Source: http://www.google.fr/patents/US8775222
Timestamp: 2017-09-20 18:32:34
Document Index: 398888728

Matched Legal Cases: ['Application No. 2416840', 'Application No. 2416840', 'Application No. 01273072', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'Application No. 2416840', 'Application No. 01273072']

Brevet US8775222 - System and method for improved rental vehicle reservation management - Google Brevets
A method and system are disclosed for managing a rental vehicle reservation based at least in part on automated processing of vehicle repair data corresponding to a disabled vehicle that is related to the rental vehicle reservation. For example, a preferred method and system can automatically compute...http://www.google.fr/patents/US8775222?utm_source=gb-gplus-shareBrevet US8775222 - System and method for improved rental vehicle reservation management
Numéro de publication US8775222 B2
Numéro de demande US 13/447,713
Autre référence de publication CA2613930A1, US8160906, US20080140460, US20120197672, US20120203581, US20120203582, US20140095228, WO2008073427A2, WO2008073427A3
Numéro de publication 13447713, 447713, US 8775222 B2, US 8775222B2, US-B2-8775222, US8775222 B2, US8775222B2
Inventeurs David G. Smith, Kimberly A. DeVallance, Owen R. Miller, Regina M. Miller, Jon B. Jouris, Maribeth Concannon, Shawn R. Cormier
Citations de brevets (273), Citations hors brevets (182), Classifications (7), Événements juridiques (1)
US 8775222 B2
A method and system are disclosed for managing a rental vehicle reservation based at least in part on automated processing of vehicle repair data corresponding to a disabled vehicle that is related to the rental vehicle reservation. For example, a preferred method and system can automatically compute from the vehicle repair data an amount of time that is likely to be needed by a repair facility to complete repairs to the disabled vehicle, which in turn can drive more accurate management of an authorization period for the rental vehicle reservation.
1. A computer-implemented method for managing a rental vehicle reservation for a replacement vehicle corresponding to a disabled vehicle, wherein the replacement rental vehicle reservation is associated with data indicative of an authorization duration for that replacement rental vehicle reservation, the method comprising:
receiving data representative of an estimation of a number of labor hours to repair the disabled vehicle;
storing a plurality of labor hours scalars in a memory, the labor hours scalars being associated with a plurality of parties such that each labor hours scalar is associated with at least one party;
determining a party associated with the received labor hours estimation data;
selecting the stored labor hours scalar that is associated with the determined party;
automatically computing data indicative of an estimated duration for the repair to the disabled vehicle based on an application of the selected labor hours scalar to the received labor hours estimation data; and
determining whether the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation that corresponds to the disabled vehicle would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle based on the computed repair duration data and the authorization duration data; and
in response to a determination that the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle, automatically extending the replacement rental vehicle reservation to thereby associate the replacement rental vehicle reservation with a new authorization duration, wherein the automatically extending step comprises:
determining whether a difference between an end of the authorization duration and an end of the repair duration corresponding to the computed repair duration data is less than a threshold; and
in response to a determination that the difference is less than the threshold, automatically storing data in the memory that is indicative of the new authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation such that an expiration of the new authorization duration coincides in time with the end of the repair duration corresponding to the computed repair duration data; and
wherein the method steps are performed by a processor in cooperation with the memory.
2. A computer-implemented method for managing a rental vehicle reservation for a replacement vehicle corresponding to a disabled vehicle, wherein the replacement rental vehicle reservation is associated with data indicative of an authorization duration for that replacement rental vehicle reservation, the method comprising:
storing a plurality of labor hours scalars and a plurality of business rules in a memory, the labor hours scalars being associated with a plurality of parties such that each labor hours scalar is associated with at least one party, the business rules being associated with a plurality of parties such that each business rule is associated with at least one party, wherein the business rules comprise a plurality of automated extensions rules such that a plurality of different parties employ different business rules for automatically extending replacement rental vehicle reservations;
selecting the stored automated extension rule that is associated with the determined party;
in response to a determination that the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle, automatically extending the replacement rental vehicle reservation in accordance with the selected automated extension rule to thereby associate the replacement rental vehicle reservation with a new authorization duration.
3. An apparatus for managing a rental vehicle reservation for a replacement vehicle corresponding to a disabled vehicle, the apparatus comprising:
a memory, the memory configured to (1) store a plurality of labor hours scalars, the labor hours scalars being associated with a plurality of parties such that each labor hours scalar is associated with at least one party, and (2) store data indicative of an authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation in association with that replacement rental vehicle reservation; and
wherein the processor is configured to (1) receive data representative of an estimation of a number of labor hours to repair the disabled vehicle, (2) determine a party associated with the received labor hours estimation data, (3) select the stored labor hours scalar that is associated with the determined party, (4) automatically compute data indicative of an estimated duration for the repair to the disabled vehicle based on an application of the selected labor hours scalar to the received labor hours estimation data, and (5) perform a management operation on the replacement rental vehicle reservation that corresponds to the disabled vehicle by (i) determining whether the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle based on the computed repair duration data and the authorization duration data, and (ii) in response to a determination by the processor that the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle, automatically extending the replacement rental vehicle reservation to thereby associate the replacement rental vehicle reservation with a new authorization duration; and
wherein the processor is further configured to automatically extend the replacement rental vehicle reservation by (1) determining whether a difference between an end of the authorization duration and an end of the repair duration corresponding to the computed repair duration data is less than a threshold, and (2) in response to a determination by the processor that the difference is less than the threshold, automatically storing data in the memory that is indicative of the new authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation such that an expiration of the new authorization duration coincides in time with the end of the repair duration corresponding to the computed repair duration data.
4. An apparatus for managing a rental vehicle reservation for a replacement vehicle corresponding to a disabled vehicle, the apparatus comprising:
a memory, the memory configured to (1) store a plurality of labor hours scalars, the labor hours scalars being associated with a plurality of parties such that each labor hours scalar is associated with at least one party, (2) store a plurality of business rules, the business rules being associated with a plurality of parties such that each business rule is associated with at least one party, wherein the business rules comprise a plurality of automated extensions rules such that a plurality of different parties employ different business rules for automatically extending replacement rental vehicle reservations, and (3) store data indicative of an authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation in association with that replacement rental vehicle reservation; and
wherein the processor is configured to (1) receive data representative of an estimation of a number of labor hours to repair the disabled vehicle, (2) determine a party associated with the received labor hours estimation data, (3) select the stored labor hours scalar that is associated with the determined party, (4) select the stored automated extension rule that is associated with the determined party, (5) automatically compute data indicative of an estimated duration for the repair to the disabled vehicle based on an application of the selected labor hours scalar to the received labor hours estimation data, and (5) perform a management operation on the replacement rental vehicle reservation that corresponds to the disabled vehicle by (i) determining whether the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle based on the computed repair duration data and the authorization duration data, and (ii) in response to a determination by the processor that the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle, automatically extending the replacement rental vehicle reservation in accordance with the selected automated extension rule to thereby associate the replacement rental vehicle reservation with a new authorization duration.
