IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,505,290
Granted Patent B1
US 12,505,290 · App. 19/028,728 · Granted Dec 23, 2025

User interface for use with a search engine for searching financial related documents

Inventors: Rajmohan Neervannan (Irvine, CA); Jaakko Kokko (Espoo, FI); Mathias Creutz (Helsinki, FI)
Assignee: AlphaSense Oy
G06F40/211G06F3/0482G06F3/0484G06F16/215G06F16/23G06F16/243G06F16/3323G06F16/3328G06F16/93G06F16/9532G06F16/9535G06F16/9538G06F16/954G06F40/205G06F40/30G06N20/00G06Q10/067G06F40/117G06F40/253
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,505,290
App. No.
19/028,728
Granted
Dec 23, 2025
Kind
B1
Abstract

A method for rendering context based information on a user interface includes receiving a user request to extract the context based information from a database. The database includes a plurality of documents and the request includes at least one search criteria required to determine a context of the user request. The method includes generating a list of documents corresponding to the context of the user request and rendering on a viewing portion of the user interface the list of documents corresponding to the context of the user request.

Claims (82)

1 . A system for generating a plurality of summaries from a plurality of documents onto a user interface of a remote computer, the system comprising:

a memory storing instructions to be executed by one or more hardware processors; and

one or more hardware processors configured to execute the instructions stored in the memory, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more hardware processors, cause the system to:

receive a user query from the remote computer to search for information from the plurality of documents, wherein the user query is based on input from a user at the remote computer;

execute a search of one or more of the plurality of documents based on the user query;

generate search results in response to executing the search,

wherein the search results comprise relevant documents from the plurality of documents, and

wherein the relevant documents are determined to be relevant based on one or more identified topics associated with the user query;

cause a response to the user query to be rendered on the user interface of the remote computer,

wherein the response to the user query is based on two or more of the relevant documents from the search results,

wherein the response to the user query includes multiple portions of content, with each portion of content including textual data based on at least one of the two or more relevant documents, and

wherein each portion of content is generated using a neural network model applied to the at least one of the two or more relevant documents that the respective portion of content is based on;

receive a selection from the user identifying a selected document associated with one of the multiple portions of content,

wherein the selected document is one of the at least one of the two or more relevant documents that the portion of content is based on; and

cause at least a portion of the selected document from the search results to be rendered on the user interface of the remote computer.

2 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more hardware processors, further cause the system to use a machine-learning model to determine at least one keyword associated with the user query.

3 . The system of claim 2 , wherein the search is executed based on the at least one keyword associated with the user query.

4 . The system of claim 2 , wherein the relevant documents are determined to be relevant based on the at least one keyword associated with the user query.

5 . The system of claim 2 , wherein, as part of the search of the one or more of the plurality of documents based on the user query, a snippet of text is identified in one or more of the plurality of documents being searched based on the at least one keyword appearing in said document being searched.

6 . The system of claim 2 , wherein, as part of the search of the one or more of the plurality of documents based on the user query, a snippet of text is identified in one or more of the plurality of documents being searched based on multiple keywords from the at least one keyword appearing in the same sentence in said document being searched.

7 . The system of claim 2 , wherein, as part of the search of the one or more of the plurality of documents based on the user query, a snippet of text is identified in one or more of the plurality of documents being searched based on multiple keywords from the at least one keyword appearing in proximity to one another in said document being searched.

8 . The system of claim 1 , wherein:

each portion of content includes textual data based on multiple of the relevant documents,

each portion of content is generated using the neural network model applied to the multiple relevant documents that the respective portion of content is based on, and

the selected document is one of the multiple relevant documents that the portion of content is based on.

9 . The system of claim 1 , wherein:

the rendered portion of the selected document includes an identified snippet of text from the selected document, and

the identified snippet of text is displayed differently in the rendered portion of the selected document.

10 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more hardware processors, further cause the system to determine at least one similar topic based on the user query, wherein the at least one similar topic is related to the one or more identified topics associated with the user query.

11 . The system of claim 10 , wherein the relevant documents are determined to be relevant further based on the at least one similar topic.

