Search Images Maps Play YouTube News Gmail Drive More »
Sign in
Screen reader users: click this link for accessible mode. Accessible mode has the same essential features but works better with your reader.

Patents

  1. Advanced Patent Search
Publication numberCA2615221 A1
Publication typeApplication
Application numberCA 2615221
PCT numberPCT/US2006/027302
Publication date18 Jan 2007
Filing date13 Jul 2006
Priority date13 Jul 2005
Also published asCA2615221C, EP1902396A2, US7778954, US8145675, US8250118, US8661066, US20060248440, US20110066616, US20120173514, US20120317042, WO2007009054A2, WO2007009054A3
Publication numberCA 2615221, CA 2615221 A1, CA 2615221A1, CA-A1-2615221, CA2615221 A1, CA2615221A1, PCT/2006/27302, PCT/US/2006/027302, PCT/US/2006/27302, PCT/US/6/027302, PCT/US/6/27302, PCT/US2006/027302, PCT/US2006/27302, PCT/US2006027302, PCT/US200627302, PCT/US6/027302, PCT/US6/27302, PCT/US6027302, PCT/US627302
InventorsForrest Rhoads, Daniel Gannon, Paul Werner, Steve Hestness, Kimberly Anne Kothe, Jonathan James Medin, Nick Bieter
ApplicantThomson Global Resources, Forrest Rhoads, Daniel Gannon, Paul Werner, Steve Hestness, Kimberly Anne Kothe, Jonathan James Medin, Nick Bieter, Thomson Reuters Global Resources
Export CitationBiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan
External Links: CIPO, Espacenet
User interface for legal case histories
CA 2615221 A1
Abstract
An exemplary legal research system provides graphical user interfaces to client access devices, with the user interfaces specifically designed to facilitate access to procedural case histories. Each interface is dynamically customized based on the procedural relationships of a plurality of legal cases to provide hyperlinks to corresponding case law documents. The hyperlinks are positioned within indicator band of the interface to indicate corresponding tiers of a court system, but also to mirror the procedural and temporal relationships of legal cases corresponding to the case law documents.
Additionally, the exemplary interface includes case validity indicators to signal the precedential value or status of corresponding legal cases. The graphical user interface, in some embodiments, provides analogous access to statutory information.
Claims(19)
1. A server for a legal research system, comprising:
means for receiving requests for procedural case histories sent by one or more client access devices; and means, responsive to at least one of the received requests, for at least partially defining a user interface on one of the client access devices that corresponds to the one of the received requests, the user interface including:
two or more regions, with each of the regions corresponding to a respective tier of a court system; and two or more hyperlink case listings, with each of the hyperlink case listings selectable to initiate retrieval of a corresponding legal case document, with one of the hyperlink case listings positioned within a first one of the regions and a second one of the hyperlink case listings positioned within a second one of the regions.
2. The server of claim 1, wherein the user interface further comprises one or more path indicators, with one of the path indicators indicating a path between the first one of the hyperlink case listings with the second one of the hyperlink case listings.
3. The server of claim 1, wherein the user interface further comprises one or more case validity indicators, with each indicator positioned adjacent a corresponding one of the hyperlink case listings and indicating a precedential value or status of a corresponding legal case.
4. The server of claim 1, wherein the means for at least partially defining a user interface, includes:
a set of rules for organizing the hyperlink case listings according to a grid having rows and columns; and means for squishing one or more of the columns to diminish visible perception of the grid.
5. The server of claim 1, wherein each of the two or more regions is substantially rectangular and rendered with a horizontal orientation.
6. The server of claim 1, wherein the graphical user interface is rendered using Microsoft Windows Graphical Device Interface.
7. The server of claim 1, wherein each hyperlink case listing is associated with a roll-over interface feature that results in output of an enlarge image of a rectangular region surrounding the hyperlink case listing.
8. A method comprising:
receiving a request for a procedural case history sent by a client access device; and in response to the received request, at least partially defining a user interface on the client access device, with the user interface including:
two or more regions,, with each of the regions corresponding to a respective tier of a court system; and two or more hyperlink case listings, with each of the hyperlink case listings selectable to initiate retrieval of a corresponding legal case document, with one of the hyperlink case listings positioned within a first one of the regions and a second one of the hyperlink case listings positioned within a second one of the regions.
9. The method of claim 8, wherein defining the user interface includes defining the user interface to include one or more path indicators, with one of the path indicators indicating a path between the first one of the hyperlink case listings with the second one of the hyperlink case listings.
10. The method of claim 8, wherein defining the user interface includes defining the user interface to include one or more case validity indicators, with each indicator positioned adjacent a corresponding one of the hyperlink case listings and indicating a precedential value or status of a corresponding legal case.
11. A graphical user interface for a legal research system, the interface comprising:
two or more regions, with each of the regions corresponding to a respective tier of a court system; and two or more hyperlink case listings, with each of the hyperlink case listings selectable to initiate retrieval of a corresponding legal case document, with a first one of the hyperlink case listings positioned within a first one of the regions and a second one of the hyperlink case listings positioned within a second one of the regions.
12. The interface of claim 11, further comprising one or more path indicators, with one of the path indicators indicating a path between the first one of the hyperlink case listings with the second one of the hyperlink case listings.
13. The interface of claim 11, wherein the user interface further comprises one or more case validity indicators, with each indicator positioned adjacent a corresponding one of the hyperlink case listings and indicating a precedential value or status of a corresponding legal case.
14. The interface of claim 11, wherein each of the two or more regions is substantially rectangular and rendered with a horizontal orientation.
15. The interface of claim 11, wherein the interface is rendered using vector graphics.
16. The interface of claim 11, wherein each hyperlink case listing is associated with a roll-over feature that when rolled over with a cursor of a pointing device results in output of an enlarge image of a rectangular region surrounding the hyperlink case listing.
17. A graphical user interface for a legal research system, the interface comprising:
two or more hyperlink case listings, with each of the hyperlink case listings selectable to initiate retrieval of a corresponding legal case document; and one or more path indicators, with one of the path indicators indicating a path between the first one of the hyperlink case listings and the second one of the hyperlink case listings.
18. The interface of claim 17, further comprising:
two or more regions, with each of the regions corresponding to a respective tier of a court system, with the first one of the hyperlink case listings positioned within a first one of the regions and a second one of the hyperlink case listings positioned within a second one of the regions.
19. The interface of claim 18, wherein each of the two or more regions is substantially rectangular and rendered with a horizontal orientation.
Description  (OCR text may contain errors)