5. A computer-implemented method for managing a rental vehicle reservation for a replacement vehicle corresponding to a disabled vehicle, the method comprising:
receiving data corresponding to an explanation for a repair delay to the disabled vehicle;
automatically computing data indicative of an estimated duration for the repair to the disabled vehicle, wherein the automatically computing step comprises (1) applying the selected labor hours scalar to the received labor hours estimation data to translate the labor hours estimation data into a number of business days needed by the repair facility to perform those labor hours and (2) automatically computing the estimated repair duration data based at least in part on an adjustment amount corresponding to whether the time needed to complete repairs to the disabled vehicle will include any holiday days and an adjustment amount corresponding to the explanation data; and
performing a management operation on the replacement rental vehicle reservation that corresponds to the disabled vehicle based on the computed data indicative of the estimated repair duration; and
6. An apparatus for managing a rental vehicle reservation for a replacement vehicle corresponding to a disabled vehicle, the apparatus comprising:
a memory, the memory configured to store a plurality of labor hours scalars, the labor hours scalars being associated with a plurality of parties such that each labor hours scalar is associated with at least one party; and
wherein the processor is configured to (1) receive data representative of an estimation of a number of labor hours to repair the disabled vehicle, (2) receive data corresponding to an explanation for a repair delay to the disabled vehicle, (3) determine a party associated with the received labor hours estimation data, (4) select the stored labor hours scalar that is associated with the determined party, (5) apply the selected labor hours scalar to the received labor hours estimation data to translate the labor hours estimation data into a number of business days needed by the repair facility to perform those labor hours, (6) automatically compute data indicative of an estimated duration for the repair to the disabled vehicle based at least in part on (i) the translated number of business days, (ii) an adjustment amount corresponding to whether the time needed to complete repairs to the disabled vehicle will include any holiday days, and (iii) an adjustment amount corresponding to the explanation data, and (7) perform a management operation on the replacement rental vehicle reservation that corresponds to the disabled vehicle based on the computed data indicative of the estimated repair duration.
7. The method of claim 1 wherein the party comprises a repair facility.
8. The method of claim 1 wherein the party comprises an insurance company-repair facility pair.
9. The method of claim 1 wherein the receiving step comprises the processor receiving the labor hours estimation data from a repair facility computer.
10. The apparatus of claim 4 wherein the memory is further configured to store data representative of a repair facility, the repair facility being the party associated with the received labor hours estimation data.
11. The apparatus of claim 4 wherein the memory is further configured to store data representative of an insurance company and a repair facility, a pair of the insurance company and the repair facility being the party associated with the received labor hours estimation data.
12. The apparatus of claim 4 wherein the processor is further configured to receive the labor hours estimation data from a repair facility computer.
13. The method of claim 5 wherein the replacement rental vehicle reservation is associated with data indicative of an authorization duration for that replacement rental vehicle reservation, and wherein the management operation performing step comprises:
the processor determining whether the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle based on the computed repair duration data and the authorization duration data; and
in response to a determination by the processor that the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle, the processor automatically extending the replacement rental vehicle reservation to thereby associate the replacement rental vehicle reservation with a new authorization duration.
14. The method of claim 13 wherein the automatically extending step comprises the processor automatically storing data in the memory that is indicative of the new authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation such that an expiration of the new authorization duration coincides in time with an end of the repair duration corresponding to the computed repair duration data.
15. The method of claim 1 wherein the party comprises an insurance company.
16. The method of claim 1 wherein the processor and memory are resident within a rental vehicle reservation management computer system.
17. The apparatus of claim 6 wherein the memory is further configured to store data indicative of an authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation in association with that replacement rental vehicle reservation, and wherein the processor is further configured to perform the management operation by (1) determining whether the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle based on the computed repair duration data and the authorization duration data, and (2) in response to a determination by the processor that the authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation would end prior to repairs being completed for the disabled vehicle, automatically extending the replacement rental vehicle reservation to thereby associate the replacement rental vehicle reservation with a new authorization duration.
18. The apparatus of claim 17 wherein the processor is further configured to automatically extend the replacement rental vehicle reservation by automatically storing data in the memory that is indicative of the new authorization duration for the replacement rental vehicle reservation such that an expiration of the new authorization duration coincides in time with an end of the repair duration corresponding to the computed repair duration data.
19. The apparatus of claim 4 wherein the memory is further configured to store data representative of an insurance company, the insurance being the party associated with the received labor hours estimation data.
20. The apparatus of claim 4 further comprising a rental vehicle reservation management computer system, the processor and memory being resident within the rental vehicle reservation management computer system.
21. The apparatus of claim 4 wherein the processor is further configured to automatically schedule a callback reminder for the replacement rental vehicle reservation in response to the received labor hours estimation data.
22. The method of claim 1 wherein the automatically computing step comprises applying the selected labor hours scalar to the received labor hours estimation data to translate the labor hours estimation data into a number of business days needed by the repair facility to perform those labor hours.
23. The method of claim 22 further comprising the processor receiving a status identifier as to whether the disabled vehicle is nondriveable, and wherein the automatically computing step further comprises the processor automatically computing the estimated repair duration data based at least in part on an adjustment amount corresponding to the received status identifier.
24. The method of claim 23 further comprising the processor defining the nondriveable adjustment amount on a party-specific basis.
25. The method of claim 22 wherein the automatically computing step further comprises the processor automatically computing the estimated repair duration data based at least in part on an adjustment amount corresponding to whether the time needed to complete repairs to the disabled vehicle will include any weekend days.
26. The method of claim 25 further comprising the processor defining the weekend adjustment amount on a party-specific basis.
27. The method of claim 22 wherein the automatically computing step further comprises the processor automatically computing the estimated repair duration data based at least in part on an adjustment amount corresponding to whether the time needed to complete repairs to the disabled vehicle will include any holiday days.
28. The method of claim 27 further comprising the processor defining the holiday adjustment amount on a party-specific basis.
