4 agents; problem 151 indicates that only one agent is scheduled on Jul. 7, 2005 at 4:45 pm, but the minimum quality agents constraint requires 2 agents; and problem 153 indicates that no agents are scheduled to work between Jul. 10, 2005 at 3:00 am and Jul. 11, 2005 at 5:00 am.
The visualization issues folder 166 can include, for example: discovery (or pattern) 167 that indicates employees 9 and 10 repeatedly perform poorly half an hour before and after lunch; pattern 168 that indicates employee 1 repeatedly performs poorly from 5:00 am to 9:00 am on the 4th of July and performs very well afterwards; and pattern 169 that indicates employee 7 repeatedly performs poorly from 5:00 am to 7:30 am in the mornings. Patterns 167, 168, 169 can affect the calculated schedule. By providing such patterns, the supervisor can manually change the calculated schedule to improve the performance of the agents. Additionally or alternatively, a schedule can be automatically or semi-automatically calculated using such patterns.
In block 179, the agent-manager system 27 determines quality scores of the agents based on the past working interval. In block 183, an interval is defined for another schedule, and in block 185, a quality goal can be defined for the call center performance. It should be noted that a quality goal can be defined for agents based on the correlation-based discovery calculated by the performance correlation application 70. For example, to assist a supervisor in defining a quality goal (and/or a service goal) of the call center during the Christmas season, the supervisor may access historical patterns on the performance of the call center during the last two Christmas seasons. The performance during the last two Christmas seasons may influence the supervisor as the levels of quality goal and service goal are configured.
In block 187, the quality goal score for each schedule of the agents is calculated based on the quality scores of the agents. In block 189, the schedule is calculated based on the defined quality goal, the calculated quality goal score, and the correlation-based discovery. As mentioned above, the supervisor can manually change the calculated schedule to improve the performance of the agents based on the correlation-base discovery. Additionally or alternatively, a schedule can be automatically or semi-automatically calculated using the correlation-base discovery that relates to the performance of the agents and the scheduled interval. In block 190, the flow diagram returns to block 171 where the schedule is executed.
The parameters obtained from the databases 62, 64, 65 are inputted into the performance correlation application 70, which identifies patterns (or correlation-based discovery) that show why and/or when certain poor performance occurs repeatedly and correlated with exogenous events such as high AHT or long queue times. The identified patterns are communicated to the I/O interface, such as display device 76 shown in
In block 195, the filtered data represents two axes of information, for example, call quality and some second axis (X). This two-axis data is inputted into a Pearson r linear correlation formula, which computes the value of r, known as the correlation coefficient. The correlation coefficient ranges from −1 (perfect negative correlation) to 0 (no correlation) to 1 (perfect positive correlation). In addition, statistical significance p (e.g., p<0.050) is computed based on total amount of data used to compute r and based on the probability of the value of r, which is based on random data. This significance value p, the total data set size N, and the correlation coefficient r constitute the outputs of the correlation engine, as shown in block 197. In block 198, a user can adjust the thresholds on desired levels of r magnitude, significance value p, data set size minima N, and other filters such as filtering to a single agent or a set of agents for data to be used in the correlation analyses. In addition, a user can also turn the pre-process filter on or off and input other combinations of paired values.
In some embodiments, the operation of the correlation performance application can be described as a method for taking an exemplary quality of service measurement of a specific call or interval, and mining the exemplar to indicate other call episodes that are statistically correlated in terms of quality of service and in terms of one or more of the set X details with the exemplar. For example, a manager discovers a poor call of Joe's on Wednesday afternoon and requests a correlation between Joe's poor calls across a range of days. Based on the results of the correlation, the manager finds a list of poor calls by Joe on Wednesdays. The list indicates to the manager that Joe does poorly on Wednesdays consistently.