USER INTERFACE FOR LEGAL CASE HISTORIES

Copyright Notice One or more portions of this patent document contain material subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent docurnent or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent files or records, but otherwise reserves all copyrights whatsoever. The following notice applies to this document: Copyright 2005, Thomson Legal and Regulatory, Inc.

Related Applications The present application claims priority to U.S. Patent Application No.
11/370,194, filed on March 6, 2006, which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 11/182,028, filed July 13, 2005. The present application relates to U.S. Patent Application No. 09/746,557, filed on December 22, 2000, which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 09/120,170, filed on July 21, 1998. All of these applications are incorporated herein by reference.

Technical Field Various embodiments of the invention concern systems, methods, and software for enabling users to interface with documents, such as judicial opinions or case documents that have complex temporal, semantic, and/or legal relationships.

Background The American legal system, as well as some other legal systems around the world, relies heavily on written judicial opinions, the written pronouncements of judges, to articulate or interpret the laws governing resolution of disputes. Each judicial opinion is not only important to resolving a particular legal dispute, but also to resolving or avoiding similar disputes, or cases, in the future. Because of this, judges and lawyers within our the American legal system are continually researching an ever-expanding body of past opinions, or case law, for the ones most relevant to resolution of new disputes.
To facilitate these searches, companies, such as Thomson Legal and Regulatory, Inc. of St. Paul, Minnesota (doing business as Thomson West), collect and publish the judicial opinions of courts across the United States in electronic form and make them available to online researchers through its Westlaw research service. Many of these opinions are published with bibliographic cites or hyperlinks to historically related opinions, known as prior cases, from other courts that have previously ruled on all or part of the same dispute.
The cites and hyperlinks enable researchers to readily access the related opinions electronically within the Westlaw research system. For example, an opinion in a patent case from the United States Supreme Court, the highest court in the United States, would generally cite not only an opinion from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the next highest court for patent cases, but also an opinion of a local Federal District Court where the patent case started, thus documenting the history or progression of the case through the U.S. federal judicial system.
The history or progression of a dispute through the court system is particularly important, because subsequent cases in a chain may overrule one or more portions of prior case. Thus, before relying on rulings in any given case, judges and lawyers need to understand its history. To this end, the Westlaw research system includes a KeyCite feature which, among other things, provides not only a sequential listing of cases that constitute the history of virtually any given case, but also a short description of the relationship between the cases.
For example, the history listing having two cases might list that one case granted a motion made in another case. The listing is a powerful tool.
However, the present inventors have recognized that some cases histories are quite complex and difficult to follow in a sequential list. This is particularly true for history listings that list a case more than once, present listings that have gaps between cases, or list multiple cases that affect a given prior case.
Accordingly, the present inventors have recognized, among other things, a need for better ways for users to interface with historically related legal cases.
Brief Description of the Drawings Figure 1 is a block diagram of a computer system which may be used to automatically generate case law citation data in a legal text processing system in accordance with the invention;

Figures 2A - 2D are screen shots illustrating examples of the user interface displayed to a user of the case law citation system in accordance with the invention;

Figure 3 is a diagram illustrating the flow of data in a case law citation system in accordance with the invention;
Figure 4 is a diagram illustrating more details of the flow of data in the case law citation system of Figure 3.

Figure 5 is a diagram illustrating a system for quotation identification in accordance with the invention that may be part of the case law citation system;.
Figure 6 is a flowchart illustrating a method for quotation identification and verification process in accordance with the invention;
Figure 7 is a flowchart illustrating a method for quotation verification in accordance with the invention;

Figure 8 is a diagram illustrating a negative history determining process in accordance with the invention;

Figure 9 is a flowchart illustrating a method for determining the depth of treatment of a legal case in accordance with the invention; and Figure 10 is a diagram illustrating a method for assigning subject matter classifications in accordance with the invention.