29. The method of claim 5 further comprising the processor defining the explanation data adjustment amount on a party-specific basis.
the processor determining whether the explanation data corresponds to an explanation categorized as an adjustment explanation or an extension explanation; and
wherein the automatically computing step comprises the processor automatically computing the estimated repair duration data based at least in part on an adjustment amount corresponding to the explanation data that has been determined to be categorized as an adjustment explanation but not on an adjustment amount corresponding to the explanation data that has been determined to be categorized as an extension explanation.
the processor performing the method steps for a plurality of rental vehicle reservations; and
the processor generating an audit report for the plurality of rental vehicle reservations based at least in part on the received labor hours estimation data and the computed estimated repair duration data.
32. The apparatus of claim 4 wherein the processor is further configured to apply the selected labor hours scalar to the received labor hours estimation data to translate the labor hours estimation data into a number of business days needed by the repair facility to perform those labor hours.
33. The apparatus of claim 32 wherein the processor is further configured to (1) receive a status identifier as to whether the disabled vehicle is nondriveable, and (2) automatically compute the estimated repair duration data based at least in part on an adjustment amount corresponding to the received status identifier.
34. The apparatus of claim 33 wherein the processor is further configured to define the nondriveable adjustment amount on a party-specific basis.
35. The apparatus of claim 32 wherein the processor is further configured to automatically compute the estimated repair duration data based at least in part on an adjustment amount corresponding to whether the time needed to complete repairs to the disabled vehicle will include any weekend days.
36. The apparatus of claim 35 wherein the processor is further configured to define the weekend adjustment amount on a party-specific basis.
37. The apparatus of claim 32 wherein the processor is further configured to automatically compute the estimated repair duration data based at least in part on an adjustment amount corresponding to whether the time needed to complete repairs to the disabled vehicle will include any holiday days.
38. The apparatus of claim 37 wherein the processor is further configured to define the holiday adjustment amount on a party-specific basis.
39. The apparatus of claim 6 wherein the processor is further configured to define the explanation data adjustment amount on a party-specific basis.
40. The apparatus of claim 6 wherein the processor is further configured to (1) determine whether the explanation data corresponds to an explanation categorized as an adjustment explanation or an extension explanation, and (2) automatically compute the estimated repair duration data based at least in part on an adjustment amount corresponding to the explanation data that has been determined to be categorized as an adjustment explanation but not on an adjustment amount corresponding to the explanation data that has been determined to be categorized as an extension explanation.
41. The apparatus of claim 4 wherein the processor is further configured to (1) receive labor hours estimation data and automatically compute the estimated repair duration data for a plurality of rental vehicle reservations, and (2) generate an audit report for the plurality of rental vehicle reservations based at least in part on the received labor hours estimation data and the computed estimated repair duration data.
42. The apparatus of claim 4 wherein the party comprises a repair facility.
43. The apparatus of claim 4 wherein the party comprises an insurance company-repair facility pair.
This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/747,645, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,160,906, entitled “System and Method for Improved Rental Vehicle Reservation Management”, filed May 11, 2007, which is a continuation-in-part of pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/609,844, entitled “Computer System for Processing Rental Car Reservations with Automated Callback Reminders”, filed Dec. 12, 2006, the entire disclosures of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.
In an effort to serve the needs of purchasers, the assignee of the present invention has pioneered the development of business systems that can be used by purchasers to create and efficiently manage replacement rental vehicle reservations, as described in pending U.S. patent application serial numbers (1) Ser. No. 09/641,820, filed Aug. 18, 2000, (2) Ser. No. 09/694,050, filed Oct. 20, 2000, (3) Ser. No. 10/028,073, filed Dec. 26, 2001, and published as 2003/0125992, (4) Ser. No. 10/865,116, filed Jun. 10, 2004, and published as 2005/0091087, (5) 60/828,540, filed Oct. 6, 2006, (6) Ser. No. 11/550,614, filed Oct. 18, 2006, and published as 2008/0097798, and (7) Ser. No. 11/609,844, filed Dec. 12, 2006, and published as 2007/0174081, and in PCT patent application PCT/US01/51437, filed Oct. 19, 2001, published as WO 02/067175, and for which U.S. national phase application Ser. No. 10/343,576 is currently pending. The entire disclosures of each of these patent applications are incorporated herein by reference.
TD=┌ƒ(r)+WH(i,ƒ(r),RSD)┐ (1)
f ( r ) = LH LHS ( i ) + ND ( i ) + A ( i , r ) ( 2 )
Furthermore, given that 11 days is longer than a week, this time span must include at least one weekend and possibly one or more holidays. Thus, depending on how the purchaser defines a weekends and holidays adjustment, then additional days may be added to TD. It should be noted that purchasers can define the weekends and holidays adjustment values on a repair facility-by-repair facility basis to match the repair facilities' business practices, if desired. Furthermore, it should be noted that the rental calculator preferably also computes the weekends and holidays adjustment based on the RSD to account for reservation time spans that encompass weekends and/or holidays. For example, if the RSD is Dec. 31, 2007, and it is assumed for purposes of this example that Dec. 31, 2007 falls on a Thursday, then a value of 11 days from f(r) will encompass three weekends (January 2-3, January 9-10, and January 16-17) and two holidays (New Years and MLK Day—January 1 and the third Monday in January, respectively). In such a circumstance, the weekends and holidays adjustment may need to account for the three weekends (rather than just a single weekend) and the two holidays. Therefore, continuing with the example wherein the RSD is Thursday, Dec. 31, 2007, if the purchaser adds two days to TD for each weekend spanned by the f(r) amount and one day for both the New Years and MLK day holidays, then WH(i,8,12/31/2007) would be 8. This, in turn, increases the value of TD to 19. Therefore, with a TD value of 19, the TCD would fall 19 days after the RSD, for a TCD of Jan. 19, 2008.
FIG. 3( a) depicts how the rules used by the rental calculator of FIG. 2 can be defined on a purchaser-by-purchaser basis. As shown in FIG. 3( a), rule set 300 1 can be applicable to purchaser A, while rule set 300 2 is applicable to purchaser B, while rule set 300 3 is applicable to purchaser C, and so on until rule set 300 2 for purchaser Z. Thus, when the rental calculator reaches step 206 for purchaser i, it can retrieve rule set 300 i that is associated with that purchaser.
Each purchaser rule set preferably includes the rules that govern how the TCD is computed, whether/how automated extensions are to be applied, and whether/how callback reminders are to be automatically scheduled. For example, FIG. 3( b) depicts a rule set 300 1 for purchaser j. Rule set 300 1 preferably comprises rules 302 that (1) define the labor hours scalar (LHS) for the purchaser, (2) define the nondriveable adjustment (ND) for the purchaser, (3) define the weekend portion of the weekends/holidays adjustment (WH) for the purchaser, (4) define the holiday portion of the weekends/holidays adjustment (WH) for the purchaser, (5) define whether and how automated extensions are to be carried out for the purchaser, (6) whether and how callbacks are to be automatically scheduled for the purchaser, and (7) define how the other adjustments (A) are to be computed for the purchaser.
