WO2001084423A2 - Method, computer program product, and system for determining assignees related by common cited references with a source patent portfolio - Google Patents

Method, computer program product, and system for determining assignees related by common cited references with a source patent portfolio Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2001084423A2
WO2001084423A2 PCT/US2001/013123 US0113123W WO0184423A2 WO 2001084423 A2 WO2001084423 A2 WO 2001084423A2 US 0113123 W US0113123 W US 0113123W WO 0184423 A2 WO0184423 A2 WO 0184423A2
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
patents
references
assignees
recited
assignee
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/US2001/013123
Other languages
French (fr)
Inventor
Stephen K. Boyer
Thomas Downes Griffin
Alex Miller
Original Assignee
Delphion, Inc
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Priority claimed from US09/560,397 external-priority patent/US6879990B1/en
Application filed by Delphion, Inc filed Critical Delphion, Inc
Priority to AU2001255609A priority Critical patent/AU2001255609A1/en
Publication of WO2001084423A2 publication Critical patent/WO2001084423A2/en

Links

Classifications

    • GPHYSICS
    • G06COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06QINFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/10Office automation; Time management
    • GPHYSICS
    • G06COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06QINFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q30/00Commerce
    • G06Q30/02Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising

Definitions

  • the present invention relates to systems and methods for making patent documents or
  • the invention relates to ways of providing meaningful insights by processing a set
  • Patent data including full text and/or images of patents, portions of patents (e.g., patent
  • searching is limited to certain portions of patent such as the claims or abstracts. Such searching
  • One aspect of the present invention will determine a ranked list of assignees associated
  • This source patent portfolio may be input by hand or otherwise derived.
  • partial list can be organized according to some criteria that will provide useful information.
  • the set of assignees is related to the source patent portfolio by virtue of commonly
  • the set of all assignees is then ranked or ordered according to this ratio so that
  • Figure 1 is a block diagram of a computing device, such as a workstation, wherein the
  • Figure 2 is logical diagram of an exemplary environment and system of a patent
  • FIGS 3A-3C are flow charts showing the operation of the system shown in Figure 2
  • Figure 3A shows the steps for general patent searching
  • Figure 3B shows the steps for
  • Figure 4 is a flow chart showing processing steps taken to create and present a list of
  • Figure 5 is a flow chart showing processing steps taken to create and present a list of
  • patents of the source patent portfolio and organized according to a ranking criteria.
  • Figure 6 is a flow chart showing processing steps taken to create and present a list of
  • assignees are also organized according to a ranking criteria.
  • Figure 7 is a flow chart showing processing steps taken to create and present a list of
  • patent portfolio means a set of one or more patents. This set
  • a patent portfolio would be the set of all patents belonging to a single assignee or
  • the term "assignee” refers to the entity, such as a corporation, that owns
  • classification system refers to an organized and defined method
  • classification systems at least one class of a classification system and in some instances fit multiple classes.
  • classification systems are the US patent classification system and the International
  • patents may be classified into industry groups, product lines or lines of business,
  • Figure 1 is a block diagram of a computing device, such as a workstation, wherein the
  • FIG. 1 The environment of Figure 1 comprises a single
  • representative computing device 100 such as a personal computer, workstation, laptop, hand ⁇
  • the computing device 100 includes a microprocessor 102 or equivalent processing capability and a
  • bus 104 to connect and enable communication between the microprocessor 102 and the
  • computing devices there may be multiple processors incorporated therein.
  • the microprocessor 102 communicates with storage 106 via the bus 104.
  • Memory 108
  • RAM Random Access Memory
  • ROM Read Only Memory
  • flash memory etc.
  • secondary storage device 110 such as a hard disk, and removable
  • storage device 112 such as a floppy diskette drive, CD ROM drive, tape storage, etc. is
  • the removable storage device 112 will have associated therewith an appropriate type of
  • removable media 114 such as a diskette, CD, tape reel or cartridge, solid state storage, etc. that
  • computing device 10 may have multiple memories (e.g., RAM and ROM), secondary storage
  • removable storage devices e.g., floppy drive and CD ROM drive.
  • the computing device 100 typically includes a user interface adapter 116 that connects
  • microprocessor 102 via the bus 104 to one or more interface devices, such as a keyboard
  • a mouse or other pointing device 120 a display 122 (such as a CRT monitor, LCD screen,
  • a printer 124 or any oilier user interface device, such as a touch sensitive screen, digitized
  • computing device 100 may use multiple user interface adapters in
  • the computing device 100 may also communicate with other computing devices,
  • ISDN Adapter as a telephone, cable, or wireless modem
  • DSL adapter as a telephone, cable, or wireless modem
  • LAN local area network
  • WAN Wide Area Networks
  • Internet etc.
  • device 100 may use multiple communication adapters for making the necessary communication
  • connections e.g., a telephone modem card and a Cellular Digital Packet Data (CDPD).
  • CDPD Cellular Digital Packet Data
  • computing device 100 may be associated with other computing devices in a LAN or WAN, or
  • the computing device can be a client or server in a client/server arrangement with another
  • the computing device 100 provides the facility for running software, such as Operating
  • Application software 138 are typically distributed as part of a computer program product that
  • RAM random access memory
  • ROM read-only memory
  • diskette a diskette
  • tape a compact disc
  • PLC programmable logic array
  • a remote transmission over a wireless network such as a cellular
  • Examples of a computer useable medium include but are not limited to palpable
  • bearing the instructions, or the instructions (or
  • the instructions or software can be associated with a computer useable medium.
  • data structure refers to a particular organization of meaningful data values
  • a network packet has a variety of
  • effected contains one or more processors, operating together, substantially independently, or distributed over a network, and further includes memory for storing the instructions and
  • computing device as described in Figure 1 may be configured with appropriate software so that
  • components may be used to create a system that implements all or part of the functional.
  • FIG. 2 a logical diagram of an exemplary environment and system of a
  • client systems are typically any computing device 100 that have
  • the patent database service 204 interacts with clients 200 by way of a web server 206
  • the patent database service 204 For example, a page exist that allow a user to enter a query for
  • pages can be used to have hardcopies of selected patents faxed to a
  • the web server is connected to a Local Area Network (LAN) 208 that allows
  • database server from IBM corporation is one preferred relational database server and others
  • the patent data is loaded into the patent database 212 and organized in tables according to
  • the database may be set up with a main"table" for "Patents" with each entry having a patent
  • Patents (patn, assignee name, US class, licensee flag, . . )
  • Patents (patn, assignee name, US class, licensee flag, . . )
  • the table may contain entries for the various parts of the
  • Oref(patn, other_reference,. . . ) The "Other Reference" (Oref) table allows for making
  • a patent data service 204 may take information from multiple sources to
  • information beyond that provided by an issuing authority For example, information regarding
  • relational database such as IBM's dB/2
  • SQL relational database
  • image servers 214 that are part of the patent data service.
  • index server 218 that provides an easily searchable index of all the patent data in the patent
  • a fax server 220 that is used to fax an image of a patent or other information to a
  • single physical machine may support more than one of the servers illustrated.
  • Figure 3 A is an example operation of processing a query.
  • the HTTP request containing the query information is received at the web
  • the web server 206 will process the information and determine that a query is
  • CGI Common Gateway Interface
  • the index server 218 has a search engine and a patent index to all the patent data found
  • the index server 218 will receive the SQL query and execute
  • results come back in the form of a "hit list” indicating a patent number, issue date, and title.
  • the web server 206 manipulates the hit list data into the proper format and serves up the
  • search results in an HTML document that is returned in the HTTP response to the client The user can then view the search results using the HTML capable browsing software executing on
  • the HTTP request containing the request for more detailed information
  • the web server 206 will process
  • the data base server 210 will execute the search into the relational patent data base 212
  • step 312 the web server 206 arranges the
  • This formatting may include links
  • the HTTP request containing the request for the image regarding a specific
  • the web server 206 will process the request and will
  • image to be in any one of commonly available formats such as TIFF, PDF, etc.
  • the image server 214 will access the image from the CD ROM towers 216 at step 320
  • a source patent portfolio is created or identified.
  • patents that make up a source patent portfolio For example, A user may select the individual
  • the source patent portfolio may be based on a search of the patent database 212.
  • the desired assignee can be received by the web server 206 and all of
  • patents can be determined for that assignee and used as a source patent portfolio.
  • Assignees can be organized according to name and/or preferably by the USPTO
  • PORTFOLIO portfolio will be referred to as PORTFOLIO and is composed of a set of patent numbers.
  • Another way of ranking the distinct assignees determined in step 406 is to provide a
  • the total number of patents for each assignee can be determined by the
  • step 412 the results of the previous steps processing' that created the ranked
  • the results are formatted for the client by the web server 206 and sent to a
  • client browser in response to an initial request.
  • a source patent portfolio is created or identified.
  • the source patent portfolio is determined in step 502.
  • the source patent portfolio will be
  • PORTFOLIO referred to as PORTFOLIO and is composed of a set of patent numbers.
  • step 502. Again using the US patent data organized into relational tables indicated previously,
  • COVERED_OTHER_REFERENCES is computed at step 504. This operates as an
  • step 508 the number of patents for each assignee is determined and the assignees are
  • the total number of patents for each assignee can be determined by the
  • assignee ABC had significantly fewer patents than assignee XYZ, all of those patent had at least
  • the results are formatted for the client by the web server 206 and sent to a
  • client browser in response to an initial request.
  • patent portfolio the patents with the classes that cite the patents of the source patent portfolio, and patents of the source patent portfolio that have common references with other patents in the
  • a source patent portfolio is created or identified.
  • PORTFOLIO set of patent numbers and referred to as PORTFOLIO.
  • a "backward" reference is one where a particular reference shows up on a patent in the
  • a "forward" reference are references to a
  • patents contains patents with forward references (i.e., those from the patents in the covered
  • references are all references (patjreferences + other jreferences) that are
  • step 612 the patents in the covered class that share or have a common reference
  • patent portfolio with the patents in the covered classes will be determined on an assignee basis.
  • each distinct assignee will eventually be organized according to a
  • LMN would have the most related technology based on the total number of references:
  • LMN would have the most related technology based on the total number of references:
  • the results are formatted for the client by the web server 206 and sent to a
  • client browser in response to an initial request.
  • one form of reference may be
  • a source patent portfolio is created or identified.
  • PORTFOLIO set of patent numbers and referred to as PORTFOLIO.
  • patents indicating a technology relationship to the source patent portfolio will eventually contain patents indicating a technology relationship to the source patent portfolio and may include those having forward references, backward references,
  • assignee and the source patent portfolio and , hence, a likelihood that a particular assignee
  • a "backward" reference is one where a particular reference shows up on a patent in the
  • a "forward" reference is a reference to a patent
  • patents contains patents with forward references (i.e., those to patents in the source patent
  • patents with shared references with the source patent portfolio could be added.
  • a decision point is made as to whether to expand upon the set of associated
  • patents are in the set of associated patents or any other criteria.
  • patent portfolio This can be done, for example, using the following SQL statement:
  • the cu ⁇ ent set of associated patents may also be ascertained and added to the set of associated
  • step 712 the assignees contained in the set of associated patents is determined
  • assignees at step 714 are seen as potential licensees. One way this can be done is through
  • PTO number could be compiled and then subtracted from the list of "raw" assignees.
  • the potential licensees may be ranked according to numerous criteria as has
  • the results are formatted for the client by the web server 206 and sent to a client