Description of Exemplary Embodiments This description, which references and incorporate the identified figures and incorporates the appendix and appended claims, describes and illustrates one or more exemplary embodiments of the invention(s.) These embodiments, offered not to limit but only to exemplify and teach, are shown and described in sufficient detail to enable those skilled in the art to make and use the invention(s). Thus, where appropriate to avoid obscuring the invention(s), the description may omit certain information known to those of skill in the relevant art.
Some embodiments of the invention are particularly applicable to a computer-implemented legal text processing system and method for semi-automatically identifying characteristics, such as citations and quotations, within a legal document and identifying relationships between the legal document and other legal documents stored in-the database. The legal document may be a legal case, a statute, a law review article, an ALR article or a legal treatise. It is in the context of a legal case that the exemplary embodiments are described.
It will be appreciated, however, that the system and method in accordance with the invention has greater utility and may be used for different legal documents, such as statutes, legislative histories, and administrative proceedings, and patents.
Some embodiments apply the teachings herein to non legal documents, such as scientific literature.
Before describing the preferred embodiment of the invention, a brief description of the terminology that will be used to describe the invention will be provided. Any reported decision of a legal case is presumed to be an authoritative statement of the law when it is written. Then, later events may affect the authoritativeness of this legal case's decision. These later events may include later proceedings or written decisions during the same litigation (e.g., direct history), a decision of a later legal case from a different litigation which resolves the same issues in a different way or using different reasoning and overrules the earlier case, or a decision of a later legal case from a different litigation which resolves the same issue differently, but does not explicitly overrule the case. The direct history of a legal case may include a record of the connections between the legal cases that are part of the same litigation. The direct history may be of varying degrees of relevance and may include positive history (i.e., maintaining or supporting the authority (of the legal case) or negative history (for example, the legal case may no longer have the authority it once had)). The indirect history of a case is a record of the connections between legal case and other legal cases which are not part of the same litigation.
The indirect history of a legal case may also be positive or negative. The significance of a particular case may often be indicated by the amount of discussion (i.e., the amount of text) that a later case uses in discussing a decision of another legal case while following, overruling or explaining the case. This is referred to as the depth of treatment of the case, as described below. One or more embodiments described herein may also be implemented on a system, such as that described in co-pending U.S. patent application 10/751,269, which was filed December 30, 2003 and which is incorporated herein by reference.
Figure 1 is a block diagram of a computer system 30 in which the invention may be embodied. The system may semi-automatically identify characteristics, such as citations and quotations within a legal case document, and then generate information about the legal case in the context of other legal cases. The computer system may include a computer 32, a server 34 and a plurality of client computers 36. The computer 32 may further include a central processing unit (CPU) 38, a memory 40 and one or more processes 42, which may be software applications that are stored in the memory 40. The CPU
controls the operation of the computer and executes the software applications stored in the memory. In operation, a plurality of pieces of electronic data corresponding to the text of the published decisions for the legal cases are fed into the computer and temporarily stored in the memory 40. In the following discussion, the written opinion of the legal case is referred to as the legal case.
Each piece of electronic data (i.e., each written opinion of a legal case) may be automatically processed by the CPU, using the processes contained in the software applications contained in the memory, to generate information about the legal case, as described below. For example, the CPU may parse the text of the legal case to identify candidate (i.e., unverified) citations to other legal cases and mark these citations for later processing, may identify candidate (i.e., unverified) quotations in the text of the legal case and mark the text accordingly, may verify the source of a quotation in the text of the legal case, mav determine a depth of treatment of a cited legal case (i.e., the significance of the cited legal case based on some predetermined criteria), may determine the negative treatment of the legal case, and may assign subject matter text, such as headnotes, in accordance with a predetermined classification system to citations in the legal case. Each of these processes may be performed by a software application in the memory 40, which is executed by the CPU 38. The details of each of these processes will be described below.
Once the processing has been completed by the processes 42, the computer 32 outputs a data record 44 for the particular legal case which contains information about the history of the legal case, information about the depth of treatment of citations in the legal case, information about quotations within the legal case, and information about the subject matter text (i.e., headnotes) assigned to each citation in the legal case. The data record generated by the computer 32 for each legal case may be stored in a database 33 in a server 34.
Then, when a user of one of the plurality of client computers 36 requests information about a legal case, the server 34 generates a user interface containing a variety information about the requested legal case based on the data records in the database 33, and presents the user reviewing the legal case with a variety of information about the legal case.
An example of the user interface provided to the user of each client computer is described below with reference to Figures 2A - 2D. In this manner, a user of the client coinputer may request data about a particular case, and the system in accordance with the invention provides that data to the user.