Another correlation computational method is clustering, which takes all evaluated and unevaluated calls and clusters them, or partitions them into sets based on one or more parameters that are statistically correlated with quality of service. A manager can visualize each “cluster” for the user and preferably annotate which calls are evaluated and which are unevaluated. Yet another correlation computational method is statistical trend analysis, which looks for temporal trends in correlated sets of calls to show that quality of service is increasing or decreasing statistically significantly over time.
In block 209, the manager scheduling application 69 determines a quality goal score for the defined interval based on the determined quality scores of the agent. In block 210, correlation-based discovery from the performance correlation application can be displayed so that a user can view and manually change the schedule based on the correlation-based discovery. In an alternative embodiment, the correlation-based discovery is inputted into the manager scheduling application to assist in determining the schedule. One or more schedules are determined for scheduling the agents, as indicated in block 211, based on the quality goal score of the schedules, the received quality goal for the scheduled interval, and the correlation-based discovery. In block 213, the one or more schedules are displayed for the manager on a display device 76. In block 216, the one or more schedules are transmitted to the agent computing device over the network.
There are two types of quality goals that are handled differently by the manager scheduling application. The first type of quality goals can be referred to as minimum agents with quality. This type of goal specifies that at least X agents are present in every interval with a quality score of at least Y. The second type of quality goal can be referred to as percent agents with quality. This type of goal specified that at least X percent of the scheduled agents in every interval have a quality score of at least Y.
In the scheduled interval, staffing 236 can be computed for every potential schedule by summing the total number of agents skilled and scheduled to be working on a particular queue in that interval. If the agents are skilled to work on multiple queues in the scheduled interval, the agents should be counted as a full agent towards the staffing number on each queue. For example, five agents are skilled and scheduled to work on the customer service queue for the interval of 8:00 am-8:15 am. Seven agents are skilled and scheduled to work on the sales queue. Three agents are skilled and scheduled to work on both the queues. This should result in a total of eight agents and ten agents qualified to be working on the customer service queue and sales queue, respectively.
Next, quality staffing 226 can be computed for the scheduled interval via a similar method. The quality staffing 226 is the total number of agents skilled and scheduled to be working on a particular queue in that interval who have a quality score that is greater than the quality score of at least Y specified in the goal. If the agents are skilled to work on multiple queues in an interval, the agents should be counted as a full agent towards the staffing number on each queue where they meet the quality goal. For example, one of the five agents skilled to work the customer service queue has a quality score of at least 75. Two of the seven agents skilled to work on the sales queue have a quality score of at least 85. Of the three agents skilled to work both queues: one meets the quality score for customer service, and one meets the quality score from sales. This should result in a total of two agents and three agents qualified to be worked on the customer service queue and sales queue, respectively.
Alternatively, a manager may care about a portion of time that agents actually spend on the queue instead of just the number of agents skilled to work that queue. In that case, the staffing 236 and quality staffing 226 can be computed differently. The staffing 236 can be determined as the equivalent amount of dedicated agents needed to provide the same service level as the current collection of multi skilled agents on the queue. The quality staffing 226 can be determined as the sum of the contributions to the queue for each of the agents skilled to work that queue.
The Required Agents Relaxation Algorithm 223 computes the required agents 226 with quality for the scheduled interval. In the case of the minimum agents goal, this calculation simply returns the at least X agents specified in the quality goal. For example, the quality goal for the customer service queue specifies at least three agents with a quality score of 75. Therefore, the required agents should be three for the scheduled interval.
The quality goal Score Formula 229 uses the required quality staffing value 226 and the quality staffing value 239 for each interval to compute the quality goal score 231 that reflects how closely this potential schedule meets the quality goal. If the quality staffing 239 is greater than or equal to the required quality staffing 226, clearly the goal is met. If the quality staffing 239 is less than the required quality staffing 226, there is deviation from the goal.
In the case of the Percent Agents goal, the algorithm can be more complex, such as by using the concept of relaxation and multiple passes to avoid over-constraining the search. Relaxation is a heuristic search technique that employs solving a simplified version of a problem as an intermediate step to solving the complete problem. In this case, early in the search, the quality goal is relaxed so the Required Agents Relaxation Algorithm 223 returns 0. This allows the Search Engine 233 to explore schedules that staff the call center optimally and meet service goals without restricting the Search Engine 233 to evaluating only schedules that meet the quality goal.
