Using e-mail message characteristics for prioritization

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 10021055
  • Patent Number
    10,021,055
  • Date Filed
    Tuesday, February 21, 2017
    7 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, July 10, 2018
    6 years ago
Abstract
Message prioritization may be provided. First, a message may be received and a priority level may be calculated for the message. If the message is not rejected for having a priority lower than a predetermined threshold, the message may be placed in a first priority queue. Next, the message may be de-queued from the first priority queue based upon the calculated priority level for the message. Distribution group recipients corresponding to the message may then be expanded and the priority level for the message may be re-calculated based upon the expanded distribution group recipients. Next, the message may be placed in a second priority queue. The message may then be de-queued from the second priority queue based upon the re-calculated priority level for the message and delivered.
Description
BACKGROUND

Within Internet message handling services, electronic mail messages are transferred from one computer to another using a client-server application architecture. When an e-mail server has to deal with bursts of e-mail traffic, it typically utilizes first in first out (FIFO) queuing to process messages in the order they are received. This may cause problems for the e-mail server. For example, a more active sender may cause messages from all other senders to be queued if FIFO were the only mechanism that determines the order and priority of message processing in the e-mail server.


SUMMARY

This Summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts in a simplified form that are further described below in the Detailed Description. This Summary is not intended to identify key features or essential features of the claimed subject matter. Nor is this Summary intended to be used to limit the claimed subject matter's scope.


Message prioritization may be provided. First, a message may be received and a priority level may be calculated for the message. If the message is not rejected for having a priority level lower than a predetermined threshold, the message may be placed in a first priority queue. Next, the message may be de-queued from the first priority queue based upon the calculated priority level for the message. Distribution group recipients corresponding to the message may then be expanded and the priority level for the message may be re-calculated based upon the expanded distribution group recipients. Next, the message may be placed in a second priority queue. The message may then be de-queued from the second priority queue based upon the re-calculated priority level for the message and delivered.


Both the foregoing general description and the following detailed description provide examples and are explanatory only. Accordingly, the foregoing general description and the following detailed description should not be considered to be restrictive. Further, features or variations may be provided in addition to those set forth herein. For example, embodiments may be directed to various feature combinations and sub-combinations described in the detailed description.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this disclosure, illustrate various embodiments of the present invention. In the drawings:



FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an operating environment;



FIG. 2 is a state diagram of a method for providing prioritization; and



FIG. 3 is a block diagram of a system including a computing device.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The following detailed description refers to the accompanying drawings. Wherever possible, the same reference numbers are used in the drawings and the following description to refer to the same or similar elements. While embodiments of the invention may be described, modifications, adaptations, and other implementations are possible. For example, substitutions, additions, or modifications may be made to the elements illustrated in the drawings, and the methods described herein may be modified by substituting, reordering, or adding stages to the disclosed methods. Accordingly, the following detailed description does not limit the invention. Instead, the proper scope of the invention is defined by the appended claims.


With conventional systems, prioritization of e-mail messages may be performed based on the “X-Priority:” MIME header that communicates a sender's prioritization intent to recipients and/or transmitting e-mail servers. While conventional e-mail servers may choose to honor such headers, in most cases it cannot be used to provide fair e-mail server resource allocation and processing order because: i) e-mail senders are not aware of other messages competing for server resources; and ii) in many cases e-mail senders cannot be trusted and may intentionally try to abuse the system.


When a conventional e-mail server has to deal with bursts of e-mail traffic and cannot immediately process all incoming messages in parallel, it typically utilizes FIFO queuing to process messages in the order they are received. However, in many cases the order of incoming messages does not translate to a fair allocation of e-mail server resources and the order of delivery. An example situation that may result in an unfair allocation may be when a very active sender causes messages from other senders to be queued behind his/her messages and thus consume disproportional amount of resources comparing to the other senders. Similarly, in a multi-tenant e-mail system, an e-mail traffic disparity between different tenants may result in unfair resource allocation between those tenants. Moreover, a larger message may take more resources than other messages or message with a specific type of attachment may be much more expensive to scan for viruses.


Consistent with embodiments of the invention, message priority based on various characteristics of the message may be calculated. Then the calculated priority may be used to determine the order of subsequent processing of the message relative to other messages to achieve a fair resource allocation across different users. The calculated priority may also be used to determine which messages to accept or reject in situations when the queuing capacity is reached.


Embodiments of the invention may use multiple priority queues and are not limited to just two priority queues. With these multiple priority queues, embodiments of the invention may process and re-prioritize a message multiple times before delivery or relay. For example, a message may come in as fresh, but get blocked on a server for a while and become stale. At one point, embodiments of the invention may lower the message's priority after it has gone in a second queue.


Consistent with embodiments of the invention, the number of priority queues, the number of re-prioritization states that take place, and the number of processing states may vary between different embodiments. For example, a message may go through N states of processing with M priority queues between those states and K “priority calculators”. The N states of processing may comprise various different types of processing and are not limited to any particular type of processing. While embodiments of the invention are not so limited, one example may be the ability to calculate priority before SMTP response is sent out and making a decision on whether to accept or reject the message based on that priority.



FIG. 1 shows a messaging system 100 consistent with embodiments of the inventions. Messaging system 100 may comprise a first processor 105, a second processor 110, a message server 115, and a network 120. Message server 115 may facilitate the passage of messages (e.g. e-mail) between first processor 105 and second processor 110 over network 120. Any one of first processor 105, second processor 110, and message server 115 may comprise, but is not limited to, a desktop computer, a notebook computer, a mobile device, a smart telephone, or a personal digital assistant, for example. Network 120 may comprise the internet or any type network over which first processor 105, second processor 110, and message server 115 may communicate. Any one of first processor 105, second processor 110, and message server 115 may be implemented using, for example, a computing device 300 as described in greater detail below with respect to FIG. 3.


Message prioritization may be provided. Consistent with embodiments of the invention, a message transfer agent (MTA) may operate on message server 115 to facilitate the passage of messages (e.g. e-mail) between first processor 105 and second processor 110 over network 120. The MTA may calculate priority of a message based on various message characteristics such as sender, recipients, authentication level, message size, etc. The calculated priority may then be used by the MTA to prioritize further processing and delivery/relay of the message relative to other messages in the MTA's pipeline. The calculated priority can also be used as a reason to temporarily reject a given message, which may allow the MTA to allocate more resources to processing higher priority messages.


Consistent with embodiments of the invention, message priority may be calculated based on various message characteristics. The calculated message priority may then be used to determine the order (e.g. priority) of further processing and relay/delivery of the message. The calculated priority may also be used to decide whether to accept or reject the message. Embodiments of the invention may also include an extensibility model to allow custom classification algorithms to determine priorities. Moreover, embodiments of the invention may include a classification system that may be layered on top of priority queuing and health-based throttling (e.g. backpressure), where one layer can be changed independent of the others.