Description

METHOD, COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT, AND SYSTEM
FOR DETERMINING ASSIGNEES RELATED BY COMMON CITED REFERENCES
WITH A SOURCE PATENT PORTFOLIO
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention.
The present invention relates to systems and methods for making patent documents or
portions thereof, such as abstracts, readily available through a computer interface. More
specifically, the invention relates to ways of providing meaningful insights by processing a set
of existing patents to determine other relevant information.
2. Present State of the Art.
Patent data, including full text and/or images of patents, portions of patents (e.g., patent
abstracts, etc.), is available in computer databases and is well known in the art. Currently, a
number of companies provide patent information over the Internet, including the United States
Patent and Trademark Office, The Intellectual Property Network, and others. While much of
the current information is centered around patents issued by the United States, increasingly
there is more information from all granting authorities worldwide.
These databases of patent information typically allow searching of the database to find
patents of interest. Some searching can be done on the entire text of a patent while other
searching is limited to certain portions of patent such as the claims or abstracts. Such searching
allows patents of interest to be found by researchers, attorneys, patent examiners, etc.
Additionally, in order to make finding relevant patents more convenient, some patent databases
provide the ability to follow links to patents that cite a given patent or were cited by the
examiner in the prosecution of a given patent.
In many instances, services are also available in association with the actual patent data. For example, it is common to be able to search for patents in a database and then "order" any
particular patents of interest to be delivered to you by mail, fax, etc.
Patent databases are used by professional patent searchers doing prior art searches or
validity searches for clients, patent examiners during the course of patent application
examination, business people to understand areas of technology, and others. Companies who
own patents can also conveniently track competitors' patent issuance activity using such patent
databases.
Elements of textual analysis tools have been applied to patent databases in order to
extract higher-level information or put more meaning into existing data. See, for example, Text
Mining Applied to Patent Analysis by Hehenberger, et. al., IBM Corp. White Paper, 1998
There is a great need for such intelligent information and ever less expensive computer
processing provides ample opportunity to provide such information.
What is needed are ways of calculating relevant intelligent information over what is
currently offered by patent database providers and patent analysis products. This will allow
new and important insights to be made by the users of such patent databases.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
One aspect of the present invention will determine a ranked list of assignees associated
with a source patent portfolio that related by sharing or having in common references with
patents in the source patent portfolio.
When the present invention is invoked, a source patent portfolio is first created as a
starting point. This source patent portfolio may be input by hand or otherwise derived. For
example, an assignee may be indicated and all of the patents owned by that particular assignee
may be derived and used as the source patent portfolio.
Next, a list is made of all the references that are cited by one or more of the patents in
the source patent portfolio. This list of references is referred to as the set of covered references
or simply the covered references. Based on the list of covered references, a search is made of
all patents that share, as a cited reference, at least one of the covered references.
Based on the narrowed scope of the entire patent database (i.e., only those patents that
share a reference with a patent in the source patent portfolio), more specific processing may
now be done. One processing step is to determine all of the assignees that have patents sharing
a reference with at least one patent in the source patent portfolio. This set of all assignees (or
partial list) can be organized according to some criteria that will provide useful information. In
any case, the set of assignees is related to the source patent portfolio by virtue of commonly
cited (i.e., "shared") references.
For example, to arrive at a more useful result, the number of patents an assignee has that
share a reference with a patent in the source patent portfolio or the total number of references
shared (i.e., some patents may share multiple references) or both may be used to rank or
organize the assignees according to likely importance.. This can give an indication of the competitors having a high number of patents in the same technology as the source patent
portfolio.
A ratio composed of the number of shared references of an assignee's patents with the
patents of the source patent portfolio divided by the total number of patents held by the assignee
can be calculated for each assignee and give an idea how vested a competitor may be in
technology area. The set of all assignees is then ranked or ordered according to this ratio so that
those companies heavily vested into the presumably same technology area will rise to the top of
the list. Again, this provides a number of competitors to watch, license, or otherwise monitor.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
A more particular description of the invention briefly described above will be rendered
by reference to specific embodiments thereof which are illustrated in the appended drawings.
These drawings depict only one or more typical embodiments of the invention and are not
therefore to be considered to be limiting of its scope. With respect to the following drawings,
like reference numbers denotes the same element throughout the set of drawings.
Figure 1 is a block diagram of a computing device, such as a workstation, wherein the
present invention may be practiced.
Figure 2 is logical diagram of an exemplary environment and system of a patent
database accessible over the Internet where the present invention can be used and implemented.
Figures 3A-3C are flow charts showing the operation of the system shown in Figure 2
above. Figure 3A shows the steps for general patent searching, Figure 3B shows the steps for
accessing detailed information with respect to a certain patent, and Figure 3C shows the steps
for accessing a patent image.
Figure 4 is a flow chart showing processing steps taken to create and present a list of
assignees related to a source patent portfolio by way of the classes covered by the source patent
portfolio and organized according to a ranking criteria.
Figure 5 is a flow chart showing processing steps taken to create and present a list of
assignees associated to a source patent portfolio related by way of the references cited in the
patents of the source patent portfolio and organized according to a ranking criteria.
Figure 6 is a flow chart showing processing steps taken to create and present a list of
assignees associated to a source patent portfolio that takes into account the classes covered by
the source patent portfolio, the references cited in the patents of the source patent portfolio, the patents with the classes that cite the patents of the source patent portfolio, and patents of the
source patent portfolio that have common references with other patents in the set of classes.
These assignees are also organized according to a ranking criteria.
Figure 7 is a flow chart showing processing steps taken to create and present a list of
assignees that would be likely candidates for licensing a source patent portfolio and are
organized according to a ranking criteria.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
As used herein, the term "patent" refers to official technical grants from governments or
other organizations. Note that other technical materials could also be organized and benefit by
the present invention as long as they have the important characteristics associated with
governmental patent grants (i.e., able to be organized into a classification system, cross-
referencing, etc.). For example, many research journals have extensive bibliographies of
articles that are technologically related that function in an analogous manner with respect to the
techniques presented herein as "cited references" in patent documents.
As used herein, the term "patent portfolio" means a set of one or more patents. This set
of patents are of particular interest for one reason or another. Preferably, though not
necessarily, a patent portfolio would be the set of all patents belonging to a single assignee or
inventor. Other types of portfolios could be used, however, such as the set of known patents in
a related technology, etc.
As used herein, the term "assignee" refers to the entity, such as a corporation, that owns
a particular patent usually by assignment. This term can also encompass inventors who do not
assign their invention. Those skilled in the art will recognize that equivalent processing, results,
and insight can be occur as disclosed herein with respect to inventor-owners as owners by actual
assignment. For scholarly articles and other publications, an "author" could be viewed in the
same manner as an inventor and an affiliated "organization," such as a company where the
author works or university where the author attends school, could be viewed as an assignee.
As used here, the term "classification system" refers to an organized and defined method
of grouping patents, usually, but not necessarily, along technology lines. A patent must fit into
at least one class of a classification system and in some instances fit multiple classes. Examples of classification systems are the US patent classification system and the International
Classification system for patents as well as the classification systems used by each country,
organization, or entity that issues patents. Furthermore, technical articles in research
publications can also be placed into classification systems.
As used herein, the term "references" refers to other patents, technical articles, and any
other information that is associated with a patent. Usually, though not necessarily, these are
found by an Examiner or submitted by an applicant during the course of patent prosecution and
"cited" in the patent document. Generally speaking references that are not patent reference are
simply referred to as "other references." Besides the official information associated with a
particular patent, other information may be associated with the patent and can be used in the
same form as any other reference.
Those skilled in the art will recognize that numerous classification systems may be
devised that do not classify all the patents found in a country. For example, a specialized
software technology classification system could include patent documents granted from
multiple governmental authorities and even include relevant scholarly articles dealing solely
with computer software.
Those skilled in the art will recognize that patents may be classified along other lines
besides technology and that users may develop arbitrary user-defined classification systems.
For example, patents may be classified into industry groups, product lines or lines of business,
etc.
Figure 1 is a block diagram of a computing device, such as a workstation, wherein the
present invention may be practiced. The environment of Figure 1 comprises a single
representative computing device 100, such as a personal computer, workstation, laptop, hand¬
held computer, information appliance, etc., including related peripheral devices. The computing device 100 includes a microprocessor 102 or equivalent processing capability and a
bus 104 to connect and enable communication between the microprocessor 102 and the
components of the computing device 100 in accordance with known techniques. Note that in
some computing devices there may be multiple processors incorporated therein.
The microprocessor 102 communicates with storage 106 via the bus 104. Memory 108,
such as Random Access Memory (RAM), Read Only Memory (ROM), flash memory, etc. is
directly accessible while secondary storage device 110, such as a hard disk, and removable
storage device 112, such as a floppy diskette drive, CD ROM drive, tape storage, etc. is
accessible with additional interface hardware and software as is known and customary in the art.
The removable storage device 112 will have associated therewith an appropriate type of
removable media 114, such as a diskette, CD, tape reel or cartridge, solid state storage, etc. that
will hold computer useable data and is a form of computer useable medium. Note that a
computing device 10 may have multiple memories (e.g., RAM and ROM), secondary storage
devices, and removable storage devices (e.g., floppy drive and CD ROM drive).
The computing device 100 typically includes a user interface adapter 116 that connects
the microprocessor 102 via the bus 104 to one or more interface devices, such as a keyboard
118, a mouse or other pointing device 120, a display 122 (such as a CRT monitor, LCD screen,
etc.), a printer 124, or any oilier user interface device, such as a touch sensitive screen, digitized