CD=┌ƒ′(r)+WH(i,ƒ′(r),RSD)┐ (3)
ƒ′(r′)=ƒ(r)+E(i,r) (4)
Also, it should be understood that the rules 302 within each rule set 300 i can be repair facility-specific, as shown in FIG. 3( d). In the example of FIG. 3( d), the rule set 300 x for purchaser x includes a plurality of different rules 302 2, 302 2, . . . 302 z, each applicable to a different repair facility. In this fashion, purchasers can tailor their computational rules to the business practices of the repair facilities at which disabled vehicles are sent for repairs. This can be particularly helpful in calibrating the rules 302 to account for the weekend and holidays policies of different repair facilities (e.g., some repair facilities may work 7 days per week, others only 6 days per week, while still others only 5 days per week; and different repair facilities will often close for different holidays). Thus, at step 206 in FIG. 2, the rental calculator can not only retrieve the rule set 300 i corresponding to the applicable purchaser i, but also retrieve the rules 302 j within rule set 300 i corresponding to the repair facility j from which the vehicle repair data was received.
Returning to the flow of FIG. 5, on 1/2 the repair facility indicates that TCD will be 1/9. If the callback for 1/2 has not yet been made, the reminder therefor would now be updated, or else a new callback reminder would be set. In either case, the updated/new callback reminder would be based on a new DUD of 1/9 (the TCD) and a new LUD of 1/2. With 7 days between the DUD and LUD, the callback reminder will be set for 2 days before the LAD, or 1/7 .
Average number of rental days for reservations corresponding to all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles that are repaired;
Percentage of repairs to all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles completed within initial TCD;
Percentage of repairs to all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles completed without reservation extensions;
Average number of labor hours to repair disabled vehicle for all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles;
Average length of extension period for repairs to all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles wherein reservation extensions are needed;
Average adjustment amount needed for repairs to all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles that are due to adjustment explanations/reasons 1, 2, . . . n;
Percentage of all adjustments for repairs to all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles that are due to adjustment explanations/reasons 1, 2, . . . n;
Average extension amount needed for repairs to all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles that are due to extension explanations/reasons 1, 2, . . . n; and
Percentage of all extensions for repairs to all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles that are due to extension explanations/reasons 1, 2, . . . n.
Furthermore, report 700 can also include data indicative of how quickly repair facilities communicate updated vehicle repair data to the purchaser and/or rental vehicle service provider, as measured by how well the different repair facilities respond to repair facility callbacks.
Average term length for replacement rental vehicle reservations;
Average cost per day for all replacement rental vehicle reservations;
Average cost per day for replacement rental vehicle reservations within vehicle classes 1, 2, . . . n;
Percentage of callbacks performed as scheduled; and
Percentage of rental vehicle reservations that go beyond their LAD.
Report 800 can also include other data indicative of how well the rental company's personnel have stayed “on top of” the reservations. For example, an additional data field in the report 800 can be data that identifies a percentage of extensions that were performed on time (that is, an extension that were made and/or requested prior to the reservation's LAD).
Average length of replacement rental vehicle reservations;
Average number of replacement rental vehicle reservations managed each week;
Average cost per replacement rental vehicle reservation;
Average length of initial authorization period per replacement rental vehicle reservation;
Average length of total authorization period per replacement rental vehicle reservation;
Average extension length per replacement rental vehicle reservation;
Average extension length per extension;
Percentage of replacement rental vehicle reservations that go beyond the LAD (for all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles);
Percentage of replacement rental vehicle reservations that end 1, 2, . . . n days prior to the LAD (for all, driveable, and nondriveable vehicles);
Moreover, report 1000 can also include data on callback performance (e.g., percentage of callbacks performed as scheduled) and extension performance (e.g., percentage of extensions that were performed on time) for insurance company personnel, as described above in connection with the rental company reports 800 and 900.
FIGS. 11( a) and (b) depict system architectures 1100 that illustrate how the different parties to the replacement rental process can exchange information with each other. In the example of FIG. 11( a), an automated reservation management computer system 1102 is in communication with a purchaser computer system 1104 and a repair facility computer system 1106 over a network 1108 such as the Internet. The automated reservation management computer system 1102 can take the form of the ARMS® system developed by the assignee of this invention and as described in the above-referenced and incorporated patent applications. While only one purchaser computer system 1104 and one repair facility computer system 1106 are shown in FIGS. 11( a) and (b) in communication with the automated reservation management computer system 1102 over network 1108, it should be readily understood that a plurality of purchaser computer systems 1104 and a plurality of repair facility computer systems 1106 can communicate with the automated reservation management computer system 1102 over network 1108.
FIG. 13 illustrates another exemplary embodiment for the automated reservation management computer system 1102. Functionality for this embodiment of the automated reservation management computer system 1102 is described in greater detail in pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/694,050, filed Oct. 20, 2000, the entire disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. As described therein, a plurality of servers 1300 in a middle architectural level of the automated reservation management computer system 1102 can be configured to provide the GUI screens to the purchaser computer system 1104 over network 1108 (albeit through a first architectural layer that connects to network 1108 through a firewall). It is also worth noting that with the embodiment of FIG. 13, a purchaser can book rental vehicle reservations not only with the rental vehicle service provider that operates computer system 1102 but also optionally with a plurality of competitive rental vehicle service providers, as described in the referenced and incorporated Ser. No. 09/694,050 application. The rental calculator 1110, automated callback scheduler 1112, and audit report generator 1114 can optionally be deployed on any of the components of computer system 1102 (e.g., servers 1300, mainframe 32, mainframe 38, server 1200, etc.).
FIG. 14 illustrates yet another exemplary embodiment for the automated reservation management computer system 1102. Functionality for this embodiment of the automated reservation management computer system 1102 is described in greater detail in pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/865,116, filed Jun. 10, 2004, the entire disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. As described therein, web services technology can be used as the mode of data exchange between a business partner computer system 1402 (e.g., purchaser computer system 1104 and/or repair facility computer system 1106) and the automated reservation management computer system 1102. To support this functionality, the automated reservation management computer system 1102 preferably employs a web services connector 1400 for connecting web services-enabled business partners 1402 with the back end processing provided by components such as servers 1300 of FIG. 13. Additional details about the web services connector 1400 are described in greater detail in the referenced and incorporated Ser. No. 10/865,116 application. To business partners who are only web-enabled, their computer systems 1404 can still communicate with the back end processing of the computer system 1102 via a web connector (such as the first architectural layer shown in FIG. 13). In the embodiment of FIG. 14, the rental calculator 1110, automated callback scheduler 1112, and audit report generator 1114 can optionally be deployed on any of the components of computer system 1102 (e.g., servers 1300, mainframe 32, mainframe 38, server 1200, the web connector, the web services connector 1400, etc.).