FIG. 2 is a state diagram setting forth the general stages involved in a method 200 consistent with an embodiment of the invention for providing prioritization. Method 200 may be implemented using message server 115. A computing device 300, as described in more detail below with respect to FIG. 3, may be used as an operating environment for message server 115. Ways to implement the states of method 300 will be described in greater detail below.


As shown in FIG. 2, message server 115 may receive a message. (State 205.) The message may comprise an e-mail and may be received, for example, from first processor 105, second processor 110, or another e-mail server. For example, a user using a first e-mail client running on first processor 105 may wish to send the message to another user using a second e-mail client running on second processor 110. In order to achieve this, first processor 105 may send the message to message server 115 that may act as a message server for second processor 110.


After the message is received (state 205), message server 115 may calculate a priority level for the received message based on the received message's characteristics. (State 210.) The priority level for the received message may comprise any index by which messages may be proved with a priority level. For example, the message may be designated with a “high”, medium”, or “low” priority level. The message may be given an index between 1 and 10 or between “A” and “Z”. Notwithstanding, a priority level may be calculated and assigned to the received message. The calculated priority level may indicate the received message's priority.


The message's characteristics from which the priority level may be calculated may comprise, but are not limited to, direct characteristics and aggregated characteristics. Direct characteristics may comprise, but are not limited to, the message's size, the presence of a specific attachment type to the message, an authentication level of the message's sender, a number of recipients the message has, whether one of the recipients the message has is a distribution group, whether the message is “fresh” verses “delayed”, or whether the message is being aggregated from a secondary account verses a regular message. Regarding the message's size direct characteristic, where the message is larger than a configurable threshold, the message may be assigned a lower priority. Regarding the message's “fresh” verses “delayed” direct characteristics, if the message was sent over a time period (e.g. 30 min.) ago, it may be marked as low priority. Another direct characteristic may comprise whether the message is associated with a user (e.g. sender and/or receiver) who is paying for the e-mail service or is receiving the e-mail service for free.


Aggregated characteristics may comprise, for example, a sender threshold. The sender threshold may comprise, but is not limited to, a number of recipients, a number of messages sent, and a total size of messages sent, for example. In this case, when a specific sender reaches a threshold on the number of messages submitted to message server 115 over a time period (e.g. the last minute), all other messages from the sender may be assigned a lower priority until the sender becomes inactive for some period of time. Other examples of the aggregated characteristics may comprise: i) tenant organization activity in a given time interval in a multi-tenant e-mail system; ii) aggregated usage of a specific resource by a sender/tenant; and iii) number of messages recently delivered to recipients of the message. A tenant organization activity may comprise an e-mail service for multiple organizations is hosted in a cloud. In this situation, the same set of hardware and other resources may be shared between those organizations.


Once the priority of a message has been determined, it can be used by message server 115 in states of method 200 in cases when message server 115 may not have enough resources to process all messages in parallel. Such subsequent states may comprise, but not limited to, distribution group expansion (e.g. state 230), rules and policy enforcement, delivery to mailboxes, or relay to other servers. The resource allocation across different messages may be based on the accuracy of priority calculation in addition to the order the messages may have been received by message server 115.


Once the priority for the received message is calculated (state 210), message server 115 may decide whether to accept or temporarily reject the message. (State 215.) The decision whether to accept or temporarily reject the message may be based on the calculated priority and the current queuing capacity/resource usage. For example, message server 115 may calculate the message priority before the message is fully accepted from first processor 105. In this case message server 115 may make a decision on whether to accept the message based on the priority. When SMTP protocol is used for message transmission, such priority calculation may be done any time before message server 115 sends a response to the SMTP DATA command (or the last chunk of ESMTP BDAT command for example). This approach may be used when message server 115 has utilized certain percentages of its queuing capacity. For example, message server 115 may start temporarily rejecting (e.g. 4XX SMTP response code) (state 220) Low priority messages when it uses over 60% of its queuing capacity and start temporarily rejecting (state 220) Normal priority messages when it reaches 80% of its queuing capacity. If message server 115 accepts (and does not temporarily reject) the message, the message may be accepted and placed on a first priority queue. (State 225.) If the calculated priority level is too low, message server 115 may decide to not accept the message from the sending MTA/client (e.g. that is, reject the message). It may then be up to the sending MTA/client to handle, for example, the SMTP protocol reject and depending on the error code, provide a temporary hold and/or other alternatives.


After the message is placed on the first priority queue (state 225), message server 115 may de-queue the message from the first priority queue. The order by which message server 115 de-queues the message may be priority-aware and may not be strictly FIFO. For example, all the messages in the first priority queue may be assigned a priority level based upon based on the messages' characteristics. (State 210.) Message server 115 may de-queue the messages with a higher priority level before it de-queue the messages with a lower priority level. Within messages having the same priority level, FIFO may be applied.


Once dequeued, message server 115 may process the message by expanding any distribution group recipients the message may have. (State 230.) After the message is processed (state 230), message server 115 may determine message destinations for delivery/relay based, for example, on recipient addresses. (State 235.) Next, message server 115 may re-calculate the priority based, for example, on the recipient changes made when message server 115 expanded (state 230) any distribution group recipients. (State 240.) The priority may be re-calculated multiple times as the message is transformed by different states in message server 115. For example, a distribution group expansion may increase the number of recipients of the message. The number of recipients may be a characteristic that affects prioritization. Consequently, the message's priority may be recalculated after the distribution group expansion in state 230. This group expansion may be one example of what can affect the priority of messages in-flight and embodiments of the invention are not so limited.


Once message server 115 re-calculates the priority (state 240), message server 115 may place the message on a second priority queue for delivery/relay. (State 245.) This is another place where the order of further processing may be influenced by the priority and is not strictly FIFO.


After message server 115 places the message on the second priority queue (state 245), message server 115 may de-queue the message from the second priority queue. As described above, the order of de-queuing may be priority-aware and may not be strictly FIFO. Once de-queued, the message may be delivered/relayed to its destinations. (State 250.)


An embodiment consistent with the invention may comprise a system for providing prioritization. The system may comprise a memory storage and a processing unit coupled to the memory storage. The processing unit may be operative to receive a message, calculate a priority level for the message, and place the message in a first priority queue. Moreover, the processing unit may be operative to de-queue the message from the first priority queue based upon the calculated priority level for the message and expand distribution group recipients corresponding to the message. Furthermore, the processing unit may be operative to re-calculate the priority level for the message based upon the expanded distribution group recipients and place the message in a second priority queue. In addition, the processing unit may be operative to de-queue the message from the second priority queue based upon the re-calculated priority level for the message and deliver the message.