As the electronic data for the text of each written opinion for a new legal case is received by the computer 32, the legal case is processed as described above and the results of the processing is stored as a data record 44 in the database 33 of the in the server 34. The users of the client computers may then retrieve data about a particular legal case from the server 34. Thus, while the server 34 is providing data about a legal case to the one or more users of the client computers, the computer 32 may be simultaneously processing additional new legal cases and adding the information for that new legal case into the database 33 in the server 34. Now, an example of a preferred user interface and information provided to the user of a client computer will be described in more detail.
Figures 2A - 2D are screen shots illustrating examples of a preferred user interface and the information provided to and displayed by a client computer in accordance with the invention. Figure 2A shows a computer screen 50 on a client computer displaying a legal case being reviewed by the user of the particular client computer in which the user interface has a Windows format, a toolbar, pull down menus, etc. In this example, the display is of the text of a legal case called Pleasant v. Celli which was decided by a California Court of Appeals. As described above, any citation for a legal case has a well-defined format which facilitate the identification of these citations within the text of the written opinion of the legal case. In order to access more information about the displayed legal case, the user of the client computer may select the citation service, which may be referred to as KeyCiteTM, from the Services menu 51 by clicking on a "KC" button 52 or click on a symbol 54. KeyCiteTm is a trademark of a citator of the assignee of the present invention. The symbol may be a colored symbol, e.g., a flag, which gives a quick status of the legal case. A
red colored flag may warn that the legal case being reviewed may not be good law for at least some portion of the legal case, a yellow colored flag may indicate that the legal case has some negative history, as described below, or another colored symbol, such as a blue H, may indicate that the legal case has some history which is not negative. The invention, however is not limited to any particular types of symbols or colors. Once the user of the client computer has selected the citator system in some manner, the screen shown in Figure 2B may be displayed.
Figure 2B is a screen shot showing an example of a computer screen 50 which the invention may employ having a control interface portion 58, and a display portion 60. The control interface portion of the display permits the user to customize the information being displayed. For example, if a first radio button 62 is selected, then the full history of the legal case, including direct history which is negative or positive, negative indirect history, and any related references may be shown. If a second radio button 64 is selected then onlv the negative direct and indirect history may be shown. If a third radio button 66 is selected, then only the direct history of the legal case may be displayed so that any minor direct history (including references), remote direct history (such as appeals after remand) and mildly negative indirect history are not displayed.
The control portion 58 of the display also may indicate the number of cases which are considered to be the history of the legal case. The control portion may also include a fourth radio button 68 and an indication of the number of citations to the legal case being displayed. When the fourth radio button is selected, a list of other documents is displayed.
In the example shown in Figure 2B, the full history of the Pleasant v.
Celli case is indicated. As shown, the various types of history, such as the direct history and the negative indirect history are displayed in the display portion and are separated from one another by headings. For each piece of history, a short description of the history or tag, such as "opinion vacated by", "disapproved of by", or "disagreed with by" may indicate the relationship between the cases listed and the base case. In this example, an earlier decision of the same court was vacated by the Pleasant case. (Appendix shows other exemplary interfaces that may be used in conjunction with the embodiments described via Figure 2B and/or elsewhere in this description. ) Now, the citations to the legal case will be described with reference to Figure 2C.
Figure 2C is an example of a screen shot showing the computer screen 50 having the control interface portion 58, and the display portion 60. This screen displays the legal cases which have cited the legal case currently being reviewed (i.e., Pleasant v. Celli in the example). In this screen shot, the fourth radio button 68 is selected. Thus, the control portion may also have a button 70 which permits the user of the system to limit the types of citations displayed, as described below with reference to Figure 2D. The display portion 60 may also display a quotation mark symbol 72 and a depth of treatment symbol 74, which are associated with the citations for the legal case, etc. which cite to the legal case of interest. The quotation symbol 72 indicates that the cited legal case directly quotes from the case of interest (i.e., in the exainple Lubner v.
City of Los Angeles contains a quotation from Pleasant v. Celli). A mP+h-a f-r .8 identifying quotations and verifying the source of the quotations in accordance with the invention will be described below. The depth of treatment symbol 74, which may be, for example, one or more stars, where the number of stars indicate the degree to which the legal case's written opinion is treated, e.g., the amount of text in the cited case opinion which is devoted to the case of interest.
The details of the depth of treatment assignment process will be described below in more detail. Now, a screen which permits a user to the limit the citations displayed in the display portion will be described with reference to Figure 2D.
Figure 2D is an example of a screen shot showing the computer screen 50 with the control portion 58 and the display portion 60. In this screen shot, it is assumed the user of the system has selected the limit citation button 70 shown in Figure 2C. As shown, the user of the system may restrict the citations displayed based on headnotes or topics and the system will evaluate all of the citations against the selected headnotes or topics so that only the legal cases containing the selected headnotes or topics are displayed in the screen shot shown in Figure 2C. A headnote may be a few sentences/paragraph which are located at the beginning of a legal case and indicate a summary of the law of a particular portion of the legal case. The user interface of the system permits a researcher to quickly and efficiently perform verification and collocation functions on a legal case. The details of the system for generating information about the legal case and providing the verification and collocation functions in accordance with the invention will now be described.