It should be noted that the user who accesses screen 1500 of FIGS. 15( a) or (b) need not necessarily be a repair facility employee. For example, the user of screen 1500 may optionally be an employee of the rental vehicle service provider or the purchaser who keys in the updated vehicle repair information provided to him/her via email, fax, or a telephone call.
US5812067 9 sept. 1996 22 sept. 1998 Volkswagen Ag System for recognizing authorization to use a vehicle
US6263322 7 juil. 1998 17 juil. 2001 Hunter Engineering Company Integrated automotive service system and method
US6381617 25 août 1999 30 avr. 2002 Hewlett-Packard Company Multiple database client transparency system and method therefor
US6389431 25 août 1999 14 mai 2002 Hewlett-Packard Company Message-efficient client transparency system and method therefor
US6567783 18 sept. 1998 20 mai 2003 I2 Technologies Us, Inc. Communication across one or more enterprise boundaries regarding the occurrence of a workflow event
US6694234 9 oct. 2001 17 févr. 2004 Gmac Insurance Company Customer service automation systems and methods
US6910040 12 avr. 2002 21 juin 2005 Microsoft Corporation System and method for XML based content management
US6968388 21 mars 2000 22 nov. 2005 Fileflow As Methods in transmission of files in a data communication network
US7020620 23 juin 2000 28 mars 2006 Basf Corporation Computer-implemented vehicle repair analysis system
US7089588 21 déc. 2000 8 août 2006 Reynolds And Reynolds Holdings, Inc. Performance path method and apparatus for exchanging data among systems using different data formats
US20020007289 14 déc. 2000 17 janv. 2002 Malin Mark Elliott Method and apparatus for processing automobile repair data and statistics
US20020073012 13 déc. 2000 13 juin 2002 Lowell Michael J. Vehicle service repair network
US20020111846 13 févr. 2002 15 août 2002 Singer Joel L. System and method for automatic maintenance reminders
US20020143819 12 avr. 2002 3 oct. 2002 Cheng Han Web service syndication system
US20020177926 9 oct. 2001 28 nov. 2002 Lockwood Robert Farrell Customer service automation systems and methods
US20030014295 18 juil. 2000 16 janv. 2003 Ppg Industries Ohio, Inc. Method and Apparatus for Coordinating Services
US20030033369 9 août 2002 13 févr. 2003 Bernhard Benjamin Karb Donovan Web services container
US20030050942 2 juil. 2002 13 mars 2003 Herve Ruellan Description of an interface applicable to a computer object
US20030093402 15 oct. 2002 15 mai 2003 Mitch Upton System and method using a connector architecture for application integration
US20030093470 15 oct. 2002 15 mai 2003 Mitch Upton System and method for implementing a service adapter
US20030093575 15 oct. 2002 15 mai 2003 Mitch Upton Application view component for system integration
US20030097286 18 oct. 2002 22 mai 2003 Vitria Technologies, Inc. Model driven collaborative business application development environment and collaborative applications developed therewith
US20030110315 15 oct. 2002 12 juin 2003 Mitch Upton System and method for providing a java interface to an application view component
US20030114967 25 oct. 2002 19 juin 2003 U-Haul International, Inc. Vehicle service status tracking system and method
US20030115572 13 déc. 2002 19 juin 2003 Clickmarks, Inc. System, method and computer program product for application development using a visual paradigm to combine existing data and applications
US20030120464 21 déc. 2001 26 juin 2003 Frederick D. Taft Test system for testing dynamic information returned by a web server
US20030120665 22 mars 2002 26 juin 2003 Joshua Fox Run-time architecture for enterprise integration with transformation generation
US20030145047 15 oct. 2002 31 juil. 2003 Mitch Upton System and method utilizing an interface component to query a document
US20030145067 30 janv. 2002 31 juil. 2003 Cover Steven A. Increasing the level of automation when configuring network services
US20030154111 28 mars 2002 14 août 2003 Dutra Daniel Arthur Automotive collision repair claims management method and system
US20040001575 22 mai 2003 1 janv. 2004 Yi Tang Voice controlled business scheduling system and method
US20040054600 31 juil. 2001 18 mars 2004 Chikashi Shike Rental system
US20040075581 2 oct. 2003 22 avr. 2004 John Staniszewski Electronic timer system and method
US20040093134 6 août 2001 13 mai 2004 Barber Richard Antony System for scheduling the servicing of equipment
US20040243423 30 mai 2003 2 déc. 2004 Decision Support Services Automotive collision estimate audit system
US20040243619 * 2 juin 2003 2 déc. 2004 John Kelly Method and system of managing service reminders using mileage estimates
US20050187833 4 avr. 2001 25 août 2005 U-Haul International, Inc. Automated equipment management and reservation system
US20050197866 4 mars 2005 8 sept. 2005 Joe Salcedo Preneed insurance services system
US20050246206 13 juin 2003 3 nov. 2005 Ccc Information Services, Inc. System and method for performing reinspection in insurance claim processing
US20060031041 2 août 2005 9 févr. 2006 Verifacts Automotive, Llc Data management systems for collision repair coaching
US20060190273 23 févr. 2005 24 août 2006 International Business Machines Corporation Method, system, and storage medium for implementing transaction-based data exchange
US20070203777 * 19 janv. 2007 30 août 2007 Berkey James P Method of improving throughput performance of an automotive repair shop
US20070271128 19 mai 2006 22 nov. 2007 Raynard Terrence Bolling Web based management information system
US20070294116 14 juin 2006 20 déc. 2007 Scott Paul Stephens Method and system for an online rental vehicle reservation-booking website including a travel agent path
US20080010105 8 août 2007 10 janv. 2008 Rose James W Apparatus and method for an internet based computer reservation booking system
US20080046261 17 août 2006 21 févr. 2008 Scene Genesis, Inc. Direct repair program management systems and methods thereof