Another embodiment consistent with the invention may comprise a system for providing prioritization. The system may comprise a memory storage and a processing unit coupled to the memory storage. The processing unit may be operative to calculate a priority level for a message. The calculated priority level for the message may be based upon at least one of the following: direct characteristics of the message and aggregated characteristics of the message. Furthermore, the processing unit may be operative to place the message in a priority queue. In addition, the processing unit may be operative to de-queue the message from the priority queue based upon the calculated priority level for the message and deliver the message.


Yet another embodiment consistent with the invention may comprise a system for providing prioritization. The system may comprise a memory storage and a processing unit coupled to the memory storage. The processing unit may be operative to calculate a priority level for a message. The calculated priority level for the message may be based upon at least one direct characteristic of the message or at least one direct aggregated characteristic of the message. Moreover, the processing unit may be operative to place the message in a first priority queue and to de-queue the message from the first priority queue based upon the calculated priority level for the message. Furthermore, the processing unit may be operative to expand distribution group recipients corresponding to the message and to re-calculate the priority level for the message based upon the expanded distribution group recipients. In addition, the processing unit may be operative to place the message in a second priority queue, de-queue the message from the second priority queue based upon the re-calculated priority level for the message, and to deliver the message.



FIG. 3 is a block diagram of a system including computing device 300. Consistent with an embodiment of the invention, the aforementioned memory storage and processing unit may be implemented in a computing device, such as computing device 300 of FIG. 3. Any suitable combination of hardware, software, or firmware may be used to implement the memory storage and processing unit. For example, the memory storage and processing unit may be implemented with computing device 300 or any of other computing devices 318, in combination with computing device 300. The aforementioned system, device, and processors are examples and other systems, devices, and processors may comprise the aforementioned memory storage and processing unit, consistent with embodiments of the invention. Furthermore, computing device 300 may comprise an operating environment for message server 115 as described above. Message server 115 may operate in other environments and is not limited to computing device 300.


With reference to FIG. 3, a system consistent with an embodiment of the invention may include a computing device, such as computing device 300. In a basic configuration, computing device 300 may include at least one processing unit 302 and a system memory 304. Depending on the configuration and type of computing device, system memory 304 may comprise, but is not limited to, volatile (e.g. random access memory (RAM)), non-volatile (e.g. read-only memory (ROM)), flash memory, or any combination. System memory 304 may include operating system 305, one or more programming modules 306, and may include a program data 307. Operating system 305, for example, may be suitable for controlling computing device 300's operation. In one embodiment, programming modules 306 may include, for example, a message transfer agent application 320. Furthermore, embodiments of the invention may be practiced in conjunction with a graphics library, other operating systems, or any other application program and is not limited to any particular application or system. This basic configuration is illustrated in FIG. 3 by those components within a dashed line 308.


Computing device 300 may have additional features or functionality. For example, computing device 300 may also include additional data storage devices (removable and/or non-removable) such as, for example, magnetic disks, optical disks, or tape. Such additional storage is illustrated in FIG. 3 by a removable storage 309 and a non-removable storage 310. Computing device 300 may also contain a communication connection 316 that may allow device 300 to communicate with other computing devices 318, such as over a network in a distributed computing environment, for example, an intranet or the Internet. Communication connection 316 is one example of communication media.


The term computer readable media as used herein may include computer storage media. Computer storage media may include volatile and nonvolatile, removable and non-removable media implemented in any method or technology for storage of information, such as computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data. System memory 304, removable storage 309, and non-removable storage 310 are all computer storage media examples (i.e. memory storage). Computer storage media may include, but is not limited to, RAM, ROM, electrically erasable read-only memory (EEPROM), flash memory or other memory technology, CD-ROM, digital versatile disks (DVD) or other optical storage, magnetic cassettes, magnetic tape, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium which can be used to store information and which can be accessed by computing device 300. Any such computer storage media may be part of device 300. Computing device 300 may also have input device(s) 312 such as a keyboard, a mouse, a pen, a sound input device, a touch input device, etc. Output device(s) 314 such as a display, speakers, a printer, etc. may also be included. The aforementioned devices are examples and others may be used.


The term computer readable media as used herein may also include communication media. Communication media may be embodied by computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data in a modulated data signal, such as a carrier wave or other transport mechanism, and includes any information delivery media. The term “modulated data signal” may describe a signal that has one or more characteristics set or changed in such a manner as to encode information in the signal. By way of example, and not limitation, communication media may include wired media such as a wired network or direct-wired connection, and wireless media such as acoustic, radio frequency (RF), infrared, and other wireless media.


As stated above, a number of program modules and data files may be stored in system memory 304, including operating system 305. While executing on processing unit 302, programming modules 306 (e.g. message transfer agent application 320) may perform processes including, for example, one or more method 200's stages (i.e. states) as described above. The aforementioned process is an example, and processing unit 302 may perform other processes. Other programming modules that may be used in accordance with embodiments of the present invention may include electronic mail and contacts applications, word processing applications, spreadsheet applications, database applications, slide presentation applications, drawing or computer-aided application programs, etc.


Generally, consistent with embodiments of the invention, program modules may include routines, programs, components, data structures, and other types of structures that may perform particular tasks or that may implement particular abstract data types. Moreover, embodiments of the invention may be practiced with other computer system configurations, including hand-held devices, multiprocessor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, minicomputers, mainframe computers, and the like. Embodiments of the invention may also be practiced in distributed computing environments where tasks are performed by remote processing devices that are linked through a communications network. In a distributed computing environment, program modules may be located in both local and remote memory storage devices.


Furthermore, embodiments of the invention may be practiced in an electrical circuit comprising discrete electronic elements, packaged or integrated electronic chips containing logic gates, a circuit utilizing a microprocessor, or on a single chip containing electronic elements or microprocessors. Embodiments of the invention may also be practiced using other technologies capable of performing logical operations such as, for example, AND, OR, and NOT, including but not limited to mechanical, optical, fluidic, and quantum technologies. In addition, embodiments of the invention may be practiced within a general purpose computer or in any other circuits or systems.


Embodiments of the invention, for example, may be implemented as a computer process (method), a computing system, or as an article of manufacture, such as a computer program product or computer readable media. The computer program product may be a computer storage media readable by a computer system and encoding a computer program of instructions for executing a computer process. The computer program product may also be a propagated signal on a carrier readable by a computing system and encoding a computer program of instructions for executing a computer process. Accordingly, the present invention may be embodied in hardware and/or in software (including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.). In other words, embodiments of the present invention may take the form of a computer program product on a computer-usable or computer-readable storage medium having computer-usable or computer-readable program code embodied in the medium for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system. A computer-usable or computer-readable medium may be any medium that can contain, store, communicate, propagate, or transport the program for use by or in connection with the instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.