Figure 3 is a diagram illustrating a method 100 in accordance with the invention which may be implemented on the computer system of Figure 1,for processing a legal case to generate information about the legal case which may be used for verification and collocation functions. As an aid in understanding the processes, the movement of a single legal case will be described. It should be understood, however, that a plurality of legal cases may be processed at the same time since each legal case may be at a different point in the process. An electronic version of the text of a legal case 102 , referred to herein as "WLLOAD", is fed into a citation identification process 104 (ACITE) that ideiztifies candidate citations to other legal cases and other legal material w;th;,, the text of the legal case, and marks up the text, i.e., adds a characteristic mark-up symbol to the text, so that the citations may be easily identified at a later time.
An example of a mark up symbol may be that the symbol combination " / v "
placed at the beginning and at the end of the citation. This identifies the citation for later processing.

Briefly, the citation identification process identifies candidate citations by identifying certain patterns of text in the legal document and compares these patterns to a predetermined set of reference patterns. In particular, digits may be first identified in the text. Next, the text is scanned for abbreviations proximate to the digits which correspond to known reporter abbreviations, such as "Cal."
or "P.". Once a piece of text having the particular formatting and punctuation of a candidate citation is identified, a case control database 124 is queried to determine if the identified candidate citation corresponds to a valid citation in the case control database. If the identified candidate citation matches a citation in the case control database, a second processing pass is performed. If no match is located, the identified candidate citation may be flagged for later manual review. As described above, each citation has a predetermined format. The format may be <case name>, <volume number> <abbreviation of reporter name> <series number (if more than one)> <page number in volume>. For example, in "18 Cal. App. 4th 841". "Cal. App. 4th" refers to the "California Appellate" reporter, 4th series; "18" refers to volume 18; and "841" refers to page 841, the page of volume 18 of Cal. App. 4th where the case decision begins.

As example of a citation to a legal case is Pleasant v. Celli, 18 Cal.
App. 4th 841, 22 Cal. Rptr 2d 663 (1993) in which the first name portion, i.e., Pleasaizt v. Celli, identifies the parties of the legal case; the second reporter portions, i.e., 18 Cal App. 4th 841 and 22 Cal. Rptr 2d 663, identify the reporters which themselves have a particular characteristic format as described above.

Once text corresponding to a reporter name is located, the text adjacent the reporter name is analyzed to identify the volume, series and page number of the citation as well as the year of the published opinion. Once thic inf-t;nri ;Q