entry pad, etc. Note that the computing device 100 may use multiple user interface adapters in
order to make the necessary connections with the user interface devices.
The computing device 100 may also communicate with other computing devices,
computers, workstations, etc. or networks thereof through a communications adapter 126, such
as a telephone, cable, or wireless modem, ISDN Adapter, DSL adapter, Local Area Network
(LAN) adapter, or other communications channel. This gives the computing device direct access to networks 128 (LANs, Wide Area Networks (WANs), the Internet, etc.), telephone
lines 130 that may be used to access other networks or computers, wireless networks 132, such
cellular telephone networks, and other communication mechanisms. Note that the computing
device 100 may use multiple communication adapters for making the necessary communication
connections (e.g., a telephone modem card and a Cellular Digital Packet Data (CDPD). The
computing device 100 may be associated with other computing devices in a LAN or WAN, or
the computing device can be a client or server in a client/server arrangement with another
computer, etc. All these configurations, as well as the appropriate communications hardware
and software, are known in the art.
The computing device 100 provides the facility for running software, such as Operating
System software 134, Middleware software 136, and Application software 138. Note that such
software executes tasks and may communicate with various software components on this and
other computing devices.
As will be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, computer programs such as that
described herein (including Operating System software 134, Middleware software 136, and/or
Application software 138) are typically distributed as part of a computer program product that
has a computer useable media or medium containing or storing the program code. Therefore,
"media", "medium", "computer useable medium", or "computer useable media" , as used
herein, may include a computer memory (RAM and/or ROM), a diskette, a tape, a compact
disc, an integrated circuit, a programmable logic array (PLA), a remote transmission over a
communications circuit, a remote transmission over a wireless network such as a cellular
network, or any other medium useable by computers with or without proper adapter interfaces.
Note that examples of a computer useable medium include but are not limited to palpable
physical media, such as a CD Rom, diskette, hard drive and the like, as well as other non- palpable physical media, such as a carrier signal, whether over wires or wireless, when the
program is distributed electronically. Note also that "servlets" or "applets" according to JAVA
technology available from Sun Microsystems out of Mountain View, CA, would be considered
computer program products.
Although the enabling instructions might be "written on" on a diskette or tape, "stored
in" an integrated circuit or PLA, "carried over" a communications circuit or wireless network, it
will be appreciated, that for purposes of the present invention described herein, the computer
useable medium will be referred to as "bearing" the instructions, or the instructions (or
software) will be referred to as being "on" the medium. Thus, software or instructions
"embodied on" a medium is intended to encompass the above and all equivalent ways in which
the instructions or software can be associated with a computer useable medium.
For simplicity, the term "computer program product" is used to refer to a computer
useable medium, as defined above, which bears or has embodied thereon any form of software
or instructions to enable a computer system (or multiple cooperating systems) to operate
according to the above-identified invention.
The term "data structure" refers to a particular organization of meaningful data values
that can be used in a predetermined fashion. For example, a network packet has a variety of
different data elements that are used and accessed by communications networks and computer
nodes for transporting the packet between different computer systems. The packet, as described
above, is a data structure and has a tangible embodiment in a computer useable medium when
stored in a file, when loaded into system memory, when transported across a communications
network, etc. in the same fashion as a computer program product.
It will be likewise appreciated that the computer hardware upon which the invention is
effected contains one or more processors, operating together, substantially independently, or distributed over a network, and further includes memory for storing the instructions and
calculations necessary to perform the invention.
Those skilled in the art will recognize that a system according to the present invention
may be created in a variety of different ways known in the art. For example, a general purpose
computing device as described in Figure 1 may be configured with appropriate software so that
the computing device functions as described hereafter. Furthermore, discrete electronic
components may be used to create a system that implements all or part of the functional.
Finally, note that combinations of multiple computing devices running appropriate software or
discrete electrical components can be used in like fashion. Essentially, the hardware is
configured (whether by software, custom designed, etc.) to perform the functional elements
making up the present invention.
Referring to Figure 2 a logical diagram of an exemplary environment and system of a
patent database accessible over the Internet is shown. Client systems 200 are connected to the
Internet 202 where they may access the patent database service 204 (represented by the
enclosed systems). Note that client systems are typically any computing device 100 that have
access to the Internet and will include an ever growing number of devices from Internet
"appliances" to cell phones to conventional PCs running web browsing software.
The patent database service 204 interacts with clients 200 by way of a web server 206
that receives requests and serves up pages or documents in HTML format. These pages can be
read by common browser software running on the clients 200 and form the user interface with
the patent database service 204. For example, a page exist that allow a user to enter a query for
patent data while another page will contain a "hit" list of patents that meet the criteria specified
in the query. Furthermore, pages can be used to have hardcopies of selected patents faxed to a
recipient or printed and mailed to a recipient or to access any other service supported. The web server is connected to a Local Area Network (LAN) 208 that allows
communication with other systems that make up the patent data service 204. Actual patent data
is accessible as textual data through a database server 210 with textual data stored in relational
tables in the patent data base 212, as image data through image server 214 with patent image
data stored on CD ROM towers 216, and as a searchable index through the index server 218
that contains an index of the relational tables in the patent data base 212. The DB2 relational
database server from IBM corporation is one preferred relational database server and others
exist in the marketplace.
The patent data is loaded into the patent database 212 and organized in tables according
to the various parts of the patent documents. Raw patent data found in a flat file is parsed into
defined fields appropriate for servicing queries on the data. Using US patent data as an example,
the database may be set up with a main"table" for "Patents" with each entry having a patent
number (patn), the main United States class of the patent (US_class), etc. Other tables could be
used to show the linkage between patents or between patents and other technical references.
Note that those skilled in the art will recognize that the data can be and in many instances
should be organized in different tables in order to achieve efficient operation in terms of storage
and data base performance. For purposes of example teaching, a logical organization of patent
data is presented below:
Patents(patn, assignee name, US class, licensee flag, . . ) The "Patents" table
contains the bulk of the patent information. Besides the patent number (patn), the assignee
(assignee_name), the main United States class of the patent (US_class), and an indication if the
assignee is licensed (licensee_flag), the table may contain entries for the various parts of the
issues patent such as abstract, claims, etc. Additional information about the patent such as
whether it is or has been involved in litigation, whether the maintenance fees are current, etc. can also be placed in this table. Only those columns that are relevant to explain the present
embodiment are shown. When an assignee is licensed to a particular patent, the licenseejflag
will be marked to true or 'Y'. Note that those skilled in the art may elaborate upon this basic
structure to include sub classes or multiple classification systems and other apparent
modifications.
Prefφatn, patjreference. . . ) The "Patent Reference" (Pref) table allows for making
the connections between different patents. Each entry is a patent number (patn) and a patent
number of a reference cited for that patent (patjreference). There is a many-to-many
relationship between patn and patjreference since a given patent may have many patent
references cited thereto and the same patent may be cited in many different patents.
Oref(patn, other_reference,. . . ) The "Other Reference" (Oref) table allows for making
connections between patents and other technical publications. Each entry is a patent number
(patn) and a reference cited for that patent (other_reference). There is a many-to-many
relationship between patn and other jreference since a given patent may have many technical
publication references cited thereto and the same technical publication may be cited in many
different patents.
The preceding general tables are presented in logical format and it is understood that an
actual implementation may break the tablea up in such a manner as will facilitate management
of such a large amount of data as is required for collections of patent data.
Note also that a patent data service 204 may take information from multiple sources to
build the patent database 212. For example, the US patent office periodically releases current
status on the payment of maintenance fees required to keep a patent in force. This information
may be combined with the infoπnation issued patents to know whether a particular patent is still
enforceable or not. Another example would be the utilization of assignee changes published periodically
due to mergers, acquisitions, etc. The power of organizing the patent mformation in the form of
relational tables allows easy correlation of this changed information received after the fact to
the issued patent data.
Those skilled in the art will realize that a patent data service could also bring in relevant
information beyond that provided by an issuing authority. For example, information regarding
the assignee could be placed in the database or otherwise made available (i.e., links to other
databases or web sites).
Once the date has been appropriately parsed into a database (preferably an SQL
relational database, such as IBM's dB/2) users can then perform (SQL) queries on the data to
search for desired data. In a relational environment, the powerful capabilities of relational
operations can be used advantageously to get information that would be very difficult to obtain
if the data was organized in other formats, such as stored as flat files.
Other elements that are part of the patent data service are image servers 214 that are
used to access images of the actual patents stored on a number of CD ROM towers 216, an
index server 218 that provides an easily searchable index of all the patent data in the patent
database 212, a fax server 220 that is used to fax an image of a patent or other information to a
recipient fax machine 222, and a print server 224 that will print patent documents or other data
onto a printer 226. Together, the constituent elements of the patent data service 204 provide
base patent data services, such as access to full text searching on patent data or patent document
delivery services, and more advanced services.
Those skilled in the art will recognize that many variations on the patent data service
204 as shown can be made without changing the basic purposes of the service. For example,
not all of the different servers are needed depending on the level of service provided. For example, if fax delivery is not supported, the fax server 220 is not needed. Additionally, a
single physical machine may support more than one of the servers illustrated.
Referring now to Figures 3A-3C, flow charts showing operation of the patent data
service 204 are presented. Figure 3 A is an example operation of processing a query. Though
this example deals with query processing that returns a "hit list" of patent numbers and titles, it
is instructive to show the operation of the system. Initially, one of the clients 200 will contact
the web server 206 that will return a web page interface to the client at step 300. This web page
will have an area that allows the user to indicate a query to the patent database. Once the user
selects the query terms he will depress a search button or otherwise cause the query information