The computer-usable or computer-readable medium may be, for example but not limited to, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, device, or propagation medium. More specific computer-readable medium examples (a non-exhaustive list), the computer-readable medium may include the following: an electrical connection having one or more wires, a portable computer diskette, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), an optical fiber, and a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM). Note that the computer-usable or computer-readable medium could even be paper or another suitable medium upon which the program is printed, as the program can be electronically captured, via, for instance, optical scanning of the paper or other medium, then compiled, interpreted, or otherwise processed in a suitable manner, if necessary, and then stored in a computer memory.


Embodiments of the present invention, for example, are described above with reference to block diagrams and/or operational illustrations of methods, systems, and computer program products according to embodiments of the invention. The functions/acts noted in the blocks may occur out of the order as shown in any flowchart. For example, two blocks shown in succession may in fact be executed substantially concurrently or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon the functionality/acts involved.


While certain embodiments of the invention have been described, other embodiments may exist. Furthermore, although embodiments of the present invention have been described as being associated with data stored in memory and other storage mediums, data can also be stored on or read from other types of computer-readable media, such as secondary storage devices, like hard disks, floppy disks, or a CD-ROM, a carrier wave from the Internet, or other forms of RAM or ROM. Further, the disclosed methods' stages may be modified in any manner, including by reordering stages and/or inserting or deleting stages, without departing from the invention.


All rights including copyrights in the code included herein are vested in and the property of the Applicant. The Applicant retains and reserves all rights in the code included herein, and grants permission to reproduce the material only in connection with reproduction of the granted patent and for no other purpose.


While the specification includes examples, the invention's scope is indicated by the following claims. Furthermore, while the specification has been described in language specific to structural features and/or methodological acts, the claims are not limited to the features or acts described above. Rather, the specific features and acts described above are disclosed as example for embodiments of the invention.

Claims
  • 1. A method for providing prioritization, the method comprising: receiving a message;calculating a priority level for the message;in response to determining that the calculated priority level of the message does not fall below a threshold, placing the message in a first priority queue;de-queuing the message from the first priority queue according to a first de-queuing order based upon the calculated priority level for the message, wherein the first de-queuing order differs from a first-in-first-out (FIFO) order;in response to de-queuing the message, processing the message to expand distribution group recipients corresponding to the message;re-calculating the priority level for the message based upon the expanded distribution group recipients;placing the message in a second priority queue;de-queuing the message from the second priority queue in a second de-queuing order based upon the re-calculated priority level for the message, wherein the second de-queuing order differs from the FIFO order; anddelivering the message.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein receiving the message comprises receiving the message from an e-mail client.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein receiving the message comprises receiving the message from a message server.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon direct characteristics of the message.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon direct characteristics of the message, the direct characteristics comprising a size of the message.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon direct characteristics of the message, the direct characteristics comprising a presence of a specific attachment type to the message.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon direct characteristics of the message, the direct characteristics comprising an authentication level of a sender of the message.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon direct characteristics of the message, the direct characteristics comprising a number of recipients of the message.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon direct characteristics of the message, the direct characteristics comprising a distribution group as recipients of the message.
  • 10. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon direct characteristics of the message, the direct characteristics comprising whether the message is “fresh” or “delayed”.
  • 11. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon direct characteristics of the message, the direct characteristics comprising whether the message is being aggregated from a secondary account or a regular message.
  • 12. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon aggregated characteristics of the message.
  • 13. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon aggregated characteristics of the message, the aggregated characteristics comprising a sender threshold comprising one of the following: a number of recipients, a number of messages sent, and a total size of messages sent.
  • 14. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon aggregated characteristics of the message, the aggregated characteristics comprising tenant organization activity in a given time interval in a multi-tenant e-mail system.
  • 15. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon aggregated characteristics of the message, the aggregated characteristics comprising aggregated usage of a specific resource by a sender/tenant.
  • 16. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon aggregated characteristics of the message, the aggregated characteristics comprising a number of messages recently delivered to recipients of the message.
  • 17. The method of claim 1, wherein delivering the message comprises delivering the message to a recipient e-mail box.
  • 18. The method of claim 1, wherein calculating the priority level for the message comprises calculating the priority level based upon direct characteristics of the message, the direct characteristics comprising whether the message is one of sent to and sent from a user who is paying for e-mail service rather than receiving a free e-mail service.
  • 19. A computer storage device that stores a set of instructions which when executed perform a method for providing prioritization, the method executed by the set of instructions comprising: providing a plurality of processing states in series, each of the plurality of processing states having a respective corresponding priority calculator, the priority calculator calculating at least: a first priority level for a message; anda second priority level for the message after expanding a distribution group of recipients for the message;providing a plurality of priority queues respectively corresponding to the plurality of processing states, the plurality of priority queues comprising at least: a first priority queue comprising the message at the first priority level; anda second priority queue comprising the message at the second priority level; andpassing the message serially through the plurality of processing states, wherein at each of the plurality of processing states the message is re-prioritize by the respective corresponding priority calculator and saved in the respective corresponding priority queue, and wherein the message is de-queued from a previous priority queue in a different order than a first-in-first-out (FIFO) order.
  • 20. A system for providing prioritization, the system comprising: a memory storage comprising computer-executable instructions; anda processing unit coupled to the memory storage, wherein upon executing the computer-executable instructions, the processing unit is operative to: calculate a priority level for a message, the calculated priority level for the message being based upon at least one of the following: at least one direct characteristic of the message and at least one aggregated characteristic of the message;in response to determining that the calculated priority level of the message does not fall below a threshold, place the message in a first priority queue;de-queue the message from the first priority queue according to a first de-queuing order based upon the calculated priority level for the message, wherein the first de-queuing order differs from a first-in-first-out (FIFO) order;in response to de-queuing the message, process the message to expand distribution group recipients corresponding to the message;re-calculate the priority level for the message based upon the expanded distribution group recipients;place the message in a second priority queue;de-queue the message from the second priority queue in a second de-queuing order based upon the re-calculated priority level for the message, wherein the second de-queuing order differs from the FIFO order; anddeliver the message.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/962,697 (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,589,254) filed on Dec. 8, 2010, entitled “USING E-MAIL MESSAGE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PRIORITIZATION” the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.