Then, at the beginning of a later pass, the Search Engine 233 sets the Required Agents Relaxation Algorithm 223 to compute the required staffing 226. At this point, the algorithm computes the required quality staffing 226 to meet the quality goal and cache it. The Search Engine 233 then instructs the Algorithm 223 to disable relaxation so the cached value should be returned instead of 0. The Search Engine 233 should also set to re-compute the required staffing 226 before each subsequent pass. For example: if there are ten staffing 236 and three quality staffing 239 are scheduled to work on the sales queue for the interval of 8:00 AM-8:15 AM, then the Agents Relaxation Algorithm 223 calculates zero required quality staffing 226. If the quality goal is twenty percent (20%) of staffing, then the required quality staffing is two, which is 20% of ten staffing 236. Once the required agents 226 are computed for the percent agents goal, the values are used by the Quality Goal Score Formula 229 just as in the minimum agents goal method that is stated above.
Finally, the application displays status messages displaying when the goal is met and is not met and displays the staffing for each 15-minute interval that meets the quality goal. This allows the users to validate that their goals are being met by the created schedule.
It should be noted that in the foregoing description, any process descriptions or blocks in flow charts should be understood as representing modules, segments, or portions of code which include one or more executable instructions for implementing specific logical functions or steps in the process, and alternate implementations are included within the scope of the preferred embodiment of the present invention in which functions may be executed out of order from that shown or discussed, including substantially concurrently or in reverse order, depending on the functionality involved, as would be understood by those reasonably skilled in the art of the present invention.
It should be emphasized that the above-described embodiments of the present invention, merely possible examples of implementations, merely set forth for a clear understanding of the principles of the invention. Many variations and modifications may be made to the above-described embodiments of the invention without departing substantially from the spirit and principles of the invention. All such modifications and variations are intended to be included herein within the scope of this disclosure and the present invention and protected by the following claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3594919 | De Bell et al. | Jul 1971 | A |
3705271 | De Bell et al. | Dec 1972 | A |
4510351 | Costello et al. | Apr 1985 | A |
4684349 | Ferguson et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
4694483 | Cheung | Sep 1987 | A |
4763353 | Canale et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4815120 | Kosich | Mar 1989 | A |
4924488 | Kosich | May 1990 | A |
4953159 | Hayden et al. | Aug 1990 | A |
5016272 | Stubbs et al. | May 1991 | A |
5101402 | Chiu et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5117225 | Wang | May 1992 | A |
5210789 | Jeffus et al. | May 1993 | A |
5239460 | LaRoche | Aug 1993 | A |
5241625 | Epard et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5267865 | Lee et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5299260 | Shaio | Mar 1994 | A |
5311422 | Loftin et al. | May 1994 | A |
5315711 | Barone et al. | May 1994 | A |
5317628 | Misholi et al. | May 1994 | A |
5347306 | Nitta | Sep 1994 | A |
5388252 | Dreste et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5396371 | Henits et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5432715 | Shigematsu et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5465286 | Clare et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5475625 | Glaschick | Dec 1995 | A |
5485569 | Goldman et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5491780 | Fyles et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5499291 | Kepley | Mar 1996 | A |
5535256 | Maloney et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5572652 | Robusto et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5577112 | Cambray et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5590171 | Howe et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5597312 | Bloom et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5619183 | Ziegra et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5696906 | Peters et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5717879 | Moran et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5721842 | Beasley et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5742670 | Bennett | Apr 1998 | A |
5748499 | Trueblood | May 1998 | A |
5778182 | Cathey et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5784452 | Carney | Jul 1998 | A |
5790798 | Beckett, II et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796952 | Davis et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5809247 | Richardson et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5809250 | Kisor | Sep 1998 | A |
5825869 | Brooks et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5835572 | Richardson, Jr. et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5862330 | Anupam et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864772 | Alvarado et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5884032 | Bateman et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5907680 | Nielsen | May 1999 | A |
5918214 | Perkowski | Jun 1999 | A |
5923746 | Baker et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5933811 | Angles et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5944791 | Scherpbier | Aug 1999 | A |
5948061 | Merriman et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5958016 | Chang et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5964836 | Rowe et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5978648 | George et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5982857 | Brady | Nov 1999 | A |
5987466 | Greer et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5990852 | Szamrej | Nov 1999 | A |
5991373 | Pattison et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991796 | Anupam et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6005932 | Bloom | Dec 1999 | A |