to be transmitted to web server 206.
At step 302, the HTTP request containing the query information is received at the web
server 206. The web server 206 will process the information and determine that a query is
desired and what search terms need to be used and will make access to the index server 218
over the LAN 208. A Common Gateway Interface (CGI) script is typically used to translate the
search terms found in the HTML document to proper SQL statements that can be processed by
a database search engine. Note also, that XML with stylesheets may also be implemented to
provide the HTML compatible pages to browsers and the like and allow further flexibility to the
patent data service.
The index server 218 has a search engine and a patent index to all the patent data found
in relational patent data base 212. The index server 218 will receive the SQL query and execute
the search into the patent index at step 304; returning the results to the web server 206. These
results come back in the form of a "hit list" indicating a patent number, issue date, and title.
Finally, the web server 206 manipulates the hit list data into the proper format and serves up the
search results in an HTML document that is returned in the HTTP response to the client. The user can then view the search results using the HTML capable browsing software executing on
the client.
Referring now to Figure 3B, a flow chart showing the steps taken to access more
detailed patent information is presented. Again, the client is provided some form of user
interface in an HTML page by the web server 206 at step 308. This may be part of the hit list
page discussed previously (e.g., clicking on the patent number or title might trigger a request for
more detailed information) or in an unrelated page.
At step 310, the HTTP request containing the request for more detailed information
regarding a specific patent is received at the web server 206. The web server 206 will process
the request and will make access to the data base server 216 over the LAN 208 to retrieve the
detailed information. Again, a CGI script is used to create the proper SQL statement(s) that
direct the search engine.
This detailed information can be anything according to the system design up to
including the entire text of the patent along with other relevant information. One example set of
"detailed" information is the first page data of a US patent along with the abstract and initial
claim.
The data base server 210 will execute the search into the relational patent data base 212
at step 312 and return the results to the web server 206. Next, the web server 206 arranges the
detailed information into the proper format and serves up the search results in an HTML
document that is returned in the HTTP response to the client. This formatting may include links
that will cause the patent data service 204 to provide additional detailed information (e.g., the
short summary or other section of the patent that wasn't provided previously), links to request
images of the actual patent document, additional services, etc. The user can then view the
detailed information using the HTML capable browsing software executing on the client. Referring now to Figure 3C, a flow chart showing the steps taken to download an image
of an actual patent document is presented. Again, the client is provided some form of user
interface in an HTML page by the web server 206 at step 316. This may be part of the hit list
page discussed previously (e.g., clicking on button might trigger a request for the patent image)
or in an unrelated page that lets the user designate which patent(s) are desired as an image of the
original patent document.
At step 318, the HTTP request containing the request for the image regarding a specific
patent is received at the web server 206. The web server 206 will process the request and will
make access to one or more image servers 214 over the LAN 208 to retrieve the patent image
from the CD ROM towers 216 storing a library of such images. The user can request the patent
image to be in any one of commonly available formats such as TIFF, PDF, etc.
The image server 214 will access the image from the CD ROM towers 216 at step 320
and return the results in the proper image format to the web server 206. Finally, the web server
206 causes the patent image to be downloaded to the client where it can be viewed, saved,
printed, or otherwise manipulated by the user at step 324.
Referring now to Figure A, a flow chart showing the processing steps taken to create a
list of assignees that are related to a source patent portfolio by having classes of a classification
system in common is presented. The results of such an analysis can give insight into what other
assignees are heavily involved in the same technology areas as that covered by the source patent
portfolio.
Initially, at step 400 a source patent portfolio is created or identified. Those skilled in
the art will recognize that there are many ways that could be employed to determine a set of
patents that make up a source patent portfolio. For example, A user may select the individual
patents of interest that make up the source patent portfolio though this could be a tedious task. Alternatively, the source patent portfolio may be based on a search of the patent database 212.
One useful way is to base the source patent portfolio on some or all of the patents held
by a particular assignee. The desired assignee can be received by the web server 206 and all of
the patents can be determined for that assignee and used as a source patent portfolio.
Depending on whether we use the assignee code used by the USPTO or an assignee name, the
following SQL statement against the table definitions presented previously would return the
desired patent numbers to make an assignee source patent portfolio:
SELECT patn FROM Patents WHERE assignee_name = <name>
Assignees can be organized according to name and/or preferably by the USPTO
normalized assignee number. Using the assignee number is generally a more reliable way of
getting all of the patents for a particular assignee as variations in assignee name or
typographical errors will be recognized as different assignees. Below is an example of an SQL
statement using the assignee code that can be derived from an assignee name.
SELECT patn FROM Patents WHERE assignee_code = <code>
Once a source patent portfolio has been created, the set of classes in a classification
system covered by the source patent portfolio is determined in step 402. The source patent
portfolio will be referred to as PORTFOLIO and is composed of a set of patent numbers.
Once the desired source patent portfolio PORTFOLIO is created, the set of classes,
COVERED_CLASSES, that are covered by the source patent portfolio is determined at step
402. Again using the example of US patent data organized into relational tables indicated previously, one way to achieve this is shown with the following SQL statement will would
return the appropriate set of US classes:
SELECT DISTINCT US_class FROM Patents
WHERE patn IN SELECT patn FROM PORTFOLIO
Now, a set of patents representing all the patents in the covered classes occurs at step
404. This operates as an intermediary set for further processing. One way to achieve this using
patent data organized in relational tables as presented previously requires issuing the following
SQL statement to create a set of patents, COVERED_PATENTS:
SELECT DISTINCT patn FROM Patents
WHERE US_class IN SELECT US_class FROM COVERED CLASSES
From this intermediate set of patents, all the distinct assignees are determined at step
406. Furthermore, each distinct assignee will eventually be organized according to a ranking
criteria that will help provide meaning into the relationship of the assignee with respect to the
covered classes.
As used herein, the term "ranking criteria" refers to many different forms of organizing
the assignees. While some examples follow, those skilled in the art will clearly recognize ways
of ranking or otherwise organizing a group of assignees so that the most relevant assignees for a
particular purpose can be easily identified.
For example, one simple criteria is that of the assignees with the most patents in the
covered classes should be ranked highest will indicate which assignees (i.e., companies or
competitors) are most present in the classes of the source patent portfolio. At step 408 the
number of patents for each assignee is determined and the assignees are ranked according to the number of patents in the covered classes in step 410. An example SQL statement that can
achieve this result using the tables of US patent data shown previously and the intermediate
results explained above:
SELECT COUNT(patn) AS pcount, assignee iame
FROM Patents
WHERE patn IN SELECT patn FROM COVERED_PATENTS
GROUP BY assigneejiame
ORDER BY pcount
Such an SQL statement would return results in the example format of Table 1 below:
Figure imgf000022_0001
TABLE 1
Another way of ranking the distinct assignees determined in step 406 is to provide a
weighted view of the patents in the covered classes so that an indication of a given assignee's
(i.e., company's, competitor's) total portfolio is in the covered classes. In other words, those
assignees who have a large percentage of their total patents in the covered classes will tend to
be ranked higher even if they have relatively fewer patents than other assignees who have more
patents numerically in the covered classes. This tends to focus more on an assignee's focus
along a particular technology and may be more relevant.
This can be easily done by finding the number of total patents for each assignee (in all
classes) and dividing this number into the number found in the covered classes. This gives a ratio of the total patents to the patents in the covered classes for each assignee.
As an example, the total number of patents for each assignee can be determined by the
following SQL statement:
SELECT COUNT atn) AS pcount, assigneejiame
FROM Patents
WHERE assigneejiame IN
(SELECT assigneejiame FROM Patents WHERE patn IN
(SELECT patn
FROM COVERED_PATENTS)) GROUP BY assigneejiame ORDER BY pcount
Given this mformation, the calculations can readily be made to determine the ratio
above indicating the amount each assignee is invested into the covered classes and the results
tabulated into Table 2 below:
Figure imgf000023_0001
TABLE 2
Reviewing the results of Table 2 in comparison with Table 1, we note that while assignee ABC had significantly fewer patents than assignee XYZ, all of those patent were in the
covered classes and would suggest that the entire company is centered around the technology of
the covered classes. XYZ, on the other hand, while well represented and covered by patents in
the covered classes does not have a significant portion of its overall technology portfolio (as
represented by issued patents) in the covered classes.
Finally, at step 412, the results of the previous steps processing' that created the ranked
list of assignees related by the classes covered by the source patent portfolio is presented to a
user. In the environment of the patent data service 204, this is done by returning the results of
the SQL statements done on the relational patent data base 212 by the data base server 210 to
the web server 206. The results are formatted for the client by the web server 206 and sent to a
client browser in response to an initial request.
Referring now to Figure 5, a flow chart showing the processing steps taken to create a
list of assignees that are related to a source patent portfolio by having cited references in
common is presented. The results of such an analysis can give insight into what other assignees
are heavily involved in the same technology areas as that covered by the source patent portfolio.
Initially, at step 500 a source patent portfolio is created or identified. The various ways
a patent portfolio can be created was explained in more detail above. Those skilled in the art
will recognize that there are many ways that could be employed to determine a set of patents
that make up a source patent portfolio.
Once a source patent portfolio has been created, the set of cited references covered by
the source patent portfolio is determined in step 502. The source patent portfolio will be
referred to as PORTFOLIO and is composed of a set of patent numbers.
Once the desired source patent portfolio PORTFOLIO is created, the set of cited patent references, COVERED_PATENT_REFERENCES, and the set of other references,
COVERED_OTHER_REFERENCED, contained in the source patent portfolio is determined at
step 502. Again using the US patent data organized into relational tables indicated previously,
we can use all of the patents contained in the bibliographic information for each of the patents
in PORTFOLIO as an example of a set of cited references. Note that those skilled in the art
could include the other non-patent references in the bibliographic infoπnation or data outside of
the patent itself but afterwards related in some way. For the cited patent data example, this is
shown with the following SQL statement(s) which will return the set of cited patent references,
COVERED_PATENT_REFERENCES, and a set of other references,
COVERED_OTHER_REFERENCES, that together include references to other US patents
(pat_references) and references to other material (otherjreferences), such as academic
publications, professional journals, etc. The SQL statement below is used for