US Referenced Citations (225)
Number Name Date Kind
4570227 Tachi Feb 1986 A
4971434 Ball Nov 1990 A
5077668 Doi Dec 1991 A
5179519 Adachi Jan 1993 A
5220507 Kirson Jun 1993 A
5377354 Scannell Dec 1994 A
5493692 Theimer Feb 1996 A
5544321 Theimer Aug 1996 A
5555376 Theimer Sep 1996 A
5603054 Theimer Feb 1997 A
5608635 Tamai Mar 1997 A
5611050 Theimer Mar 1997 A
5617526 Oran Apr 1997 A
5634084 Malsheen May 1997 A
5671333 Catlett Sep 1997 A
5675733 Williams Oct 1997 A
5694616 Johnson Dec 1997 A
5796394 Wicks et al. Aug 1998 A
5812865 Theimer Sep 1998 A
5826022 Nielsen Oct 1998 A
5826269 Hussey Oct 1998 A
5835881 Trovato Nov 1998 A
5850219 Kumomura Dec 1998 A
5864848 Horvitz Jan 1999 A
5905863 Knowles May 1999 A
5907839 Roth May 1999 A
5911773 Mutsuga Jun 1999 A
5917489 Thurlow et al. Jun 1999 A
5935218 Beyda Aug 1999 A
5950187 Tsuda Sep 1999 A
5974465 Wong Oct 1999 A
5978837 Foladare Nov 1999 A
5995597 Woltz Nov 1999 A
6021403 Horvitz Feb 2000 A
6034970 Levac Mar 2000 A
6067565 Horvitz May 2000 A
6073142 Geiger et al. Jun 2000 A
6078865 Koyanagi Jun 2000 A
6085216 Huberman Jul 2000 A
6101531 Eggleston Aug 2000 A
6119065 Shimada Sep 2000 A
6144942 Ruckdashel Nov 2000 A
6147977 Thro Nov 2000 A
6151623 Harrison Nov 2000 A
6161130 Horvitz Dec 2000 A
6182059 Angotti Jan 2001 B1
6185603 Henderson Feb 2001 B1
6189027 Haneda Feb 2001 B1
6192360 Dumais Feb 2001 B1
6195533 Tkatch Feb 2001 B1
6199102 Cobb Mar 2001 B1
6212265 Duphorne Apr 2001 B1
6212535 Weikart et al. Apr 2001 B1
6216165 Woltz Apr 2001 B1
6233430 Helferich May 2001 B1
6267733 Peterson Jul 2001 B1
6282565 Shaw Aug 2001 B1
6298304 Theimer Oct 2001 B1
6317592 Campana Nov 2001 B1
6321158 DeLorme Nov 2001 B1
6327581 Platt Dec 2001 B1
6339746 Sugiyama Jan 2002 B1
6353398 Amin Mar 2002 B1
6363415 Finney et al. Mar 2002 B1
6370526 Agrawal Apr 2002 B1
6381735 Hunt Apr 2002 B1
6385662 Moon May 2002 B1
6396513 Helfman May 2002 B1
6408277 Nelken Jun 2002 B1
6411930 Burges Jun 2002 B1
6411947 Rice Jun 2002 B1
6421708 Bettis Jul 2002 B2
6421709 McCormick Jul 2002 B1
6424995 Shuman Jul 2002 B1
6438545 Beauregard et al. Aug 2002 B1
6442589 Takahashi Aug 2002 B1
6466232 Newell Oct 2002 B1
6477460 Kepler Nov 2002 B2
6484197 Donohue Nov 2002 B1
6490574 Bennett Dec 2002 B1
6505150 Nunberg Jan 2003 B2
6505167 Horvitz Jan 2003 B1
6507866 Barchi Jan 2003 B1
6513026 Horvitz Jan 2003 B1
6513046 Abbott Jan 2003 B1
6526350 Sekiyama Feb 2003 B2
6532489 Merchant Mar 2003 B1
6549915 Abbott Apr 2003 B2
6549944 Weinberg Apr 2003 B1
6553358 Horvitz Apr 2003 B1
6557036 Kavacheri Apr 2003 B1
6584502 Natarajan Jun 2003 B1
6618716 Horvitz Sep 2003 B1
6622089 Hasegawa Sep 2003 B2
6622160 Horvitz Sep 2003 B1
6629123 Hunt Sep 2003 B1
6654343 Brandis Nov 2003 B1
6658485 Baber Dec 2003 B1
6672506 Swartz Jan 2004 B2
6694252 Ukita Feb 2004 B2
6714967 Horvitz Mar 2004 B1
6728635 Sakamoto Apr 2004 B2
6732149 Kephart May 2004 B1
6741188 Miller May 2004 B1
6747675 Abbott Jun 2004 B1
6748225 Kepler Jun 2004 B1
D494584 Schlieffers Aug 2004 S
6791580 Abbott Sep 2004 B1
6796505 Pellaumail et al. Sep 2004 B2
6801223 Abbott et al. Oct 2004 B1
6812937 Abbott et al. Nov 2004 B1
6837436 Swartz et al. Jan 2005 B2
6842877 Robarts et al. Jan 2005 B2
6886002 Horvitz Apr 2005 B2
6898518 Padmanabhan May 2005 B2
6944278 Nielsen Sep 2005 B1
6952647 Hasegawa et al. Oct 2005 B2
6980993 Horvitz et al. Dec 2005 B2
6999993 Shah et al. Feb 2006 B1
7003525 Horvitz et al. Feb 2006 B1
7010501 Roslak et al. Mar 2006 B1
7040541 Swartz et al. May 2006 B2
7063263 Swartz et al. Jun 2006 B2
7076241 Zondervan Jul 2006 B1
7103473 Ranjan Sep 2006 B2
7120865 Horvitz et al. Oct 2006 B1
7171378 Petrovich Jan 2007 B2
7194681 Horvitz Mar 2007 B1
7195157 Swartz et al. Mar 2007 B2
7233933 Horvitz et al. Jun 2007 B2
7233954 Horvitz Jun 2007 B2
7327708 Komandur Feb 2008 B2
7337181 Horvitz Feb 2008 B2
7385501 Miller Jun 2008 B2
7409423 Horvitz et al. Aug 2008 B2
7461129 Shah et al. Dec 2008 B2
7565403 Horvitz et al. Jul 2009 B2
7664249 Horvitz et al. Feb 2010 B2
7689521 Nodelman et al. Mar 2010 B2
7743340 Horvitz et al. Jun 2010 B2
7797267 Horvitz Sep 2010 B2
7844666 Horvitz et al. Nov 2010 B2
7877686 Abbott et al. Jan 2011 B2
7975015 Horvitz et al. Jul 2011 B2
8024415 Horvitz et al. Sep 2011 B2
8166392 Horvitz Apr 2012 B2
8254380 Boucard Aug 2012 B2
9589254 Gourevitch Mar 2017 B2
20010007968 Shimazu Jul 2001 A1
20010025223 Geiger et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010030664 Shulman et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010040590 Abbott et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010040591 Abbott et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010042087 Kephart et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010043231 Abbott et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010043232 Abbott et al. Nov 2001 A1
20020002450 Nunberg et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020007356 Rice et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020032689 Abbott, III et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020038294 Matsugu Mar 2002 A1
20020044152 Abbott, III et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020052930 Abbott et al. May 2002 A1
20020052963 Abbott et al. May 2002 A1
20020054117 van Dantzich et al. May 2002 A1
20020054130 Abbott, III et al. May 2002 A1
20020054174 Abbott et al. May 2002 A1
20020078204 Newell et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020080155 Abbott et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020080156 Abbott et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020080888 Shu Jun 2002 A1
20020083025 Robarts et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020083158 Abbott et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020087525 Abbott et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020087649 Horvitz Jul 2002 A1
20020099681 Gainey et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020099817 Abbott et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020154210 Ludwig et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020159575 Skladman et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020164998 Younis Nov 2002 A1
20020173905 Jin Nov 2002 A1
20020186823 Kikinis et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020191034 Sowizral et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030014491 Horvitz et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030023571 Barnhill Jan 2003 A1
20030046401 Abbott et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030154476 Abbott, III et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030167311 Kirsch Sep 2003 A1
20030182052 DeLorme et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030182383 He Sep 2003 A1
20030212646 Horvitz Nov 2003 A1
20030236745 Hartsell Dec 2003 A1
20040015557 Horvitz Jan 2004 A1
20040070602 Kobuya et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040172483 Horvitz Sep 2004 A1
20040201500 Miller et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040203615 Qu Oct 2004 A1
20050034078 Abbott et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050065632 Douglis Mar 2005 A1