found, the candidate citation is identified and marked up, as described above, to identify it as a citation. The citation identification process may use a two pass process in which first, full format citations, such as Pleasant v. Celli, 18 Cal.
App. 4th 841, 22 Cal. Rptr 2d 663 (1993), are identified, matched to the case control database, and placed within a table. In a second pass through the legal case, short form citations, such as Pleasant, may be identified based on the text of the full citations that are contained in the table. It should be noted that these short form citations cannot be identified automatically without first identifying each full citation. For doubtful short form citations which don t match the table, a tentative identification may be made.
The citation identification process 104 in Figure 3 outputs a file 106 containing the text of the legal case with any citations marked up. The file may then be fed into a quote identification process 108 (IQUOTE) in which the text of the legal case is parsed quotations in the text of the legal case are identified and marked up, and a possible source of the quotation is also identified. At this point, the marked up quotations have not been verified.
They are merely candidate quotations which must be further processed to be verified.
The details of the quote identification process will be described below with reference to Figures 4-6. The quote identification process may output a file that contains the text of the legal case in which both the citations and the quotations are marked up. At this point, the text of the legal case with the citations and quotations mark-ups may be stored in a database for later use and may also be fed into several processes. These processes may include a quote verification process 112, a depth treatment process 114, and a negative treatment process 116. As shown, these processes may execute in parallel on the same file since each process generates information about the legal case which is separate and independent from that generated by the other processes. Each of their processes will be described in more detail below with reference to Figure 7, Figure 9, and Figure 8, respectively.
In general, the quote verification process 112 verifies that the candidate quotations identified by the quote identification process 108 are in fact from the source (i.e., the citing case) by comparing the candidate quotatinn in thP
niterl case to the quotation in the citing case. The process then generates a data record 118 containing information about the verified quotation. The depth treatment process 114 uses information generated by the system, including the verified quotations to generate depth treatment information, such ,as the number of occurrences of a citation and the characteristics of the citation based on its position (e.g., whether it is free standing, at the head of a string or in the interior of a string). The process then generates a data record 120 containing information about the depth of treatment information that is applied to each citation in the case of interest. The negative treatment process 116 generates information about any negative treatment the case of interest has received by any of the citing cases and, in step 122, a database 124 containing information about each legal case being processed is updated manually to reflect the negative treatment. The data records 118, 120 from the quotation verification and depth treatment processes, respectively, may be combined together by a grouper process 126 along with a headnote assignment data record 128 (HNRESULT), as described below, to generate a single data record containing the depth treatment information, the quotation information, and the headnote assignment information, about the legal case being processed. This single data record may then be used to generate the information displayed on a computer screen to the user as shown in Figures 2A- 2D.
The data record 118 containing the information about the verified quotations in the legal case also may be fed into a citation loci identification process 130 which attempts to identify the supporting text surrounding quotations and citations in the legal case to generate a citation loci data record 132. The citation loci data record may then be input into a subject matter assignment and thresholding process 134 which matches the words and phrases in the quotations to one or more headnotes or topics and then determines, based on a threshold value, which headnotes are selected, as described below with reference to Figure 10. The subject matter assigmnent and thresholding process 134 outputs the data record 128 (HNRESULT) containing the selected subject matter text, such as headnotes, which is fed into the grouper 126, as described above. Thus, the svstem in accordance with the invention autom generates information about a legal case and then provides that information, using a graphical user interface, to a person using the system when requested.
The user may quickly and efficiently locate various information, such as citation information, depth of treatment information, negative treatment information and subject matter text, such as a headnote, about the legal case from a single source.
More details about the system will now be described with reference to Figure 4.
Figure 4 is a diagram illustrating more details of the quote identification process 108, the quote verification process 112, the depth treatment process 114, the negative treatment process 116, the citation loci identification process and the subject matter assignment and thresholding process 134 of Figure 3. As shown, the outputs from each of these processes are fed into a system information database 33, as described above.
The quote identification process 108 uses the file containing the text of the legal case with marked up citations to identify and mark-up quotations as described above. The text the legal case contains unverified quotations while the file 144 containing the verified quotations is stored in the database 33. The output of the quote identification process is a plurality of data records in which each data record has an identified quotation and a possible source of the quotation. The output of the quote identification process may be combined with the file containing the text of the legal case and the marked up citations to produce a file with marked up citations and quotations 110 which is used as an input to the depth of treatment process 114, the negative treatment process 116, the loci identification process 130 and the subject matter assignment and thresholding process 134. During the quote identification process 108, as described below in more detail with reference to Figures 5 and 6, several processes are performed. First, candidate quotations in the text file are identified by scanning the text to identify symbols, e.g., quotation marks, which indicate the beginning or end of a quotation. Next, the beginning and end of the identified quotations are marked up with a quote identifier symbol, such as "0/oq". Finally, a possible source of the quotations, such as the legal case or other legal material from which the quotations originate is tentatively identified.
The source of the quotation is then verified during the quote verification process 112 as described below. The output of the quote identification process 108 may include a Qdata file 140 which contains information about each quotation that is later verified against the probable source of the quotations and a Qtxt file which contains the actual text of the quotations.
The Qdata and Qtxt files 140, 142 are then fed into the quote verification process 112 which uses an electronic database of legal cases, already available, to find and verify the possible source of each quotation found by the quotation identification process. For each quotation, the possible source of the quotation is retrieved. Next, the quotation identified by the quotation identification process is matched against the text of the possible source to locate text in the source corresponding to the quotation. This verifies the source as the origin of the quotation. For each quotation with a verified source, a data record 144 containing the verified quotations for a legal case is stored in the database 33.
Then, when a legal case containing verified quotations is displayed as a citation to a legal case, the citation will contain a quotation symbol, as described above, indicating that the legal case has a verified quotation. The depth treatment process will now be described.
The depth treatment process 114 may receive the file 110 containing the legal case text with the marked up citations and quotations and, in step 146, the depth treatment process performs several processes in order to determine the significance of the citation based on a set of predetermined criteria that are related in some ways to significance. These criteria may be the number of times that the citation appeared in the legal case, the type of the citation, and the association of a verified quotation with the citation. First, the depth treatment process reads through the file 110 and identifies citations which have been marked up previously by the citation identification process. For each identified citation, the type of the citation is determined to be either an ordinary citation, a middle of a string citation, or the head of a string citation. An ordinary citation is a typical citation which usually appears within a legal case and that does not have other citations adjacent to it. A middle of a string (interior) citation is a citation that appears in the middle or at the end of a string citation in which a series of legal documents are cited together in a sentence or paraaranh. An interior citation is usually perceived by users as contributing less to the depth with which the cited case is discussed. The head of string citation is a citation that appears at the beginning of a string citation and is perceived by users as contributing more to the depth since it is conventional to place the most pertinent citation at the head of a string citation. The depth of treatment process may also identify the page number of the legal case for all available pagination on which the citation appears so that a depth record is written as many times as page breaks occur in the legal case.
The information about each citation in a legal case, such as the total number of times that the citation appears in the legal case document, the types of each of these citations, and the page number for each citation occurrence is output in a file 148 which is stored in the database 33. This information, in addition to any verified quotations associated with any of the occurrences of the citation, may be used to generate both the "citations to the case" section described above and the depth of treatment symbols. The technique for generating the depth of treatment symbols will be described in more detail below.
The negative treatment process 116 may include an automatic processing step 150 and a manual verification step 152 which generate a list of the negative history (i.e., other written opinions from other legal case which disagree with or overrule the current legal case) for the legal case. During the automatic processing step 150, the file containing the legal text with the marked up citations and quotations is scanned in order to identify stems of certain words, such as "overrule", "recede", "disapprove", or "distinguish", which may indicate negative treatment. As an illustration, the process to identify the root of the word "overrule" in the text of the legal case is described. When an instance of the root "overrule" is identified, a set of heuristic rules, as described below, are applied to make a determination about whether the sentence containing the identified root is actually an overruling, as described below with reference to Figure 8. Then, during the manual verification process 152, a human operator of the system verifies the results of the automatic process and the actual verified overrulings are added to the case control database 124. The human o-perator mav also identify other negative history about the legal case which cannot be easily identified automatically, as described below. The negative treatment process aids a human operator in rapidly identifying overrulings. These overrulings are negative history which affect the authority of the reasoning of the legal case.
The loci identification process 130 uses the file containing the legal case text with marked up citations and quotations and a file 144 containing the verified quotations, identifies any marked up citations, and applies a set of heuristic rules, as described below, to identify and select a portion of text from around each citation which may indicate the text supported by the citation. If a citation appears multiple times in a legal case, the surrounding text for each of the occurrences of the citation is combined. In addition, if the quote verification process, as described above, has verified any quotation associated with that citation, the text of that verified quotation is also combined with the other text surrounding the citation. All of the identified text that surrounds each citation may then be used to determine one or more headnotes or subject matter headings which may be applicable to the citation. The subject matter heading classifies the citation based on a predetermined number of subject matter areas, such as Intellectual Property or Patents. A process 154 (Headqf) reads all of the text identified adjacent to a given citation and generates a natural language search query to search an existing database for matches to the identified text, as described below. The natural language query process is generally described in U.S. Patent Nos. 5,265,065 and 5,418,948, which are assigned to the same assignee as the present application and are incorporated herein by reference.
The Headqf process 154 generates a file 156 containing the natural language queries.
Using the natural language queries, a subject matter assignment process step runs the natural language queries against a headnotes database to identify subject matter headings, such as headnotes, which possibly match the text surrounding the citation. For each matched subject matter heading, the query also generates a belief score value indicating how close the subject matter heading match was to the text. A predetermined number of the most closely relevant subject matter headings and their belief scores are provided to a thresholding process step 160.