COVERED PATENT REFERENCES:
SELECT DISTINCT patjreference FROM Pref WHERE patn IN SELECT patn FROM PORTFOLIO
To deteπnine COVERED_OTHER_REFERENCES, a similar SQL statement is used:
SELECT DISTINCT other jreference FROM Oref WHERE patn IN SELECT patn FROM PORTFOLIO
Now, a set of patents representing all the patents that have cited therein at least one of
the references from the cited references lists, COVERED_PATENT_REFERENCES and
COVERED_OTHER_REFERENCES, is computed at step 504. This operates as an
intermediary set for further processing and is known as SHARED_REFERENCE_PATENTS. One way this can be done using patent data organized in relational tables as presented
previously requires joining the following SQL statements to create a set of patents,
SHARED_REFERENCE_P ATENTS :
SELECT DISTINCT patn FROM Pref
WHERE patjreference IN SELECT patjreference FROM
COVERED_PATENT_REFERENCES
SELECT DISTINCT patn FROM Oref
WHERE other jreference IN SELECT other jreference FROM
COVERED_OTHER_REFERENCES
From this intermediate set of patents, all the distinct assignees are determined at step
506. Furthermore, each distinct assignee will eventually be organized according to a ranking
criteria that will help provide meaning into the relationship of the assignee with respect to the
source patent portfolio.
For example, one simple criteria is that of ranking the assignees with the most patents
having at least one common cited references with one of the patents in the source patent
portfolio (i.e., the most patents in SHARED_REFERENCE_P ATENTS). The highest ranked
will indicate which assignees (i.e., companies or competitors) are most linked by common
references to the source patent portfolio. It should follow that the assignees are in very much
the same technology area at the source patent portfolio since the patent examiners are citing the
same relevant art, the inventors have knowledge of the same references that they submit,
searches performed by counsel and submitted are uncovering the same technology, etc.
Since some patents by a particular assignee may contain more than one of the cited
references found in COVERED_PATENT_REFERENCES or
COVERED_OTHER_REFERENCES, another ranking criteria would be to count the total number of cited references (regardless of the number of patents) contained within all the patents
held by an assignee. This would allow an assignee having relatively fewer patents with
common cited references but having patents that have multiple common cited references per
patent to be better reflected in a ranking. Those skilled in the art will see further variations that
take into account multiple references "linking" patents together, forward references and
backward references in addition to shared references, references to common non-patent related
information (both cited in the patent and later associated with the patent database), etc.
At step 508 the number of patents for each assignee is determined and the assignees are
ranked according to the number of patents that have at least one common cited reference from
those in the source patent portfolio in step 510. An example SQL statement that can achieve
this result using the tables of US patent data shown previously and the intermediate results
explained above:
SELECT COUNT(patn) AS pcount, assigneejiame
FROM Patents
WHERE patn IN SELECT patn FROM SHARED_REFERENCE_P ATENTS
GROUP BY assigneejiame
ORDER BY pcount
Such an SQL statement would return results in the example format of Table 3 below:
Figure imgf000027_0001
TABLE 3 Another way of ranking the distinct assignees determined in step 506 is to provide a
weighted view of the patents having a common cited reference with respect to an assignee's
(i.e., company's, competitor's) total portfolio. In other words, those assignees who have a large
percentage of their total patents having cited references in common with the source patent
portfolio will tend to be ranked higher even if they have relatively fewer patents than other
assignees who have more numerous patents with common cited references.
This can be easily done by finding the number of total patents for each assignee (in all
classes) and dividing this number into the number found having common cited references. This
gives a ratio of the total patents to the patents in the covered classes for each assignee.
As an example, the total number of patents for each assignee can be determined by the
following SQL statement:
SELECT COUNT atn) AS pcount, assignee_name
FROM Patents
WHERE assigneejiame IN
(SELECT assigneejiame
FROM Patents
WHERE patn IN
(SELECT patn
FROM SHARED_REFERENCE_P ATENTS)) GROUP BY assigneejiame ORDER BY pcount
Given this information, the calculations can readily be made to determine the ratio
above indicating the amount invested each assignee over the common cited references and the
results tabulated into Table 4 below:
Figure imgf000028_0001
Figure imgf000029_0001
TABLE 4
Reviewing the results of Table 4 in comparison with Table 3, we note that while
assignee ABC had significantly fewer patents than assignee XYZ, all of those patent had at least
one cited reference in common with one of the patents in the source patent portfolio, suggesting
a close alignment with the technology covered by the source patent portfolio. XYZ, on the
other hand, while having many patents with common cited references may not be as aligned
with the technology found in the source patent portfolio.
Finally, at step 512, the results of the previous steps processing that created the ranked
list of assignees related by the classes covered by the source patent portfolio is presented to a
user. In the environment of the patent data service 204, this is done by returning the results of
the SQL statements done on the relational patent data base 212 by the data base server 210 to
the web server 206. The results are formatted for the client by the web server 206 and sent to a
client browser in response to an initial request.
Referring now to Figure 6, a flow chart showing processing steps taken to create and
present a list of assignees associated to a source patent portfolio that takes into account the
classes covered by the source patent portfolio, the references cited in the patents of the source
patent portfolio, the patents with the classes that cite the patents of the source patent portfolio, and patents of the source patent portfolio that have common references with other patents in the
set of classes. As before, the results of such an analysis can give insight into what other
assignees are heavily involved in the same technology areas as that covered by the source patent
portfolio.
Initially, at step 600 a source patent portfolio is created or identified. The various ways
a patent portfolio can be created was explained in more detail above and will be composed of a
set of patent numbers and referred to as PORTFOLIO.
Once the desired source patent portfolio PORTFOLIO is created, the set of classes,
COVERED_CLASSES, that are covered by the source patent portfolio is deteπnined at step
602. Again using the example of US patent data organized into relational tables indicated
previously, one way to achieve this is shown with the following SQL statement will would
return the appropriate set of US classes:
SELECT DISTINCT US_class FROM Patents
WHERE patn IN SELECT patn FROM PORTFOLIO
Now, a set of patents representing all the patents in the covered classes occurs at step
604. This operates as an inteπnediary set for further processing. One way to achieve this using
patent data organized in relational tables as presented previously requires issuing the following
SQL statement to create a set of patents, CO VERED_P ATENTS:
SELECT DISTINCT patn
FROM Patents
WHERE US class IN SELECT US class FROM COVERED CLASSES
At step 606, the references cited in the patents that are in source patent portfolio is made
so that all the patents in the covered classes that are cited can be determined and made part of a set of correlated patents, CORRELATED JP ATENTS. The set of correlated patents will
contain patents of interest, namely those having forward references, backward references, and
shared references between the source patent portfolio and the patents in the covered classes.
The greater number of these "linkages" on an assignee basis will tend to indicate similarity
between patents owned by an assignee and the source patent portfolio.
A "backward" reference is one where a particular reference shows up on a patent in the
source patent portfolio (or other relevant group of patents) and is backwards in time (i.e., the
reference typically predates the patent citing it). A "forward" reference are references to a
patent in a source patent portfolio (or other relevant group of patents) and an is forward in time
(i. e. , the patent that has the reference is later than the patent cited). A "shared" reference is the
same reference showing up both in a patent of the source patent portfolio and in a patent
contained in the set of covered classes or other relevant group of patents (e.g., all patents, an
industry group of patents, etc.).
Initially, the set of correlated patents contains patent coπelated by being in the same
covered classes as the source patent portfolio and also being cited by at least one of the patents
in the source patent portfolio. These are the "backward" references from the patents in the
source patent portfolio to the patents in the covered classes. One way this can be done is shown
in the following SQL statements. First, a set of unique patent references, UPR, is determined
for the source patent portfolio:
SELECT DISTINCT patjreference
FROM Pref
WHERE patn IN SELECT patn FROM PORTFOLIO
Note that only patent references are sought since, for this example, the source patent portfolio and patents in the covered classes are composed of only patents and not other kinds of
documents. Then, those patents in the covered classes that are actually cited by one of the
patents in the source patent portfolio is given by:
SELECT DISTINCT patn
FROM COVERED_P ATENTS
WHERE patn IN SELECT patjreference FROM UPR
Additionally, at step 608, the patents in the covered classes that cite any of the patents in
the source patent portfolio are determined. These are the "forward" references from the patents
in the covered classes to the patents in the source patent portfolio. This can be done using the
following SQL statement:
SELECT DISTINCT patjreference FROM Pref WHERE patn IN
(SELECT patn
FROM COVERED_P ATENTS) AND pat_reference IN (SELECT patn FROM PORTFOLIO)
These patents are also added to the set of coπelated patents. Now, the set of coπelated
patents contains patents with forward references (i.e., those from the patents in the covered
classes to patents in the source patent portfolio) and backwards references (i.e., those from
patents in the source patent portfolio to patents in the covered classes).
Next, we add to the set of coπelated patents those patents in the covered classes that
have common or shared references with those patents in the source patent portfolio. As a
preliminary matter, the set of covered patent references,
COVERED_PATENT_REFERENCES, and the set of covered other references, COVERED_OTHER REFERENCES, from the source patent portfolio is ascertained at step
610. Note that these references are all references (patjreferences + other jreferences) that are
cited in the patents of the source patent portfolio and the patents in the covered classes and are
not restricted to just the patent references. As before, an SQL statement that can perform this
operation for patent references is given by:
SELECT DISTINCT patjreference
FROM Pref
WHERE patn LN SELECT patn FROM PORTFOLIO
And for other references, the SQL statement is:
SELECT DISTINCT otherjreference FROM Oref WHERE patn IN SELECT patn FROM PORTFOLIO
Next, in step 612, the patents in the covered class that share or have a common reference
with the patents in the source patent portfolio is determined. Again, this can be done using an
SQL statement in the example environment, with the results being added to the set of coπelated
patents. The following SQL for patent references:
SELECT DISTINCT patn FROM Pref WHERE patjreference IN
(SELECT patjreference
FROM COVEREDJPATENT_REFERENCES) AND patn IN
(SELECT patn FROM COVERED_P ATENTS)
And the following SQL statement for other references:
SELECT DISTINCT patn FROM Oref
WHERE otherjreference IN
(SELECT otherjreference FROM COVERED OTHER REFERENCES) AND patn IN (SELECT patn
FROM COVERED_P ATENTS)
These patents having shared references are added to the set of coπelated patents. The
set of coπelated patents now contains patents from the covered classes having at least one
reference of either "backwards," "forward," or "shared" references.
Using this intermediate set of coπelated patents, all the distinct assignees are determined
at step 614. At step 616, the number of forward and backwards references between the patents
in the source patent portfolio and the patents in the covered classes will be determined for each
assignee. At step 618, the number of times a reference is shared between patents in the source
patent portfolio with the patents in the covered classes will be determined on an assignee basis.
Finally, at step 620, each distinct assignee will eventually be organized according to a
ranking criteria that will help provide meaning into the relationship of the assignee with respect
to the source patent portfolio. One way this can be done is to simply tabulate the total number