20050081059 Bandini et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050204009 Hazarika Sep 2005 A1
20050266858 Miller et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050272442 Miller et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060017983 Syri Jan 2006 A1
20060019676 Miller et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060031062 Bakis et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060041583 Horvitz Feb 2006 A1
20060212220 Bou-Ghannam et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060271277 Hu et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060277474 Robarts et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070011314 Horvitz et al. Jan 2007 A1
20080090591 Miller et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080091537 Miller et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080161018 Miller et al. Jul 2008 A1
20090006574 Horvitz et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090013052 Robarts et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090094240 Bordeaux et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090119385 Horvitz May 2009 A1
20090157834 Krishnaswamy Jun 2009 A1
20090259713 Blumrich Oct 2009 A1
20100030865 Jiang Feb 2010 A1
20100138511 Guo Jun 2010 A1
20100185665 Horn Jul 2010 A1
20100217811 Kay Aug 2010 A1
20100228833 Duquette Sep 2010 A1
20110071964 Horvitz Mar 2011 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (14)
Number Date Country
HEI 04-280535 Oct 1992 JP
HEI 05-233195 Sep 1993 JP
HEI 06-120978 Apr 1994 JP
HEI 08-140158 May 1996 JP
HEI 08-331621 Dec 1996 JP
HEI 10-079756 Mar 1998 JP
HEI 10-269154 Oct 1998 JP
HEI 10-283291 Oct 1998 JP
HEI 11-017839 Jan 1999 JP
HEI 11-32144 Feb 1999 JP
HEI 11-127259 May 1999 JP
WO 9800787 Jan 1998 WO
WO 98003907 Jan 1998 WO
WO 9825195 Jun 1998 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (143)
Entry
“Symantec Brightmail Gateway v8.0”, Technical Brief: Messaging Security, Retrieved Date: Sep. 23, 2010, http://eval.symantec.com/mktginfo/enterprise/white_papers/b-brightmail_gateway_8_WP_14552102-2.en-us.pdf, pp. 1-31.
“XCON: Cannot Configure MTAA to Provide Adequate Message Control”, Revision 4.2, Published Date: Oct. 27, 2006, http://support.microsoft.com/kb/186714, pp. 1-3.
[No Author Listed], “IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, Method of rule-based file, window, and message processing”, vol. 38, No. 7, Jul. 1, 1995.
[No Author Listed], “Mapmyindia Rocks Indian Web2.0 with GoogleMap Type Digitised Maps,” http://www.webyantra.net/tag/mashup/, last accessed Mar. 16, 2007, 7 pages.
[No Author Listed], “PDA Toshiba,” http://www.citynotebookcentre.com.au/Products/PDA&CELU/Toshiba/toshiba_pda_e740.htm, last accessed Mar. 16, 2007, 3 pages.
[No Author Listed], “Visual Warbling to subtly indicate status conditions”, IBM Technical Disclosure Bulleting, vol. 41, No. 1, 1998, pp. 611-613.
Apte, Chidanand et al., “Automated Learning of Decision Rules for Text Categorization”, ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 1994, pp. 233-251, vol. 12, Issue 13.
Billinghurst, Mark et al., “An Evaluation of Wearable Information Spaces”, Proceedings of the Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, 1998, 8 pages.
Billinghurst, Mark et al., “Wearable Devices: New Ways to Manage Information”, IEEE Computer Society, Jan. 1999, pp. 57-64.
Billinghurst, Mark, “Research Directions in Wearable Computing”, University of Washington, May 1998, 48 pages.
Boone, Gary, “Concept Features in Re: Agent, an Intelligent Email Agent”, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pp. 141-148, 1998.
Breese, J. et al., “Empirical Analysis of Predictive Algorithms for Collaborative Filtering”, In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 43-52, 1998, AUAI, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco.
Chen, Guanling et al., “A Survey of Context-Aware Mobile Computing Research”, Dartmouth Computer Science Technical Report, 2000, 16 pages.
Cohen, W., “Learning Rules that Classify E-Mail”, 1996, AAAI Spring Symposium on ML and IR, 1996, accessed at http://www.aaai.org/Papers/Symposia/Spring/1996/SS-96-05/SS96-05-003.pdf, 8 pages.
Crawford, Elisabeth, et al., “An Intelligent Interface for Sorting Electronic Mail”, Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pp. 182-183, 2002.
Czerwinski, M. et al., “Visualizing implicit queries for information management and retrieval”, In Proceedings of CHI '99, ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 560-567, 1999, Association for Computing Machinery.
Dumais, Susan, et al., “Inductive Learning Algorithms and Representations for Text Categorization”, Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, 1998. pp. 148-155, ACM Press, New York, NY.
Eugenio et al., “Generating driving directions for intelligent vehicles interfaces”, 12th IEEE International Conference and Workshops on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, 2005, 8 pages.
European Notice of Allowance in Application 00952285.5, dated Jun. 9, 2006, 11 pgs.
Forscher, Stewart, “CyberNag (Mailmen Division) Project Notebook”, accessed at: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/computing/classes/cs3302_96_winter/projects/groups/Mai1Men/, last accessed on Feb. 9, 2004, 14 pages.
Habel, “Incremental Generation of Multimodal Route Instructions”, http://www.cs.niu.edu/-nlgdial/final/SS703CHabel .pdf, last access Dec. 11, 2008, 8 pages, Hamburg Germany.
Hampe et al., “Integrating topographic information and landmarks for mobile navigation”, http://www.ikg.uni-hannover.de/publikationen/publikationen/2003/wien_hampe_elias.pdf, last accessed Mar. 14, 2007, 13 pages.
Harter, Andy et al., “A Distributed Location System for the Active Office”, IEEE Network, 1994, pp. 62-70.
Heckerman, David, “A Tutorial on Learning With Bayesian Networks”, Microsoft Research, Nov. 1996, 57 pages.
Horvitz et al., “Attention-Sensitive Alerting in Computing Systems”, Microsoft Research, Aug. 1999.
Horvitz et al., “Attention-Sensitive Alerting”, In Proceedings of UAI'99, Conference on Uncertainty and Artificial Intelligence, Sweden Jul. 1999, p. 305-313.
Horvitz, E. et al., “Display of information for time-critical decision making”, In Proceedings of the Eleventh Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 296-305 Montreal, 1995, Canada. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco.
Horvitz, E., “Principles of mixed-initiative user interfaces”, In Proceedings of CHI '99, ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 159-166, 1999, Association for Computing Machinery.
Horvitz, E., et al., “The Lumiere project: Bayesian user modeling for inferring the goals and needs of software users”, In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 256-265, 1998, Morgan Kaufman, San Francisco.
Horvitz, E., et al., “Time-critical action: Representations and application”, In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI-97), pp. 250-257, 1997, Providence, RI, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco.