12 . The system of claim 10 , wherein:

the rendered portion of the selected document includes an identified snippet of text from the selected document, and

the identified snippet of text is identified based on the at least one similar topic.

13 . The system of claim 10 , wherein each portion of content is associated with one or more of the at least one similar topic.

14 . The system of claim 10 , wherein:

a first portion of content of the multiple portions of content is associated with a first similar topic,

a second portion of content of the multiple portions of content is associated with a second similar topic, and

the first similar topic and the second similar topic are based on the user query.

15 . The system of claim 1 , wherein:

a first portion of content of the multiple portions of content is associated with a first keyword,

a second portion of content of the multiple portions of content is associated with a second keyword, and

the first keyword and the second keyword are based on the user query.

16 . A computer-implemented method for generating a plurality of summaries from a plurality of documents onto a user interface of a remote computer, the computer-implemented method comprising:

receiving a user query from the remote computer to search for information from the plurality of documents, wherein the user query is based on input from a user at the remote computer;

executing a search of one or more of the plurality of documents based on the user query;

generating search results in response to executing the search,

wherein the search results comprise relevant documents from the plurality of documents, and

wherein the relevant documents are determined to be relevant based on one or more identified topics associated with the user query;

causing a response to the user query to be rendered on the user interface of the remote computer,

wherein the response to the user query is based on two or more of the relevant documents from the search results,

wherein the response to the user query includes multiple portions of content, with each portion of content including textual data based on at least one of the two or more relevant documents, and

wherein each portion of content is generated using a neural network model applied to the at least one of the two or more relevant documents that the respective portion of content is based on;

receiving a selection from the user identifying a selected document associated with one of the multiple portions of content,

wherein the selected document is one of the at least one of the two or more relevant documents that the portion of content is based on; and

causing at least a portion of the selected document from the search results to be rendered on the user interface of the remote computer.

17 . The computer-implemented method of claim 16 , further comprising using a machine-learning model to determine at least one keyword associated with the user query.

18 . The computer-implemented method of claim 17 , wherein the search is executed based on the at least one keyword associated with the user query.

19 . The computer-implemented method of claim 17 , wherein the relevant documents are determined to be relevant based on the at least one keyword associated with the user query.

20 . The computer-implemented method of claim 17 , wherein, as part of the search of the one or more of the plurality of documents based on the user query, a snippet of text is identified in one or more of the plurality of documents being searched based on the at least one keyword appearing in said document being searched.

21 . The computer-implemented method of claim 17 , wherein, as part of the search of the one or more of the plurality of documents based on the user query, a snippet of text is identified in one or more of the plurality of documents being searched based on multiple keywords from the at least one keyword appearing in the same sentence in said document being searched.

22 . The computer-implemented method of claim 17 , wherein, as part of the search of the one or more of the plurality of documents based on the user query, a snippet of text is identified in one or more of the plurality of documents being searched based on multiple keywords from the at least one keyword appearing in proximity to one another in said document being searched.

23 . The computer-implemented method of claim 16 , wherein:

each portion of content includes textual data based on multiple of the relevant documents,

each portion of content is generated using the neural network model applied to the multiple relevant documents that the respective portion of content is based on, and

the selected document is one of the multiple relevant documents that the portion of content is based on.

24 . The computer-implemented method of claim 16 , wherein:

the rendered portion of the selected document includes an identified snippet of text from the selected document, and

the identified snippet of text is displayed differently in the rendered portion of the selected document.

25 . The computer-implemented method of claim 16 , further comprising determining at least one similar topic based on the user query, wherein the at least one similar topic is related to the one or more identified topics associated with the user query.

26 . The computer-implemented method of claim 25 , wherein the relevant documents are determined to be relevant further based on the at least one similar topic.

27 . The computer-implemented method of claim 25 , wherein:

the rendered portion of the selected document includes an identified snippet of text from the selected document, and

the identified snippet of text is identified based on the at least one similar topic.

28 . The computer-implemented method of claim 25 , wherein each portion of content is associated with one or more of the at least one similar topic.