US20080097798 18 oct. 2006 24 avr. 2008 The Crawford Group, Inc. Method and System for Creating and Processing Rental Vehicle Reservations Using Vouchers
US20080133281 30 nov. 2006 5 juin 2008 The Crawford Group, Inc. Method and System for Creating Rental Vehicle Reservations from Facsimile Communications
US20080140460 11 mai 2007 12 juin 2008 The Crawford Group, Inc. System and Method for Improved Rental Vehicle Reservation Management
US20080162199 5 oct. 2007 3 juil. 2008 The Crawford Group, Inc. Method and System for Communicating Vehicle Repair Information to a Business-to-Business Rental Vehicle Reservation Management Computer System
US20080243562 30 oct. 2007 2 oct. 2008 The Crawford Group, Inc. Web Enabled Business to Business Computer System for Rental Car Services Having a Bidirectional Communication Link with a Repair Facility - 3
US20080243563 30 oct. 2007 2 oct. 2008 The Crawford Group, Inc. Web Enabled Business to Business Computer System for Rental Car Services Including Data Display Functionality - 4
US20080249814 30 oct. 2007 9 oct. 2008 The Crawford Group, Inc. Web Enabled Business to Business Computer System for Rental Car Services - 3
US20090018859 27 août 2007 15 janv. 2009 Purifoy Jonathan P Method for vehicle repair estimate and scheduling
US20100023352 23 juil. 2008 28 janv. 2010 The Crawford Group, Inc. System and Method for Improved Information Sharing by Repair Facilities for Managing Rental Vehicle Reservations
US20120197672 16 avr. 2012 2 août 2012 The Crawford Group, Inc. System and Method for Improved Rental Vehicle Reservation Management
US20120203582 16 avr. 2012 9 août 2012 The Crawford Group, Inc. System and Method for Improved Rental Vehicle Reservation Management
US20130159033 7 févr. 2013 20 juin 2013 The Crawford Group, Inc. Extended Web Enabled Multi-Featured Business To Business Computer System For Rental Vehicle Services
US20130218614 18 mars 2013 22 août 2013 The Crawford Group, Inc. Extended Web enabled Business to Business Computer System for Rental Vehicles Services
US20130238373 1 avr. 2013 12 sept. 2013 The Crawford Group, Inc. Method and Apparatus for Tracking Repair Facility Performance for Repairs Relating to Replacement Rental Vehicle Transactions
WO2000052601A1 1 mars 2000 8 sept. 2000 Global Reservation Systems, Inc. A method and system for providing travel reservation and related services
WO2002067175A2 19 oct. 2001 29 août 2002 The Crawford Group, Inc. Extended web enabled multi-featured business to business computer system for rental vehicle services
WO2002097700A2 19 oct. 2001 5 déc. 2002 The Crawford Group, Inc. Extended web enabled multi-featured business to business computer system for rental vehicle services
1 "ARMS Automotive Web Service Process Overview", 8 pages, 2004.
2 "Cieca Estimate Management Standard", Version 2.01, Feb. 3, 1999 and Jun. 19, 2001, 54 pp.
3 "Communicating Status Updates Just Got Easier", 2 pages, Creation Date of Oct. 26, 2006.
4 "Enterprise ARMS Your Shop With the Competitive Edge", 2 pages, Creation Date of Oct. 2007.
5 "Fix Auto WEB—CMS Repair Delay Form", 3 pages, 2004.
7 "Rental Management for Vehicle Replacement Rentals", National Electronic Data Interchange Transaction Set Implementation Guide, 272/824, Jul. 2000.
8 "Rental Management Invoicing and Application Advice for Vehicle Replacement Rentals", National Electronic Data Interchange Transaction Set Implementation Guide, 811/824, Jul. 2000.
9 "Rental Management Remittance Advice for Vehicle Replacement Rentals", National Electronic Data Interchange Transaction Set Implementation Guide, 820, Jul. 2000.
10 "Welcome to the Hertz Interactive Reservation Process"; Mar. 3, 2000; pp. 62-27.
11 "What Is Windows Communication Foundation?", downloaded from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms731082(printer).aspx on Aug. 27, 2008, 6 pages.
13 Amendment and Response to Office Action submitted Apr. 20, 2009 for U.S. Appl. No. 10/343,576.
14 ARMS 400 Demonstration, p. 1-67.
15 ARMS Claims Internet Quick Reference Guide, Oct. 1999.
16 ARMS Electronic Callback System Demonstration, pp. 1-22, 1998.
17 ARMS Overview, pp. 1-10.
18 ARMS Technology, Jul. 2000.
21 ARMS/400 User Manual, 1999.
22 ARMS/400—Automated Rental Management System, pp. 1-8, 1995.
23 Automated Rentals, Unwrapped, pp. 1-7, Oct. 1995.
24 CarTemps Rent-A-Car; "CarTemps MPOWERENT Management System"; Instruction Manual; Copyright 2000; v1.1; publication date unknown.
25 Clip, "Servlets: CGI the Java Way", Byte, May 1, 1998, pp. 55-56, vol. 23, No. 5, McGraw-Hill, Inc., St. Peterborough, US.
26 Collision Industry Electronic Commerce Association Business Message Specification Schema, Jul. 30, 2003.
27 Copyright Chronicle Publishing Company, May 2, 1997, "Booking a room, vehicle for vacation via the 'Net", Pantagraph, C.1.
28 Curbera et al., "Unraveling the Web Services Web: An Introduction to SOAP, WSDL, and UDDI", IEEE Internet Computing, Mar. 1, 2002, pp. 86-93, vol. 6, No. 2, IEEE Service Center, New York, NY, US.
29 D.P. General Use Programs, AACB10 Consolidated Callback Maintenance, Apr. 1994, pp. 1-4.
30 Darrah, "Hi-Tech Streamlines Car Rental Process", Feb. 1999, p. 29, vol. 66, Issue 2.
31 Data Warehouse & Analyzer Quick Sheet, Jun. 2000, pp. 1-2.
32 Dollar Rent A Car Systems, Inc., pp. 1-5, 1998.
33 ECARS 2000 Customer Profile, Chapters 1-16.
34 ECARS—Enterprise Computer Assisted Rental System, AACJO1 Callbacks, pp. 1-9, Jul. 1, 1997.
35 Election with Partial Traversal in Response to Restriction Requirement submitted Sep. 2, 2009 for U.S. Appl. No. 10/343,576.
36 Enterprise Computer Assisted Rental System Workbook, Dec. 1996.
37 Enterprise Computer Assisted Rental System Workbook, Sep. 1997.
38 Enterprise Network and Physical Connections Overview, 1995, pp. 1-5.
39 Enterprise Rent-A-Car ARMS—Vehicle Messaging System, Project Charter, Oct. 15, 1998, pp. 1-7.
40 Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company ARMS—Vehicle Messaging System Overview, May 16, 2001, p. 1-35.