Horvitz, E., et al., “Time-dependent utility and action under uncertainty”, In Proceedings of Seventh Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 151-158, 1991, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco.
Horvitz, Eric et al., “In Pursuit of Effective Handsfree Decision Support: Coupling Bayesian Inference”, Speech Understanding, and User Models, 1995, 8 pages.
Japanese Final Rejection in Application 2001-514691, dated Feb. 5, 2010, 8 pgs.
Japanese Final Rejection in Application 2001-514691, dated Jun. 11, 2010, 5 pgs.
Japanese Final Rejection in Application 2001-514693, dated Oct. 7, 2011, 9 pgs.
Japanese Final Rejection in Application 2001-514693, dated Mar. 4, 2011, 11 pgs.
Japanese Notice of Allowance in Application 2001-514693, dated Jan. 31, 2012, 6 pgs.
Japanese Notice of Rejection in Application 2001-514693, dated Oct. 5, 2010, 9 pgs.
Japanese Pre-Appeal Examination in Application 2001-514693, dated Jul. 29, 2011, 2 pgs.
Japanese Written Appeal in Application 2001-514693, filed Jul. 4, 2011, 6 pgs.
Joachims, Thorsten, “Text Categorized with Support Vector Machines: Learning with Many Relevant Features”, 1998, 7 pages.
Koleszar, “A Landmark-Based Location Reference Grid for Street Maps”, http://stilnet.dtic.mil/oai/oai? &verb-getRecord&metadataPrefix-htrnl&identifieFADA070048, Defense Technical Information Center, Jun. 1, 1979, 1 page.
Koller, Daphne et al., “Toward Optimal Feature Selection”, Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Machine Learning, 1996, pp. 284-292, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA.
Leiberman, H., “An agent that assist web browsing”, In Proceedings of IJCAI-95, Montreal Canada, 1995, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, 6 pages.
Lewis, David D., “Evaluating and Optimizing Autonomous Text Classification Systems”, International ACM-SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 1995, pp. 246-254.
Lewis, David D., et al., “Training Algorithms for Linear Text Classifiers”, SIGIR'96, 1996, 9 pages.
Losee, Jr., Robert M., “Minimizing Information Overload: The Ranking of Electronic Messages”, Journal of Information Science, 1989, pp. 179-189, vol. 15, Issue 3.
MacSkassy, Sofus A. et al., “EmailValet: Learning Email Preferences for Wireless Platforms”, Jun. 3, 1999, 4 pgs.
MacSkassy, Sofus A., et al., “EmailValet: Learning User Preferences for Wireless Email, IJCAI-99 Workshops: Learning About Users and Machine Learning for Information Filtering”, pp. 1-6, 1999.
Maes, Pattie, “Agents that Reduce Work and Information Overload”, Communications of the ACM, Jul. 1994, vol. 37, No. 7, pp. 31-40 and 146.
Maes, Pattie, “Social Interface Agents: Acquiring Competence by Learning from Users and other Agents”, AAAI Technical Report SS-94-03, 1994, pp. 71-78.
Maes, Pattie, et al., “Learning Interface Agents”, AAAI-93 Proceedings, 1993, pp. 459-465.
Marx, Matthew et al., “CLUES: Dynamic Personalized Message Filtering”, 1996 ACM, 9 pgs.
May et al., “Presence and Quality of Navigational Landmarks: Effect on Driver Performance and Implications for Design”, http://magpie.lboro.ac.uk/dspace/bitstrearn/2134/2277/I/PUB284.pdf, last accessed Mar. 14, 2007, 40 pages, Loughborough, United Kingdom.
Mock, Kendrick, “An Experimental Framework for Email Categorization and Management”, Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM SIGIR Conference, pp. 392-393, 2001.
PCT International Search Report dated Sep. 22, 2003 dated Sep. 29, 2003, for PCT Application Serial No. PCT/US00/20685, 4 pages.
PCT International Search Report dated Sep. 29, 2003, for International Application Ser. No. PCT/US00/20685, 7 pgs.
Platt, J., “Fast training of support vector machines using sequential minimal optimization”, In Advances in Kernal Methods: Support Vector Learning. MIT Press, 1999, pp. 41-65, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Platt, John C., “Probabilistic Outputs for Support Vector Machines and Comparisons to Regularized Likelihood Methods”, Advances in Large Margin Classifiers, 1999 MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 11 pages.
Provost, Jefferson, “Naive-Bayes vs. Rule-Learning in Classification of Email”, pp. 1-4, University of Texas at Austin, Artificial Intelligence Lab. Technical Report, AI-TR-99-284, 1999.
Rhodes, Bradley J., “Remembrance Agent: A continuously running automated information retrieval system”, The Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Practical Application of Intelligent Agents and Multi Agent Technology, 1996, pp. 487-495.
Rhodes, Bradley J., “The Wearable Remembrance Agent: A System for Augmented Memory”, Personal Technologies Journal Special Issue on Wearable Computing, 1997, 12 pages.
Rhodes, Bradley J., “The Wearable Remembrance Agent: A System for Augmented Theory”, The Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Wearable Computers, Oct. 1997, pp. 123-128.
Riecken, Doug et al., “Agents That Reduce Work and Information Overload”, p. 31-40; p. 146 (ACM, Communication of the ACM, vol. 37, No. 7, Jul. 1994).
Sahami, M. et al., “A Bayesian approach to filtering junk e-mail”, In Workshop on Learning for Text Categorization, AAAI Technical Report WS-98-05, 1998, American Association for Artificial Intelligence, AAAI, 8 pgs.
Schilit, Bill et al., “Context-Aware Computing Applications”, in Proceedings of the Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, Dec. 1994. pp. 85-90.
Schilit, Bill et al., “Customizing Mobile Applications”, Proceedings USENIX Symposium on Mobile and Location Independent Computing, Aug. 1993, 9 pages.
Schilit, Bill et al., “Disseminating Active Map Information to Mobile Hosts”, IEEE Network, 1994, pp. 22-32, vol. 8-No. 5.
Schilit, Bill et al., “The ParcTab Mobile Computing System”, IEEE WWOS-IV, 1993, 4 pages.
Schilit, William Noah, “A System Architecture for Context-Aware Mobile Computing”, Columbia University, 1995, 153 pages.
Segal, Richard, et al., “MailCat: An Intelligent Assistant for Organizing Email”, Autonomous Agents '99, p. 276-282, 1999, 5 pgs.
Shin Maruyama et al., “Priority Control in Receiving E-mails by Giving a Separate Response to Each DNS Query”, Proceedings of the 2005 Symposium on Applications and the Internet (SAINT'06), IEEE Computer Society, Retrieved Date: Sep. 23, 2010, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=01581317.
Smith, Craig A., “Agent Function for viewpoint-like interfaces”, Xerox disclosure journal, vol. 19, No. 6, Nov. 1, 1994, p. 481.
Spreitzer, Mike et al., “Architectural Considerations for Scalable, Secure, Mobile Computing with Location Information”, The 14th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, Jun. 1994, pp. 29-38.
Spreitzer, Mike et al., “Providing Location Information in a Ubiquitous Computing Environment”, SIGOPS '93, 1993, pp. 270-283.
Spreitzer, Mike et al., “Scalable, Secure, Mobile Computing with Location Information”, Communications of the ACM, Jul. 1993, 1 page, vol. 36, No. 7.
Starner, Thad Eugene, “Wearable Computing and Contextual Awareness”, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Jun. 1999, 249 pages.