29 . The computer-implemented method of claim 25 , wherein:

a first portion of content of the multiple portions of content is associated with a first similar topic,

a second portion of content of the multiple portions of content is associated with a second similar topic, and

the first similar topic and the second similar topic are based on the user query.

30 . The computer-implemented method of claim 16 , wherein:

a first portion of content of the multiple portions of content is associated with a first keyword,

a second portion of content of the multiple portions of content is associated with a second keyword, and

the first keyword and the second keyword are based on the user query.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jan 17, 2025
From: NEERVANNAN, RAJMOHAN; KOKKO, JAAKKO; CREUTZ, MATHIAS
To: ALPHASENSE OY
Reel/Frame 069917/0557 →
Continuity (20)
Continuation 18891751 · Sep 20, 2024
Continuation 18653457 · May 2, 2024
Continuation 18635640 · Apr 15, 2024
Continuation 18599723 · Mar 8, 2024
Continuation 18444828 · Feb 19, 2024
Continuation 18384534 · Oct 27, 2023
Continuation 18370614 · Sep 20, 2023
Continuation 18134354 · Apr 13, 2023
Continuation 18134302 · Apr 13, 2023
Continuation 18099763 · Jan 20, 2023
Continuation 18082765 · Dec 16, 2022
Continuation 17945436 · Sep 15, 2022
Continuation 17532120 · Nov 22, 2021
Continuation 17384075 · Jul 23, 2021
Continuation 17244994 · Apr 30, 2021
Continuation 17107148 · Nov 30, 2020
Continuation 15891254 · Feb 7, 2018
Continuation 15820507 · Nov 22, 2017
Continuation 12939165 · Nov 3, 2010
Provisional Application 61257466 · Nov 3, 2009
References Cited (206)
US 5555426A · Johnson · 1996 [cited by applicant]
US 5704060A · Del Monte · 1997 [cited by applicant]
US 5754938A · Herz · 1998 [cited by applicant]
US 6453315B1 · Weissman · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 6460034B1 · Wical · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 6850906B1 · Chadha · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 6999959B1 · Lawrence · 2006 [cited by examiner]
US 7360163B2 · Masuda · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 7454393B2 · Horvitz et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 7606798B2 · Ge · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7664746B2 · Majumder · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 7739221B2 · Lawler et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7895221B2 · Colledge · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 7991764B2 · Rathod · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8131779B2 · Jonker et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8180713B1 · Rigby et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8196030B1 · Wang · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8244721B2 · Morris · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 8265925B2 · Aarskog · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8589373B2 · Mayer · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8606815B2 · Chen et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8862573B2 · Musgrove · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8949233B2 · Hsiao et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9129008B1 · Kuznetsov · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9183286B2 · Chen · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9405751B2 · Hull · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9715543B2 · Macadaan et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 10198506B2 · Qiao · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 11907511B1 · Neervannan et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 11989510B1 · Neervannan et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 12106047B1 · Neervannan et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20020156760A1 · Lawrence · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 20030014441A1 · Suzuki · 2003 [cited by examiner]
US 20030051214A1 · Graham · 2003 [cited by examiner]
US 20040230898A1 · Blakely et al. · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20050033711A1 · Horvitz et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050055628A1 · Chen et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050086224A1 · Franciosa · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050154617A1 · Ruggieri · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050235034A1 · Chen et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050267871A1 · Marchisio et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20060041605A1 · King et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060041828A1 · King et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060050996A1 · King et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060069589A1 · Nigam et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060069670A1 · Khaliq · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060104515A1 · King et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060116994A1 · Jonker et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060200341A1 · Corston-Oliver et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060200342A1 · Corston-Oliver et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060242040A1 · Rader · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060253418A1 · Charnock et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060277465A1 · Pandit et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20070005646A1 · Dumais et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070033221A1 · Copperman · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070047819A1 · Hull · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070112792A1 · Majumder · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 20070185859A1 · Flowers et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070192265A1 · Chopin et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070203720A1 · Singh · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070203816A1 · Costache · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070208992A1 · Koren · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070214133A1 · Liberty · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 20070219986A1 · Egozi · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070239662A1 · Fontes · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070260598A1 · Odom · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070300142A1 · King et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20080033587A1 · Kurita et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080059451A1 · Musgrove · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080097985A1 · Olstad et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080109406A1 · Krishnasamy et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080120129A1 · Seubert · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080133488A1 · Bandaru et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080148147A1 · Poston · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080154883A1 · Chowdhury et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080177994A1 · Mayer · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080209339A1 · Macadaan et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080214152A1 · Ramer et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080243842A1 · Liang · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080249764A1 · Huang et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080256040A1 · Sundaresan et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080270387A1 · Weitenberner · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080313147A1 · Svore · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080313172A1 · King et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20090048823A1 · Liu et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090077658A1 · King et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090089352A1 · Davis et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090112892A1 · Cardie et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090119156A1 · Dulepet · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090119157A1 · Dulepet · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090164387A1 · Armstrong et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090164417A1 · Nigam et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090171951A1 · Lucas et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090204599A1 · Morris · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20090204610A1 · Hellstrom et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090234811A1 · Jamil · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20090254540A1 · Musgrove et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090254572A1 · Redlich et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090265307A1 · Reisman et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090319342A1 · Shilman et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20100030799A1 · Parker et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100114899A1 · Guha et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100169317A1 · Wang et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100177964A1 · King et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100191758A1 · Peng et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100211562A1 · Busch · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100222032A1 · Griffin · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100257117A1 · Shvadron et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100262454A1 · Sommer · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100278453A1 · King · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110078167A1 · Sundaresan et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110099184A1 · Symington · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110179009A1 · Nam · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110231395A1 · Vadlamani et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110261049A1 · Cardno et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20160042072A1 · LaPorte et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160140237A1 · Musgrove · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20200143384A1 · Koontz et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200184151A1 · Ekmekci et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on Kurita, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 147 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on Guha, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 82 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on Fontes, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 120 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on the Capital IQ System, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 36 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on “Information Retrieval,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 48 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on “Search User Interfaces,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 81 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on “Information Retrieval: A Survey,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 56 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on “Google Guide,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 89 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on “Edgar Analyzer,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 53 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on “Edgar Extraction System,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 37 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on “Modern Information Retrieval,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 49 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on “An Introduction to Information Retrieval,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 39 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on Edgar Pro, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 42 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on FactSet, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 104 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on CapIQ, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 41 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on Singh, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 82 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on Ruggieri, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 63 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on Costache, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 117 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on Chadha, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 33 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on Khaliq, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 82 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,244,273 based on Chopin, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 144 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on Singh, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 93 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on Ruggieri, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 64 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on Costache, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 119 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on Chadha, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 33 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on Khaliq, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 69 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on Chopin, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 140 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on Kurita, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 111 