41 Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company ARMS—Vehicle Messaging System Phase II Project Charter, Aug. 20, 1999, p. 1-6.
42 Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company, ARMS Basics and Concepts, vol. 1, Chapter 1-4, Feb. 24, 1998.
43 Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company, ARMS Basics and Concepts, vol. 1, Chapters 1-4, Jun. 10, 1998.
44 Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company, Functional Specification, pp. 1-2, Nov. 1999.
45 Enterprise Rent-A-Car, ARMS Online Reporting, Project Charter, Version 1.0, Aug. 20, 1999, pp. 1-7.
46 Everything You Need to Know About ARMS Automotive, 2000, pp. 1-8.
47 Fix Auto Collision, EMS Web Agent 1.0, White Paper, Version 1.0, Draft 01, Dec. 9, 2003, pp. 1-18.
48 Fix Auto, downloaded from https://www.fixauto.com/default.aspx, Sep. 14, 2006, 20 pages.
49 Graham et al., "Building Web Services with Java?: Making Sense of XML, SOAP, WSDL, and UDDI", Internet Citation, Dec. 12, 2001, Retrieved from the Internet: .
50 Graham et al., "Building Web Services with Java?: Making Sense of XML, SOAP, WSDL, and UDDI", Internet Citation, Dec. 12, 2001, Retrieved from the Internet: <URL:http://proquest.safaribooksonline.com/0672321815>.
51 http://www.eautoclaims.com, pp. 1-11, Apr. 8, 2000.
52 http://www.hertz.com/InteractionRes/htm/isexckge.htm, pp. 1-2, Mar. 20, 1997.
53 Interactions, "Electronic Connections", p. 3, Mar. 15, 1995.
54 Interactions, ARMS Update, vol. 6, Issue 2, Feb. 1997.
55 Interactions, ARMS, vol. 3, No. 6, Mar. 15, 1994.
56 Interactions, Published especially for our Farmers adjusters, 1994.
57 Interactions, Special Edition, Nov. 1992.
58 Interactions, Special Edition, vol. 1, No. 4, Aug. 1992.
59 Interactions, vol. 1, No. 3, Jul. 1992.
60 Interactions, vol. 1, No. 5, Sep. 1992.
61 Interactions, vol. 1, No. 8, Dec. 1992.
62 Interactions, vol. 2, No. 1, Jan. 1993.
63 Interactions, vol. 2, No. 11, Oct. 1, 1993.
64 Interactions, vol. 2, No. 13, Nov. 1, 1993.
65 Interactions, vol. 2, No. 14, Nov. 15, 1993.
66 Interactions, vol. 2, No. 5, May 1993.
67 Interactions, vol. 2, No. 7, Jul. 1993.
68 Interactions, vol. 2, No. 8, Aug. 1993.
69 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 1, Jan. 1, 1994.
70 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 1, Jan. 15, 1994.
71 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 10, May 15, 1994.
72 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 11, Jun. 1, 1994.
73 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 12, Jun. 15, 1994.
74 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 14, Jul. 15, 1994.
75 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 15, Aug. 1, 1994.
76 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 16, Aug. 15, 1994.
77 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 21, Nov. 1, 1994.
78 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 23, Dec. 1, 1994.
79 Interactions, vol. 3, No. 8, Apr. 15, 1994.
80 Interactions, vol. 4, Issue 14, Jul. 15, 1995.
81 Interactions, vol. 4, Issue 16, Aug. 15, 1995.
82 Interactions, vol. 4, Issue 19, Oct. 1, 1995.
83 Interactions, vol. 4, Issue 21, Nov. 1, 1995.
84 Interactions, vol. 4, Issue 24, Dec. 15, 1995.
85 Interactions, vol. 4, No. 3, Feb. 1, 1995.
86 Interactions, vol. 4, No. 6, Mar. 15, 1995.
87 Interactions, vol. 4, No. 9, May 1, 1995.
88 Interactions, vol. 5, Issue 1, Jan. 1, 1996.
89 Interactions, vol. 5, Issue 13, Oct. 1, 1996.
90 Interactions, vol. 5, Issue 14, Nov. 1, 1996.
91 Interactions, vol. 5, Issue 2, Jan. 15, 1996.
92 Interactions, vol. 5, Issue 4, Feb. 15, 1996.
93 Interactions, vol. 6, Issue 12, Dec. 1997.
94 Interactions, vol. 6, Issue 8, Aug. 1997.
95 Interactions, vol. 7, Issue 1, Jan. 1998.
96 Interactions, vol. 7, Issue 12, Dec. 1998.
97 Interactions, vol. 7, Issue 5, May 1998.
98 Interactions, vol. 7, Issue 7, Jul. 1998.
99 Interactions, vol. 7, Issue 8, Aug. 1998.
100 Interactions, vol. 8, Issue 7, Jul. 1999.
101 Interactions, vol. 8, Issue 8, Aug. 1999.
102 Interactions, vol. 8, Issue 9, Sep. 1999.
103 Interactions, vol. 9, Issue 2, Feb. 2000.
104 Interactions, vol. 9, Issue 3, Mar. 2000.
105 Interactions, vol. 9, Issue 5, May 2000.
106 International Preliminary Report on Patentability (Chapter I) for PCT/US2007/025327 issued Jun. 25, 2009.
107 International Search Report for PCT/US2007/025327 dated May 21, 2008.
108 Internet Networking Architecture, 1999.
109 Introducing ARMS Claims, Jun. 2000, pp. 1-6.
110 IS General Use Programs-Section 19, AACB34 Callback Fax Customization, Mar. 5, 1998.
111 IS General Use Programs—Section 19, AACB34 Callback Fax Customization, Mar. 5, 1998.
112 * Kennemer, Brian, "Microsoft Project Tutorial: Duration and task Types", Jul. 13, 2001.
113 Lone Star Rental Systems, EZ Traker(TM), Your Complete Auto Rental Management Solution.
114 Lone Star Rental Systems, EZ Traker™, Your Complete Auto Rental Management Solution.
115 Lorentz, Jeff, Functional Specification, Internet Application Development, ARMS Automotive, pp. 1-3.
116 Milligan, Michael, "OTA targets mid-January to release e-commerce protocol", Travel Weekly, Jan. 10, 2000.
117 Net rentacar.com User Guide, pp. 1-19.
118 Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 12/179,071 dated Dec. 30, 2011.