of references (backwards, forwards, and shared) between the patents in the source patent
portfolio and the patents in the covered classes.
Below are a set of SQL statements in the example environement that organize and rank
the assignees appearing in the set of coπelated patents. By adding the results for each particular
count value together, and then re-ranking or reordering the assignees based total references, a
ranked ordering of assignees having very similar technology to the source patent portfolio
results.
For "backwards" references:
SELECT COUNT(pat_reference) AS backwardj-ef_count, assigneejiame FROM Pref WHERE patn IN
(SELECT patn FROM COVERED_P ATENTS) AND patn IN
(SELECT patjreferences
FROM UPR) GROUP BY assigneejiame ORDER BY backwardjref_count
This could give results according to Table 5 below:
Figure imgf000035_0001
TABLE 5
For "forward" references:
SELECT COUNT(pat_reference) AS forward_ref_count, assigneejiame FROM Pref WHERE patn IN (SELECT patn
FROM PORTFOLIO) AND patn IN
(SELECT patjreferences FROM COVEREDJ PR) GROUP BY assignee_name
ORDER BY forward ref count This could give results according to Table 6 below:
Figure imgf000036_0001
TABLE 6
For "shared" references, joining the following two statements (one for patent references
and the other for other references):
SELECT COUNT(pat_reference) AS sharedjref_count, assigneejiame FROM Patents WHERE patn IN
(SELECT patn
FROM CO VERED_P ATENTS) AND patjreference IN
(SELECT patjreference
FROM COVEREDJPATENTJ JEFERENCES) GROUP BY assigneejiame ORDER BY shared ref count
SELECT COUNT(otherjreference) AS sharedjref count, assigneejiame FROM Patents WHERE patn IN (SELECT patn
FROM CO VEREDJP ATENTS) AND otherjreference IN
(SELECT otherj-eference FROM COVERED_OTHER_REFERENCES) GROUP BY assigneejiame ORDER BY shared ref count
This could give results according to Table 7 below:
Figure imgf000037_0001
TABLE 7
Combining the individual results (or using an appropriate SQL statement or statements)
would give the total ranked results as shown below in Table 8:
Figure imgf000037_0002
Figure imgf000038_0001
TABLE 8
Looking only at the total to report back, Table 9 below would indicate that assignee
LMN would have the most related technology based on the total number of references:
Figure imgf000038_0002
TABLE 9
By weighting the shared references value by a factor of 5x, a different organization of
assignees will result. This would be useful in the case where sharing references more highly
indicates that the technology covered by the two sharing patents is more similar. This is given
by Tables 10 and 11, respectively, shown below.
Figure imgf000039_0001
TABLE 10
Looking only at the total to report back, Table 9 below would indicate that assignee
LMN would have the most related technology based on the total number of references:
Figure imgf000039_0002
Figure imgf000040_0001
TABLE 11
Finally, at step 622, the results of the previous steps processing' that created the ranked
list of assignees related by the classes covered by the source patent portfolio is presented to a
user. In the environment of the patent data service 204, this is done by returning the results of
the SQL statements done on the relational patent data base 212 by the data base server 210 to
the web server 206. The results are formatted for the client by the web server 206 and sent to a
client browser in response to an initial request.
Those skilled in the art will see many variations that fit within the ambit of managing
and weighting the different kinds of references. For example, one form of reference may be
more heavily weighted in some fashion as shown above. Another variation could involve other
SQL code to determine multiple references per patent and give additional weighting to those
circumstances.
Referring now to Figure 7, a flow chart showing processing steps taken to create and
present a list of assignees that are likely candidates to license a source patent portfolio is shown.
Initially, at step 700 a source patent portfolio is created or identified. The various ways
a patent portfolio can be created was explained in more detail above and will be composed of a
set of patent numbers and referred to as PORTFOLIO.
At step 702, the patent references cited in the patents that are in the source patent
portfolio are added to a set of associated patents, ASSOCIATED_P ATENTS. The set of
associated patents will eventually contain patents indicating a technology relationship to the source patent portfolio and may include those having forward references, backward references,
and shared references with respect to the source patent portfolio. The greater number of these
"linkages" on an assignee basis will tend to indicate similarity between patents owned by an
assignee and the source patent portfolio, and , hence, a likelihood that a particular assignee
would be a candidate for licensing.
A "backward" reference is one where a particular reference shows up on a patent in the
source patent portfolio (or other relevant group of patents) and is backwards in time (i.e., the
reference typically predates the patent citing it). A "forward" reference is a reference to a patent
in a source patent portfolio (or other relevant group of patents) and an is forward in time (i.e.,
the patent that has the reference is later than the patent cited). A "shared" reference is the same
reference showing up both in a patent of the source patent portfolio and in another patent. This
other patent may also be constrained to be part of another group, such as those in a specified set
of classes (see above) or from the body of all patents.
Initially, the set of associated patents contains those patents that are cited by a patent in
the source patent portfolio. One way this can be done is shown in the following SQL statement:
SELECT DISTINCT pat_reference FROM Pref WHERE patn IN (SELECT patn
FROM PORTFOLIO)
Additionally, at step 704, patents that cite any of the patents in the source patent
portfolio are determined. These are the "forward" references to the patents in the source patent
portfolio. This can be done using the following SQL statement: SELECT DISTINCT patn FROM Pref
WHERE patjreference IN (SELECT patn FROM PORTFOLIO)
These patents are also added to the set of associated patents. Now, the set of associate
patents contains patents with forward references (i.e., those to patents in the source patent
portfolio) and backwards references (i.e., those from patents in the source patent portfolio).
Additional patents that are directly related to the source patent portfolio could also be
added to the set of associated patents could be expanded at this point in a number of ways. For
example, patents with shared references with the source patent portfolio could be added.
At step 706, a decision point is made as to whether to expand upon the set of associated
patents should be undertaken. Expansion is taken to widen out the number of patents contained
in the set of associated patents by looking at patents related to current set of associated patents.
This is done by looking at the associated patents and treating them the same as the source patent
portfolio to find even more related patents. In other words, the current set of associated patents
can be analyzed for backward, forward, and shared references to still other patents. These other
patents are then added to the set of associated patents so that set of associated patents expands
in size and breadth. This can be done over a number of iterations or until a specific number of
patents are in the set of associated patents or any other criteria.
If the decision is made to expand the set of associated patents at step 706, one
embodiment will add to the set of associated patents, at step 708, all patents that are cited by
any one of the patents cuπently in the set of associated patents (i.e., backward references). An
SQL statement that can accomplish this is given as follows: SELECT DISTINCT pat_reference FROM Pref WHERE patn IN
(SELECT patn FROM ASSOCIATED_P ATENTS))
At step 710, we add all patents that cite any one of the patents cuπently in the set of
associated patents to the set of associated patents (i.e., forward references). This can be
accomplished with the following SQL statement:
patent portfolio. This can be done, for example, using the following SQL statement:
SELECT DISTINCT patn FROM Pref
WHERE patjreference IN (SELECT patn
FROM ASSOCIATED_PATENTS)
Note that it is desirable in some instances for the backward reference patent should not
be added into the set of associated patents until the forward reference patents are gathered so as
expand the set of associated patents equally. Note also that patents with shared references with
the cuπent set of associated patents may also be ascertained and added to the set of associated
patents. Further, other related patents may added as will be apparent to one skilled in the art.
The recursive querying capability of modern relational databases, such as DB2, provide
an easy mechanism to expand out the set of associated patents to many levels. How many
levels (or iterations through steps 706 - 710) will determine the size of the set of associated
patents from which assignees will be derived..
Next, at step 712, the assignees contained in the set of associated patents is determined
as RAW_ASSIGNEES. An example SQL statement to achieve this would be: SELECT DISTINCT assigneejiame FROM Patents WHERE patn IN
(SELECT patn FROM ASSOCIATED_P ATENTS)
The assignees who have already been licensed are removed from the list of "raw"
assignees at step 714 and are seen as potential licensees. One way this can be done is through
the SQL statement below that presumes storing licensing information on a per patent basis and
builds upon the statement above:
SELECT DISTINCT assignee_name FROM Patents WHERE patn IN (SELECT patn
FROM ASSOCIATED_P ATENTS) AND licensee_flag != 'Y'
Those skilled in the art will recognize that a list of licensed assignees (either by name or
PTO number) could be compiled and then subtracted from the list of "raw" assignees.
At step 716, the potential licensees may be ranked according to numerous criteria as has
been explained previously. They can be ranked by the assignees with the most patents in the set
of associated patents or source patent portfolio, the largest number of "references" to patents in
the associated patents or source patent portfolio (e.g., backward, forward, and shared), a ratio
based on either number references or number patents divided by the total number of patents
owned by an assignee, any of the above with an extra weighting given to a patent with multiple
references or extra weighting given to a type of reference, etc.
Finally, at step 718, the results of the previous steps processing that created the ranked
list of assignees that are potential licensees of a source patent portfolio is presented to a user. In
the environment of the patent data service 204, this is done by returning the results of the SQL statements done on the relational patent data base 212 by the data base server 210 to the web
server 206. The results are formatted for the client by the web server 206 and sent to a client
browser in response to an initial request.
Note that elements of the various scenarios shown in Figures 4-7 can be combined as
will be apparent by those skilled in the art. For example, the principle introduced in connection
with Figure 1, steps 706-710, that broadens out the number of patents to successive levels can
be applied to the scenarios shown in Figures 4-6.
By way of example and not limitation, the expansion principle can be applied is to the
set of cited references and patents having at least one of the references in Figure 5, steps 502-
504, by taking the SHARED_REFERENCE_P ATENTS and working with those patents as a
starting point for determining the set of cited references to expand out to another level. The
effect of this expansion is to increase the number of SHARED_REFERENCE_P ATENTS
yields higher quality end results in many instances since certain assignees are better
represented. The same expansion could apply to the scenario shown in Figure 6 where the set
of coπelated patents is likewise expanded to successive levels.
While the preferred embodiment of the present invention has been described in detail, it
will be understood that modification and adaptations to the embodiment(s) shown may occur to
one of skill in the art without departing from the scope of the present invention as set forth in
the following claims. Thus, the scope of this invention is to be construed according to the
appended claims and not just to the specifics disclosed in the exemplary embodiment or
embodiments.
References in the claims to an element in the singular is not intended to mean "one and
only" unless explicitly so stated, but rather "one or more." All structural and function equivalents to the elements of the above-described exemplary embodiment that are currently
known or later come to be known to those of ordinary skill in the art are expressly incorporated
herein by reference and are intended to be encompassed by the present claims. No element,
component, or method step in the present disclosure is intended to be dedicated to the public
regardless of whether the element, component, or method step is explicitly recited in the claims.
No claim element herein is to be construed under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph, unless the element is expressly recited using the phrase "means for" or "step for."