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on Guha, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 77 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on Fontes, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 87 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on The Capital IQ System, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 31 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on “Information Retrieval,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 48 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on “Search User Interfaces,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 67 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on “Information Retrieval: A Survey,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 53 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on “Google Guide,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 70 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on “Edgar Analyzer,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 49 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on “Edgar Extraction System,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 29 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on “Modern Information Retrieval,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 49 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on “An Introduction to Information Retrieval,” dated Mar. 25, 2024, 37 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on Edgar Pro, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 47 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on FactSet, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 83 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tegus Invalidity Contentions for U.S. Pat. No. 11,687,218 based on CapIQ, dated Mar. 25, 2024, 37 pages. [cited by applicant]
Yaw Etse: “Celsus Advanced Search and Document Search”, date created: Aug. 20, 2008, last updated: Sep. 10, 2008, 33 pages. [cited by applicant]
Adam McCue: Capital IQ Filings Detailed View, date created: Oct. 7, 2008, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Jeff Gates: Capital IQ FirstRain News & Blogs Page, date created: Nov. 13, 2007, 28 pages. [cited by applicant]
John Fitzpatrick: Capital IQ “Research Enhancements (Apr. 2009)”, date created: Nov. 10, 2008, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Alberto Zamora and David Shapiro: “Capital IQ / TheMarkets.com Research Integration”, 45 pages. [cited by applicant]
Carlos Valle: Capital IQ “Transaction News”, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
John Gerdes Jr.: “EDGAR-Analyzer: automating the analysis of corporate data contained in the SEC's EDGAR database”, Decision Support Systems 35 (2003) 7-29. [cited by applicant]
Gerry H. Grant and Sumali J. Conlon: “EDGAR Extraction System: An Automated Approach to Analyze Employee Stock Option Disclosures”, Journal of Information Systems, vol. 20, No. 2, Fall 2006, pp. 119-142. [cited by applicant]
EDGAR Pro Quick Start Guide, EDGAR Online Corporate Sales, updated Sep. 2007, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
The Wayback Machine, “Making your your keyword search more effective:”, 2 pages. [cited by applicant]
FactSet Research Systems Inc.: “30 years Annual Report 2008”, 80 pages. [cited by applicant]
FactSet: “IB Central”, Apr. 29, 2008-Dec. 1, 2008, 1 page. [cited by applicant]
FactSet: “Quick Start—Your guide to using FactSet”, May 21, 2010, 34 pages. [cited by applicant]
Nancy Blachman: “Google Guide—An interactive tutorial on making searching even easier”, Feb. 21, 2004, 142 pages. [cited by applicant]
Ed Greengrass: “Information Retrieval: A Survey”, Nov. 30, 2000, 224 pages. [cited by applicant]
David A. Grossman and Ophir Frieder: “Information Retrieval—Algorithms and Heuristics—Second Edition”, 2004, 344 pages. [cited by applicant]
Marti A. Hearst: “Search User Interfaces”, Cambridge University Press, 2009, 419 pages. [cited by applicant]
Christopher D. Manning et al.: “An Introduction to Information Retrieval”, Cambridge University Press, Apr. 1, 2009, 581 pages. [cited by applicant]
Ricardo Baeza-Yates and Berthier Ribeiro-Neto: “Modern Information Retrieval”, 1999, 538 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 12/939,165, mailed on Aug. 28, 2017, 29 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 12/939,165, mailed on Jun. 13, 2016, 28 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 12/939,165, mailed on Aug. 13, 2015, 27 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 12/939,165, mailed on May 7, 2015, 29 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 12/939,165, mailed on Jun. 24, 2014, 18 pages. [cited by applicant]
Siadaty, et al., “Relemed: sentence-level search engine with relevance score for the MEDLINE database of biomedical articles”, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 2007, 7:1, pp. 1-11, Published on Jan. 10, 2007… [cited by applicant]
Osamu Furuse, et al., “Opinion Sentence Search Engine on Open-domain Blog”, Proceedings of International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2007, 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
Jahna Otterbacker, et al., “Using Random Walks for Question-focused Sentence Retrieval”, Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference—Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing 2005, dated Oct… [cited by applicant]
Vanessa Graham Murdock, Aspects of sentence retrieval:, U Mass Amherst Dissertation for Ph.D., dated Sep. 2006, 171 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 15/820,507, mailed on Feb. 27, 2018, 11 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 12/939,165, mailed on Mar. 28, 2018, 27 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 15/697,418, mailed on Dec. 19, 2018, 7 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/244,994, mailed on Aug. 27, 2021, 17 pages. [cited by applicant]
[cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 17/107,148, mailed on Feb. 9, 2021, 17 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 17/384,138, mailed on Nov. 12, 2021, 11 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/404,350, mailed on Dec. 23, 2021, 11 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/538,959, mailed on Feb. 3, 2022, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/384,138, mailed on Mar. 8, 2022, 11 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/384,138, mailed on Aug. 10, 2022, 14 pages. [cited by applicant]
[cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/532,120, mailed on Oct. 12, 2022, 13 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/694,792, mailed on Feb. 3, 2023, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 18/134,302, mailed on Jun. 14, 2023, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 18/205,860, mailed on Aug. 16, 2023, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 18/134,354, mailed on Oct. 19, 2023, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]