119 Office Action for CA Application 2613930 dated Jan. 21, 2014.
120 Office Action for CA Application No. 2416840 dated Jan. 7, 2005.
121 Office Action for CA Application No. 2416840 dated Mar. 5, 2010.
122 Office Action for EP Application No. 01273072.7 dated Apr. 11, 2004.
123 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/343,576 dated Aug. 3, 2009.
124 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/343,576 dated Feb. 4, 2010.
125 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/343,576 dated Nov. 19, 2008.
126 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/865,116 dated May 12, 2011.
127 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 10/865,116 dated Oct. 28, 2010.
128 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/823,782 dated Feb. 17, 2011.
129 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/929,277 dated Oct. 12, 2010.
130 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/929,350 dated Feb. 7, 2011.
131 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/929,473 dated Oct. 12, 2010.
132 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/178,037 dated Nov. 17, 2010.
133 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/447,769 dated Nov. 13, 2013.
134 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/447,821 dated Aug. 9, 2013.
135 Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/447,821 dated Oct. 11, 2012.
136 Open Travel Alliance, "ebXML Uses Opentravel Alliance Specification for Early Tests", May 10, 2000.
137 Open Travel Alliance, "Open Travel Alliance Joins Forces with DISA", Sep. 9, 1999.
138 Open Travel Alliance, "Open Travel Alliance Names Board Officers", Sep. 2, 1999.
139 Open Travel Alliance, "OpenTravel Alliance's New XML Specification Creates a Common Customer Profile for Travelers", Feb. 29, 2000.
140 Open Travel Alliance, "White Paper", pp. 1-20, Feb. 2000.
141 Orion Systems, Ltd., System Overview and Handheld Terminals, downloaded from www.orsys.com on Dec. 1, 1997, pp. 1-5.
142 Orion Systems, Ltd., System Overview with Screens and Reports, May 1996.
143 PC/ARMS Demonstration, pp. 1-45, 1995.
144 Preview Travel, Inc., Car Reservations, 1999.
145 * Project Management Central , Aug. 5, 2004.
146 Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 09/641,820, now USPN 7,275,038, filed Aug. 18, 2000 (as of Apr. 20, 2011).
147 Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 09/694,050, now USPN 7,899,690, filed Oct. 20, 2000-Part 1-3 (as of Apr. 20, 2011).
148 Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 09/694,050, now USPN 7,899,690, filed Oct. 20, 2000—Part 1-3 (as of Apr. 20, 2011).
149 Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 10/343,576, filed Jan. 31, 2003-Part 1-3 (as of Apr. 20, 2011).
150 Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 10/343,576, filed Jan. 31, 2003—Part 1-3 (as of Apr. 20, 2011).
151 Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 11/609,844, filed Dec. 12, 2006 (as of Apr. 20, 2011).
152 Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 11/868,266, filed Oct. 5, 2007 (as of Apr. 20, 2011).
153 Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 12/179,071, filed Jul. 24, 2008 (as of Apr. 20, 2011).
154 * Pyron, Tim, "Special Edition Using Microsoft Office Project 2003", Feb. 3, 2004, Chapter 3 :Setting Up a Project Document.
155 * Pyron, Tim, "Special Edition Using Microsoft Office Project 2003", Feb. 3, 2004.
156 Rental Redesign, Rental Management, RMS (Rental Management Services), Sep. 30, 1998, pp. 1-2.
157 Response to Office Action for CA Application 2416840 dated Sep. 3, 2010.
158 Response to Office Action for CA Application No. 2416840 dated Jul. 7, 2005.
159 Response to Office Action for EP Application No. 01273072.7 dated Aug. 30, 2005.
160 Response to Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/929,277 dated Oct. 12, 2010.
161 Rosen, Cheryl, "OTA Debuts Data Protocol", Business Travel News, Jan. 10, 2000.
162 Rosen, Cheryl, "OTA Publishes XML Data Standard", Business Travel News, pp. 1-2, Mar. 20, 2000.
163 Spreadsheet Calculator Form for Allstate, 14 pages, File Creation Date of May 6, 2007.
164 Spreadsheet Calculator Form to Estimate Formula Days, 9 pages, File Creation Date of Jan. 16, 2006.
165 The ARMS Connection, Safeco/Enterprise Rent-A-Car, pp. 1-4.
166 The Connection, State Farm Insurance/Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Rental Process Automation and Procedures, pp. 1-3.
167 The Hertz Corporation, 1998.
168 Travel Agent, "Many Ways to Sell", Oct. 2, 1995, vol. 0, No. 0, p. 36.
169 TSD Brochure, "Are You Comparing Apples to Apples When Choosing Rental Software", p. 1-3.
170 TSD Brochure, Rent 2000 from TSD, Rental Management Software, Revolutionize the Way You Do Business with the Proven Solution, p. 1-2.
171 TSD Brochure, Rent 2000 from TSD, Rental Management Software, Revolutionize the Way You Do Business, p. 1-29.
172 U.S. Appl. No. 09/564,911, filed May 4, 2000 (Williams).
173 U.S. Appl. No. 09/698,491, filed Oct. 27, 2000 (Menendez et al.).
174 U.S. Appl. No. 09/698,502, filed Oct. 27, 2000 (Menendez et al.).
175 U.S. Appl. No. 09/698,552, filed Oct. 27, 2000 (Menendez et al.).
176 U.S. Appl. No. 11/472,168, filed Jun. 21, 2006 (Kelly et al.).
177 U.S. Appl. No. 60/527,762, filed Dec. 9, 2003 (Adegan).
178 U.S. Appl. No. 60/692,886, filed Jun. 21, 2005 (Kelly et al.).
179 U.S. Appl. No. 60/828,540, filed Oct. 5, 2006 (Smith et al.).
180 Wustner et al., "Converting Business Documents: A Classification of Problems and Solutions Using XML/XSLT", Advanced Issues of E-Commerce and Web-Based Information Systems, Jun. 26-28, 2002, Proceedings of the Fourth IEEE International Workshop, Piscataway, NJ, US, IEEE, 8 pages.
181 www.Hertz.com (archived Feb. 29, 2000).
182 Yenckel, "For This Cyberspace Visitor, Once Is More Than Enough", Feb. 11, 1996, p. E.01, The Washington Post (Pre-1997 Fulltext), ISSN 01908286.
Classification internationale G06Q30/00, G06Q10/02, G06Q10/00
Classification coopérative G06Q10/00, G06Q30/00, G06Q10/02
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:SMITH, DAVID G.;DEVALLANCE, KIMBERLY A.;MILLER, OWEN R.;AND OTHERS;SIGNING DATES FROM 20070522 TO 20070523;REEL/FRAME:028052/0079