Claims

1. A method for ascertaining assignees associated with a source patent portfolio, the
source patent portfolio composed of one or more patents where each patent has one or more
references cited thereto, the method comprising:
determining a set of cited references ("shared" references) contained in the
patents of the source patent portfolio;
establishing a set of related patents wherein each patent contains at least one of
the references found in the set of cited references;
processing all of the patents in the set of related patents to determine the
assignees contained in the set; and
organizing the assignees according to a ranking criteria.
2. A method as recited in claim 1 further comprising:
adding, to the set of related patents, a set of patents that cite as a reference at
least one of the patents in the source patent portfolio ("forward" references).
3. A method as recited in claim 1 wherein the set of cited references contains all the
references contained in all the patents of the source patent portfolio and the set of related
patents contains all the patents indicated by the set of cited references.
4. A method as recited in claim 1 wherein the ranking criteria is the frequency of
occurrence for each assignee in the set of related patents.
5. A method as recited in claim 1 wherein the ranking criteria is the ratio of the total
number of patents held by an assignee to the frequency of occurrence for the assignee in the set
of related patents.
6. A method as recited in claim 1 wherein the source patent portfolio is the set of all
patents assigned to a particular assignee.
7. A method as recited in claim 1 further comprising:
presenting the organized assignees in an HTML document that can be read by an
Internet browser.
8. A method as recited in claim 1 wherein only a predetermined number of the
associated assignees are organized.
9. A method as recited in claim 1 wherein the ranking criteria is based on the number of
references from the set of cited references that are contained in the set of related patents for each
assignee.
10. A method as recited in claim 1 wherein the ranking criteria gives higher ranking to
assignees having patents in the set of related patents that contain more than one of the
references in the set of cited references.
11. A computer program product comprising:
a computer usable medium;
computer readable instructions embodied on said computer useable medium for
ascertaining assignees associated with a source patent portfolio, the source patent
portfolio composed of one or more patents where each patent has one or more references
cited thereto, the instructions directing a computer to perform the steps of:
determining a set of cited references ("shared" references) contained in
the patents of the source patent portfolio;
establishing a set of related patents wherein each patent contains at least
one of the references found in the set of cited references;
processing all of the patents in the set of related patents to determine the
assignees contained in the set; and
organizing the assignees according to a ranking criteria.
12. A computer program product as recited in claim 11 further comprising the
instructions directing a computer to perform the steps of:
adding, to the set of related patents, a set of patents that cite as a reference at
least one of the patents in the source patent portfolio ("forward" references).
13. A computer program product as recited in claim 11 wherein the set of cited
references contains all the references contained in all the patents of the source patent portfolio
and the set of related patents contains all the patents indicated by the set of cited references.
14. A computer program product as recited in claim 11 wherein the ranking criteria is
the frequency of occurrence for each assignee in the set of related patents.
15. A computer program product as recited in claim 11 wherein the ranking criteria is
the ratio of the total number of patents held by an assignee to the frequency of occurrence for
the assignee in the set of related patents.
16. A computer program product as recited in claim 11 wherein the source patent
portfolio is the set of all patents assigned to a particular assignee.
17. A computer program product as recited in claim 11 further comprising the
instructions directing a computer to perform the steps of:
presenting the organized assignees in an HTML document that can be read by an
Internet browser.
18. A computer program product as recited in claim 11 wherein only a predetermined
number of the associated assignees are organized.
19. A computer program product as recited in claim 11 wherein the ranking criteria is
based on the number of references from the set of cited references that are contained in the set
of related patents for each assignee.
20. A computer program product as recited in claim 11 wherein the ranking criteria
gives higher ranking to assignees having patents in the set of related patents that contain more
than one of the references in the set of cited references.
21. A system for ascertaining assignees associated with a source patent portfolio, the
source patent portfolio composed of one or more patents where each patent has one or more
references cited thereto, the system comprising:
a means for determining a set of cited references ("shared" references) contained
in the patents of the source patent portfolio;
a means for establishing a set of related patents wherein each patent contains at
least one of the references found in the set of cited references;
a means for processing all of the patents in the set of related patents to determine
the assignees contained in the set; and
a means for organizing the assignees according to a ranking criteria.
22. A system as recited in claim 21 further comprising:
a means for adding, to the set of related patents, a set of patents that cite as a
reference at least one of the patents in the source patent portfolio ("forward" references).
23. A system as recited in claim 21 wherein the set of cited references contains all the
references contained in all the patents of the source patent portfolio and the set of related
patents contains all the patents indicated by the set of cited references.
24. A system as recited in claim 21 wherein the ranking criteria is the frequency of
occurrence for each assignee in the set of related patents.
25. A system as recited in claim 21 wherein the ranking criteria is the ratio of the total
number of patents held by an assignee to the frequency of occuπence for the assignee in the set
of related patents.
26. A system as recited in claim 21 wherein the source patent portfolio is the set of all
patents assigned to a particular assignee.
27. A system as recited in claim 21 further comprising:
a means for presenting the organized assignees in an HTML document that can
be read by an Internet browser.
28. A system as recited in claim 21 wherein only a predeteπnined number of the
associated assignees are organized.
29. A system as recited in claim 21 wherein the ranking criteria is based on the number
of references from the set of cited references that are contained in the set of related patents for
each assignee.
30. A system as recited in claim 21 wherein the ranking criteria gives higher ranking to
assignees having patents in the set of related patents that contain more than one of the
references in the set of cited references.
PCT/US2001/013123 2000-04-28 2001-04-24 Method, computer program product, and system for determining assignees related by common cited references with a source patent portfolio WO2001084423A2 (en)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
AU2001255609A AU2001255609A1 (en) 2000-04-28 2001-04-24 Method, computer program product, and system for determining assignees related by common cited references with a source patent portfolio