Stenmark, Dick, “The Duality of Email as Corporate Information Channel”, Internal Communication, 1999, pp. 1-4.
Theimer, Marvin, et al., “Operating System Issues for PDAs”, in Fourth Workshop on Workstation Operating Systems, 1993, 7 pages.
Tomko, “Case Study-Assessing Spatial Distribution of Web Resources for Navigation Services”, available at http://www.sli.unimelb.edu.au/tornko/publications/tornko04case.pdf, Jan. 2004, 15 pgs.
Tran, Minh, “FreeBSD server anti-spam software using automated TCP connection control”, CAIA Technical Report 040326A, Retrieved Date: Sep. 23, 2010, http://caia.swin.edu.au/reports/040326A/CAIA-TR-040326A.pdf, 13 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/364,527, Amendment and Response filed Jan. 20, 2004, 12 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/364,527, Amendment and Response filed May 7, 2003, 13 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/364,527, Notice of Allowance dated Jan. 10, 2006, 5 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/364,527, Notice of Allowance dated Feb. 19, 2004, 9 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/364,527, Office Action dated Dec. 27, 2002, 12 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/364,527, Office Action dated Jul. 18, 2003, 7 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/365,293, Office Action dated Aug. 23, 2002, 20 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/365,293, Office Action dated Feb. 5, 2003, 20 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/365,293, Office Action dated Jun. 26, 2003, 22 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Amendment and Response filed Jan. 24, 2003, 9 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Amendment and Response filed Oct. 13, 2003, 9 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Amendment and Response filed Oct. 19, 2004, 9 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Amendment and Response filed Feb. 12, 2003, 9 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Amendment and Response filed Feb. 23, 2005, 14 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Amendment and Response filed Apr. 21, 2004, 9 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Amendment and Response filed Aug. 15, 2005, 10 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Notice of Allowance dated Nov. 4, 2005, 7 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Office Action dated Nov. 21, 2003, 9 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Office Action dated Dec. 15, 2004, 11 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Office Action dated May 16, 2003, 11 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Office Action dated May 18, 2005, 13 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Office Action dated Jul. 20, 2004, 9 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/464,348, Office Action dated Sep. 25, 2002, 8 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Amendment after Allowance filed Jan. 25, 2012, 3 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Amendment and Response filed Feb. 24, 2010, 7 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Amendment and Response filed Mar. 23, 2011, 14 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Amendment and Response filed Sep. 2, 2009, 10 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Amendment and Response filed Sep. 20, 2010, 11 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Amendment and Response filed Sep. 6, 2011, 15 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Notice of Allowance dated Oct. 28, 2011, 14 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Notice of Allowance dated Feb. 28, 2012, 13 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Office Action dated Oct. 3, 2008, 36 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Office Action dated Dec. 23, 2010, 28 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Office Action dated Jun. 18, 2010, 27 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/442,546, Office Action dated Jun. 3, 2011, 17 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/464,603, Advisory Action dated Aug. 20, 2004, 3 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/464,603, Amendment and Response filed Mar. 25, 2004, 10 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/464,603, Amendment and Response filed Jul. 26, 2004, 8 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/464,603, Notice of Allowance dated Dec. 13, 2004, 7 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/464,603, Office Action dated Dec. 2, 2003, 12 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/464,603, Office Action dated Jun. 14, 2004, 14 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/795,695, Office Action dated Jan. 4, 2007, 27 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/795,695, Office Action dated Jul. 27, 2006, 28 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/795,695, Office Action dated Jun. 22, 2007, 20 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/314,528, Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 18, 2008, 10 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Amendment and Response filed Jan. 23, 2015, 16 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Amendment and Response filed Jan. 28, 2014, 12 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Amendment and Response filed Jun. 28, 2013, 12 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Amendment and Response filed Aug. 21, 2015, 14 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Office Action dated Oct. 23, 2014, 20 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Office Action dated Oct. 28, 2013, 19 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Office Action dated Oct. 7, 2015, 21 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Office Action dated Mar. 29, 2013, 18 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Office Action dated May 21, 2015, 20 pgs.
Want, Roy et al., “The Active Badge Location System”, ACM Transactions on Information Systems, Jan. 1992, pp. 91-102, vol. 10, No. 1.
Want, Roy, “Active Badges and Personal Interactive Computing Objects”, IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 1992, 11 pages, vol. 38, No. 1.
Weiser, Mark, “Some Computer Science Issues in Ubiquitous Computing”, Communications of the ACM, Jul. 1993, pp. 75-84, vol. 36, No. 7.
Weiser, Mark, “The Computer for the 21st Century, Scientific American”, Sep. 1991, pp. 94-104, vol. 265, No. 3.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Amendment and Response filed Feb. 10, 2016, 12 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Office Action dated May 19, 2016, 23 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Amendment and Response filed Sep. 27, 2016, 10 pgs.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/962,697, Notice of Allowance dated Oct. 24, 2016, 12 pgs.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20170163583 A1 Jun 2017 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 12962697 Dec 2010 US
Child 15438414 US