6009429 | Greer et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6014134 | Bell et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6014647 | Nizzari et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6018619 | Allard et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6035332 | Ingrassia et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6038544 | Machin et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6039575 | L'Allier et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6057841 | Thurlow et al. | May 2000 | A |
6058163 | Pattison et al. | May 2000 | A |
6061798 | Coley et al. | May 2000 | A |
6072860 | Kek et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6076099 | Chen et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6078894 | Clawson et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6091712 | Pope et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6108711 | Beck et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6122665 | Bar et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6122668 | Teng et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6130668 | Stein | Oct 2000 | A |
6138139 | Beck et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6144991 | England | Nov 2000 | A |
6146148 | Stuppy | Nov 2000 | A |
6151622 | Fraenkel et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6154771 | Rangan et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6157808 | Hollingsworth | Dec 2000 | A |
6171109 | Ohsuga | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6182094 | Humpleman et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6195679 | Bauersfeld et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6201948 | Cook et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6211451 | Tohgi et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6225993 | Lindblad et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6230197 | Beck et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6236977 | Verba et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6244758 | Solymar et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6282548 | Burner et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6286030 | Wenig et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6286046 | Bryant | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6288753 | DeNicola et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6289340 | Purnam et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6301462 | Freeman et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6301573 | McIlwaine et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6324282 | McIlwaine et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6347374 | Drake et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6351467 | Dillon | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6353851 | Anupam et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6360250 | Anupam et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6370574 | House et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6404857 | Blair et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6411989 | Anupam et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6418471 | Shelton et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6459787 | McIlwaine et al. | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6487195 | Choung et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6493758 | McLain | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6502131 | Vaid et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6510220 | Beckett, II et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6535909 | Rust | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6542602 | Elazar | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6546405 | Gupta et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6560328 | Bondarenko et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6583806 | Ludwig et al. | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6606657 | Zilberstein et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6665644 | Kanevsky et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6674447 | Chiang et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6683633 | Holtzblatt et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6697858 | Ezerzer et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6724887 | Eilbacher et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6738456 | Wrona et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
6757361 | Blair et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6772396 | Cronin et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6775377 | McIlwaine et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6792575 | Samaniego et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6810414 | Brittain | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6820083 | Nagy et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6823384 | Wilson et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6870916 | Henrikson et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6901438 | Davis et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6959078 | Eilbacher et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
6965886 | Govrin et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
20010000962 | Rajan | May 2001 | A1 |
20010032335 | Jones | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010043697 | Cox et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020038363 | MacLean | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020052948 | Baudu et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020065911 | Von Klopp et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020065912 | Catchpole et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020128925 | Angeles | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143925 | Pricer et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020165954 | Eshghi et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030055883 | Wiles et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030079020 | Gourraud et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030144900 | Whitmer | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030154240 | Nygren et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20040100507 | Hayner et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040165717 | McIlwaine et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20050138560 | Lee et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20060179064 | Paz et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060233349 | Cooper | Oct 2006 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0453128 | Oct 1991 | EP |
0773687 | May 1997 | EP |
0989720 | Mar 2000 | EP |
2369263 | May 2002 | GB |
WO 9843380 | Nov 1998 | WO |
WO 0016207 | Mar 2000 | WO |