The thresholding step uses the subject matter headings identified and performs various calculations which take into account the rank of the subject matter headings, the belief score of the subject matter headings and the number of citations which reference that subject matter heading. After the calculations are performed, a predetermined number of top headnote hits and a flag for each headnote indicating if the headnote passed the thresholding are stored in the database 33 with a link to the citation. These subject matter headings permit citations in the legal case to be classified by and searched for using these subject matter headings, as described above with reference to Figure 2D. Now, the quote identification process will be described in more detail.
Figures 5 and 6 are diagram illustrating more details about the quote identification process 108 in accordance with the invention. The quote identification process 108 may include a lexical scanner process 170, a paragraph buffer 172 and a main loop process 174 to receive the text of the legal case and automatically generate a file containing each quotation identified and a possible source for each quotation. The lexical scanner 170 splits documents into logical fragments, known as tokens, and these tokens are then used by the main loop process 174 to identify quotations. The tokens which are identified by the lexical scanner may include capitalized words, punctuation marks that might end a sentence, white space such as one or more spaces, case names, footnote references, star of quote markers and end of quote markers. The lexical scanner process used may be based on any of a number of commercially available software applications, such as, for example, an application known as FLEX, available from Sun Microsystems Inc, Mountain View, CA. The lexical scanner accepts grammar specifying patterns and identifies an action when a specific pattern is located. In particular, the lexical scanner, in accordance, with the invention may divide a legal case into the certain types of paragraphs based on a predetennined set of criteria, such as a set of rules: 1) a paragraph which might contain a quotation; 2) paragraphs which are indented block quotations; 3) paragraphs which contain important information about the document, such as the star of the document, the document's serial number or the end of the document;
and 4) paragraphs which are of no interest to the quotation identification process, such as headnotes, headings and the like. A variety of different criteria and rules may be used to identify these paragraphs.
An example of a set of rules which may be used by the invention will now be described. The set may include a rule that identifies paragraphs which do not contain any quotations and stores them in the paragraph buffers where they are overwritten by the next paragraph, and a rule for paragraphs with possible quotations in which the lexical scanner returns a tag to the main loop indicating that the paragraph is either a normal text paragraph, an indented block quotation paragraph, or that the text of the quotation appears in a footnote.
Once the type of the paragraph is determined, the lexical scanner processes the text within the paragraph in the same manner to identify any tokens in each paragraph.
Within each paragraph, the lexical scanner may identify the following tokens: a capitalized word, a non-capitalized word, a numeric character string, an abbreviation, a proper name (i.e., "Mr. Smith"), a case citation, a section reference (i.e., "Section 150"), a case name (i.e., Roe v. Wade), an embedded reference, any end of the sentence punctuation, any other punctuation characters, a colon, semicolon or comma followed by a space, single or multiple white space characters, a start of a quotation, an end of a quotation, the number of a footnote, open and close parentheses, open and close brackets, open and close curly braces, a mark-up for a citation, and a mark-up for an embedded reference.
More details about the operation and modification of the FLEX software application is available from the Sun Microsystems Inc. Reference Manual, Programmer's Overview Utilities and Libraries, Chapter 9, pp, 203 - 226, which is incorporated herein by reference.
The paragraph buffers 172 are where the tokens about the paragraph most recently scanned by the lexical scanner are stored before being processed by the main loop 174 and then possibly written out into an output file if a quotation is identified in the paragraph. The main loop 174 may decide what action to take for each token returned by the lexical scanner, manage the paragraph buffers, and decide when to discard data for a previous paragraph from the paragraph buffer, link several physical paragraphs together into a virtual paraaranh fnr quotations which run over several physical paragraphs, determine where the breaks between sentences occur within a paragraph, and decide when to process a virtual paragraph by a set of heuristic rules, as described below.
Figure 6 is a flowchart of the quotation identification process 108 in accordance with the invention. In step 180, the legal case text is scanned paragraph by paragraph and for each paragraph, the sentences and tokens in the paragraph are identified. In the step 182, a set of heuristic rules is applied to each token in a paragraph to determine if a quotation had been identified. One of the most important functions of the lexical scanner and the quotation identification process is to identify the beginning and end of a quotation.
This is difficult since each writer may use a slightly different format for the beginning and ending of a quotation. Therefore, several rules are needed to identify the beginning and ending of a quotation. An example of a set of heuristic rules that may be applied to accomplish such identification will now be described. These rules may use the lexical scanner to identify a conventional start quotation punctuation symbol, such as "or", to identify a conventional end of quotation delimiter, such as "or", or to identify a start/end of quotation symbol in a longer string of characters. For example, a rule may attempt to identify strings in which the conventional end of quotation symbol is embedded within a sentence. For each of these rules, the characters surrounding the token may be checked to ensure that the token is in fact a star of end of the quotation.
Once the rules have been applied to each token in a paragraph, the quotation identification process determines if another paragraph exists in step 184 and loop to step 180 to process a new paragraph. Once all of the paragraphs have been analyzed, in step 186, the process output the data record containing the identified quotations and the possible source of those quotations. Now, the quotation verification process will be described.
Figure 7 is a flowchart illustrating the method 112 for verifying a quotation in accordance with the invention. At step 200, the quote verification process reads in the text strings identified as quotations by the quote identification process 108 and identifies separators, when present, from a predetermined set of separators in the text strings. The separators mav include ellipses, bracketed expressions, and stop phrases. The stop phrases include a variety of legal phrases and others which do not help identify the source of a quotation, for example, "citation(s) omitted", "sic", "emphasis provided" and the like. When present, the separators are used to parse the text string into segments in which each segment includes the works that occur between a pair of separators. In step 202, the text string is parsed to determine its length since the minimum verifiable quote length may be, for example, six non-stop words, where stop words are non-content bearing words such as articles and prepositions. The text string is also parsed to collapse any words which contain apostrophes or other punctuation marks (e.g., "T]hen"). The parsed quotation text string falls into one of two distinct categories: (1) a text string with a single segment, or (2) a text string with multiple segments. Thus, in step 204, the system determines if the text string has a single seginent. If the text string has a single segment, then in step 205, the collection normalized inverse document frequency (IDF) for each term (word) in the single segment of the text string is determined. A document frequency value indicates the frequency of a particular term in a typical document collection, while IDF is equal to the reciprocal of document frequency (i.e., 1/doc freq), or in other words, the rarity of a term in a document collection. In a preferred embodiment, the collection normalized inverse document frequency (IDF) may be calculated, if the number of occurrences of a word is greater than zero, as:

