SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ORGANIZING AND PRESENTING EVIDENCE RELEVANT TO A SET OF STATEMENTS

• US 20100217717A1
• Filed: 02/16/2010
• Published: 08/26/2010
• Est. Priority Date: 02/24/2009
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Devonwood Logistics, Inc.
• Original Assignee: Devonwood Logistics, Inc.
• Inventors: Overby, Walter
• Application Number:
  US12/706,496
• Publication Number:
  US 20100217717A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/311
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/00 Administration; Management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 50/18 Legal services

Abstract

Evidence relevant to a set of statements can be organized and presented to a user using a suitably programmed computer system. The computer system accepts as input from the user a set of statements, a set of argument tags associated with each statement, a set of evidence items, and a set of argument tags associated with each evidence item. The computer then collects, for each statement, the group containing any evidence item that is relevant to the statement, where relevance is indicated by at least one argument tag shared between the argument tags associated with the statement and the argument tags associated with the evidence item. The computer then presents the set of statements and, for each statement, the evidence items relevant to the statement.

Claims

1. A computer program product, comprising a computer readable medium having computer readable program code stored thereon in computer-executable format, said computer readable program code, when executed by a computer, causing the computer to effect a method comprising:

accepting as input a set of statements, a set of argument tags associated with each statement, a set of evidence items, and a set of argument tags associated with each evidence item;

collecting, for each statement, the group containing any evidence item that is relevant to the statement, where relevance is indicated by at least one argument tag shared between the argument tags associated with the statement and the argument tags associated with the evidence item; and

presenting the set of statements and, for each statement, the evidence items relevant to the statement.

2. The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the method effected by the computer further includes presenting, for each evidence item relevant to a statement, the argument tags shared between the argument tags associated with the statement and the argument tags associated with the evidence item.

3. The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the method effected by the computer further includes:

accepting as input an annotation for an item, where an item is one of a statement, an argument tag, an evidence item, and an association of an argument tag with a statement or evidence item; and

presenting the annotation along with the item.

4. The computer program product of claim 1, wherein:

the set of evidence items comprises excerpts from one or more references, each reference having a citation, and each excerpt having a sub-citation within a reference; and

the method effected by the computer further includes presenting the citation and sub-citation of the evidence items presented.

5. The computer program product of claim 4, wherein the method effected by the computer further includes combining the sub-citations of the evidence items relevant to a statement into a more concise representation for presentation.

6. The computer program product of claim 4, wherein the set of statements comprises elements of one or more claims of one or more patents.

7. The computer program product of claim 6, wherein the argument tags associated with each element represent anticipation arguments.

8. The computer program product of claim 6, wherein the argument tags associated with each element represent enablement arguments.

9. The computer program product of claim 6, wherein the argument tags associated with each element represent infringement arguments.

10. The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the method effected by the computer further includes:

accepting as input a threshold rating and a rating for each association of an argument tag with an evidence item; and

excluding from the set of argument tags associated with each evidence item all argument tags rated below the threshold rating.

11. A computing system, comprising:

a user interface comprising a screen display and one or more input devices; and

a processor system comprising one or more processors and associated memory, the processor system programmed or configured to include;

accepting logic for accepting as input via the user interface a set of statements, a set of argument tags associated with each statement, a set of evidence items, and a set of argument tags associated with each evidence item;

collecting logic for collecting, for each statement, the group containing any evidence item that is relevant to the statement, where relevance is indicated by at least one argument tag shared between the argument tags associated with the statement and the argument tags associated with the evidence item; and

presenting logic for presenting via the user interface the set of statements and, for each statement, the evidence items relevant to the statement.

12. The computing system of claim 11, wherein the processor system is further programmed or configured to present, for each evidence item relevant to a statement, the argument tags shared between the argument tags associated with the statement and the argument tags associated with the evidence item.

13. The computing system of claim 11, wherein the processor system is further programmed or configured to accept as input an annotation for any item, where an item is one of a statement, an argument tag, an evidence item, and an association of an argument tag with a statement or evidence item, and to present the annotation along with the item.

14. The computing system of claim 11, wherein:

the set of evidence items comprises excerpts from one or more references, each reference having a citation, and each excerpt having a sub-citation within a reference; and

the processor system is further programmed or configured to present the citation and sub-citation of the evidence items presented.

15. The computing system of claim 14, wherein the processor system is further programmed or configured to combine the sub-citations of the evidence items relevant to a statement into a more concise representation before they are presented.

16. The computing system of claim 14, wherein the set of statements comprises elements of one or more claims of one or more patents.

17. The computing system of claim 16, wherein the argument tags associated with each element represent anticipation arguments.

18. The computing system of claim 16, wherein the argument tags associated with each element represent enablement arguments.

19. The computing system of claim 16, wherein the argument tags associated with each element represent infringement arguments.

20. The computing system of claim 11, wherein the processor system is further programmed or configured to:

accept as input a threshold rating and a rating for each association of an argument tag with an evidence item; and

exclude from the set of argument tags associated with each evidence item all argument tags rated below the threshold rating.

21. A method effected by a computing system having a user interface and a programmed processor system, the method comprising:

the computing system accepting as input via the user interface a set of statements, a set of argument tags associated with each statement, a set of evidence items, and a set of argument tags associated with each evidence item;

the computing system collecting, for each statement, the group containing any evidence item that is relevant to the statement, where relevance is indicated by at least one argument tag shared between the argument tags associated with the statement and the argument tags associated with the evidence item; and

the computing system presenting via the user interface the set of statements and, for each statement, the evidence items relevant to the statement.

22. The method of claim 21, wherein the method further includes the computing system presenting, for each evidence item relevant to a statement, the argument tags shared between the argument tags associated with the statement and the argument tags associated with the evidence item.

23. The method of claim 21, wherein the method further includes:

the computing system accepting as input an annotation for any item, where an item is one of a statement, an argument tag, an evidence item, and an association of an argument tag with a statement or evidence item; and

the computing system presenting via the user interface the annotation along with the item.

24. The method of claim 21, wherein:

the set of evidence items comprises excerpts from one or more references, each reference having a citation, and each excerpt having a sub-citation within a reference; and

wherein the method further includes the computing system presenting the citation and sub-citation of the evidence items presented.

25. The method of claim 24, wherein the method further includes the computing system combining the sub-citations of the evidence items relevant to a statement into a more concise representation for presentation.

26. The method of claim 24, wherein the set of statements comprises elements of one or more claims of one or more patents.

27. The method of claim 26, wherein the argument tags associated with each element represent anticipation arguments.

28. The method of claim 26, wherein the argument tags associated with each element represent enablement arguments.

29. The method of claim 26, wherein the argument tags associated with each element represent infringement arguments.

30. The method of claim 21, wherein the method further includes the computing system accepting as input a threshold rating and a rating for each association of an argument tag with an evidence item;

and then excluding from the set of argument tags associated with each evidence item all argument tags rated below the threshold rating.