Applications Claiming Priority (8)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US56015700A 2000-04-28 2000-04-28
US56015800A 2000-04-28 2000-04-28
US56084000A 2000-04-28 2000-04-28
US09/560,158 2000-04-28
US09/560,840 2000-04-28
US09/560,397 2000-04-28
US09/560,397 US6879990B1 (en) 2000-04-28 2000-04-28 System for identifying potential licensees of a source patent portfolio
US09/560,157 2000-04-28

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2001084423A2 true WO2001084423A2 (en) 2001-11-08

Family

ID=27504812

Family Applications (4)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/US2001/013173 WO2001084424A2 (en) 2000-04-28 2001-04-24 Method, computer program product, and system for determining assignees related by common cited references with a source patent portfolio
PCT/US2001/013123 WO2001084423A2 (en) 2000-04-28 2001-04-24 Method, computer program product, and system for determining assignees related by common cited references with a source patent portfolio
PCT/US2001/013355 WO2001084426A2 (en) 2000-04-28 2001-04-25 Method, computer program product, and system for determining assignees associated with a source patent portfolio
PCT/US2001/013230 WO2001084425A2 (en) 2000-04-28 2001-04-25 Method, computer program product, and system for determining potential licensees of a patent portfolio

Family Applications Before (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/US2001/013173 WO2001084424A2 (en) 2000-04-28 2001-04-24 Method, computer program product, and system for determining assignees related by common cited references with a source patent portfolio

Family Applications After (2)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/US2001/013355 WO2001084426A2 (en) 2000-04-28 2001-04-25 Method, computer program product, and system for determining assignees associated with a source patent portfolio
PCT/US2001/013230 WO2001084425A2 (en) 2000-04-28 2001-04-25 Method, computer program product, and system for determining potential licensees of a patent portfolio

Country Status (2)

Country Link
AU (4) AU2001255618A1 (en)
WO (4) WO2001084424A2 (en)

Cited By (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US7117443B1 (en) 2001-09-24 2006-10-03 Zilka Kevin J Network browser graphical user interface for managing web content
US7194691B1 (en) 2001-09-24 2007-03-20 Aloft Media, Llc Network browser window with adjacent identifier selector interface for storing web content
US7433884B2 (en) * 2004-09-29 2008-10-07 Chi Research, Inc. Identification of licensing targets using citation neighbor search process
US9423954B2 (en) 2010-11-30 2016-08-23 Cypress Lake Software, Inc Graphical user interface methods, systems, and computer program products
US9841878B1 (en) 2010-08-26 2017-12-12 Cypress Lake Software, Inc. Methods, systems, and computer program products for navigating between visual components
US10397639B1 (en) 2010-01-29 2019-08-27 Sitting Man, Llc Hot key systems and methods

Families Citing this family (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE10312278A1 (en) 2003-03-19 2004-09-30 Röhm GmbH & Co. KG Process for the separation of transition metals from polymers
DE102010031314A1 (en) 2010-07-14 2012-01-19 Evonik Röhm Gmbh Sulfur-free removal of transition metal catalysts

Cited By (12)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US7117443B1 (en) 2001-09-24 2006-10-03 Zilka Kevin J Network browser graphical user interface for managing web content
US7194691B1 (en) 2001-09-24 2007-03-20 Aloft Media, Llc Network browser window with adjacent identifier selector interface for storing web content
US7433884B2 (en) * 2004-09-29 2008-10-07 Chi Research, Inc. Identification of licensing targets using citation neighbor search process
US10397639B1 (en) 2010-01-29 2019-08-27 Sitting Man, Llc Hot key systems and methods
US11089353B1 (en) 2010-01-29 2021-08-10 American Inventor Tech, Llc Hot key systems and methods
US9841878B1 (en) 2010-08-26 2017-12-12 Cypress Lake Software, Inc. Methods, systems, and computer program products for navigating between visual components
US10338779B1 (en) 2010-08-26 2019-07-02 Cypress Lake Software, Inc Methods, systems, and computer program products for navigating between visual components
US10496254B1 (en) 2010-08-26 2019-12-03 Cypress Lake Software, Inc. Navigation methods, systems, and computer program products
US9423954B2 (en) 2010-11-30 2016-08-23 Cypress Lake Software, Inc Graphical user interface methods, systems, and computer program products
US9823838B2 (en) 2010-11-30 2017-11-21 Cypress Lake Software, Inc. Methods, systems, and computer program products for binding attributes between visual components
US9870145B2 (en) 2010-11-30 2018-01-16 Cypress Lake Software, Inc. Multiple-application mobile device methods, systems, and computer program products
US10437443B1 (en) 2010-11-30 2019-10-08 Cypress Lake Software, Inc. Multiple-application mobile device methods, systems, and computer program products

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
AU2001255618A1 (en) 2001-11-12
AU2001257225A1 (en) 2001-11-12
AU2001255609A1 (en) 2001-11-12
WO2001084426A2 (en) 2001-11-08
WO2001084424A2 (en) 2001-11-08
AU2001257263A1 (en) 2001-11-12
WO2001084425A2 (en) 2001-11-08

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US6879990B1 (en) System for identifying potential licensees of a source patent portfolio
US8583592B2 (en) System and methods of searching data sources
US9069853B2 (en) System and method of goal-oriented searching
US9977827B2 (en) System and methods of automatic query generation
Burnham Scopus database: a review
TWI463337B (en) Method and system for federated search implemented across multiple search engines
US7752314B2 (en) Automated tagging of syndication data feeds
US6694331B2 (en) Apparatus for and method of searching and organizing intellectual property information utilizing a classification system
US7930301B2 (en) System and method for searching computer files and returning identified files and associated files
US20130018805A1 (en) Method and system for linking information regarding intellectual property, items of trade, and technical, legal or interpretive analysis
US20080222105A1 (en) Entity recommendation system using restricted information tagged to selected entities
US20020138474A1 (en) Apparatus for and method of searching and organizing intellectual property information utilizing a field-of-search
US7693866B1 (en) Network-based system and method for accessing and processing legal documents
US20120215761A1 (en) Method and System for Automated Search for, and Retrieval and Distribution of, Information
US20070282829A1 (en) Pipelined architecture for global analysis and index building
US20080195586A1 (en) Ranking search results based on human resources data
KR20080046670A (en) Ranking functions using document usage statistics
AU2010202186B2 (en) Marketing asset exchange
US20070157100A1 (en) System and method for organization and retrieval of files
EP1683049A1 (en) Sytems and methods for searching and displaying reports
CN101661490A (en) Search engine, client thereof and method for searching page
WO2001084423A2 (en) Method, computer program product, and system for determining assignees related by common cited references with a source patent portfolio
CN109272436A (en) Policy information management system
SG178008A1 (en) System and method for providing an incentivized tagging system for electronic resources
Gatenby Aiming at quality and coverage combined: blending physical and virtual union catalogues

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A2

Designated state(s): AE AG AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY BZ CA CH CN CR CU CZ DE DK DM DZ EE ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MA MD MG MK MN MW MX MZ NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK SL TJ TM TR TT TZ UA UG US UZ VN YU ZA ZW

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A2

Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW MZ SD SL SZ TZ UG ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE TR BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GW ML MR NE SN TD TG

121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application
REG Reference to national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: 8642

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase
DFPE Request for preliminary examination filed prior to expiration of 19th month from priority date (pct application filed before 20040101)
NENP Non-entry into the national phase in:

Ref country code: JP