logl Collection _ Docs ~
lDoc Occurences idf _ score =
log(Collection - Docs) where Doc Occurrences is the number of documents in which the given tenn is present and Collection Docs is the total number of documents in the collection.
The IDF is used for purposes of determining good terms for matching, since a rare word is more likely to be distinct and provide a good indication that the quotation is from the candidate source.
Once the IDF has been calculated for each term, a selected number of the terms (i.e., six) with the highest IDF values below a selected threshold may be ranked by IDF value (step 206) and placed into a "template" (i.e., storage array) (step 207) which indicates the position of each term in the text string. Any terms with an unusually high IDF value (e.g., greater than 0.80) are not used, since such infrequently occurring terms are often misspelled words. If there are several terms with the same IDF value, then the alphanumeric ordering of the terms may be used as a secondary key for ranking the terms for the template.
Should there still exist equivalent terms (e.g., terms with the same IDF
values and alphanumeric spellings) then the position of the tenns in the text string may be used as a third key for ranking the terms in the template. The template may then be compared to the quotation from the candidate source document to determine if an exact match, based on the positions of the high IDF terms, occurs in step 208. If an exact match occurs, then in step 210, the verified quotation is output and fed into the database as described above. In the event that an exact match does not occur in step 212, a certification match failure message is generated and the quotation is not stored in the database.
In step 204, if the text string has multiple segments (i.e., it contains one or more separator terms in the text string, such as "The roof fell in...
crashing down ), the process goes to step 214 in which the IDF for each term within each required segment is determine. Then, a selected number of terms (e.g., four) within each segment, with the highest IDF values below the threshold, are ranked by IDF (step 215) and placed into a template (step 216) in order to determine the position of the terms in the segment for matching purposes (step 208). For a text string with more than four seginents, the first two and last two segments may be used to match against the candidate source document (step 217-218). In this manner, the quotations identified by the automatic quote identification process are automatically verified and any verified quotations are identified by a quotation symbol, as described above. Now, the negative treatment process in accordance with the invention will be described.
Figure 8 is a diagram illustrating a method 220 for determining the negative treatment of a legal case in accordance with the invention. The file containing the text of the legal case with the marked up quotations and citations is input into the automatic negative treatment process 150. The automatic negative treatment process may 1) identify occurrences of the word stem "overrule" in the legal case; 2) determine the proximity of the stem to a citation;
and 3) exclude any bad legal cases. Prior to identifying the stem "overrule", the case control database 124 may be checked and the automatic processing stopped if any history already exists for the legal case. To identify the occurrences of the stem "overrule", the text of the legal case is are scanned and the verb tense of any occurrences of the stem is determined. The verb tense of the stem indicates whether the overruling refers to the current case overruling a previous case or some other type of overruling. A set of heuristic rules may look for a particular verb tense and then take an action based on the verb tense.
An example of the set of the rules used will now be described, but the invention is not limited to any particular set of rules. For example, one rule may locate "overrule" or overrules" in a sentence and then scans backwards for up to four words. If "not" or never" is located, then the sentence is discarded since it does not refer to an actual overruling. If "we" is found, then the sentence is added to the list of possible overruling which are reviewed by a human being.
If none of the phrases is located during the backwards scan, the sentence is also added to the list.

Another rule may locate "overrule" and then scans backwards for up to five words to attempt to locate non-case words which would indicate that something other than the legal case is being overruled so that the sentence is not added to the list. A few examples of these non-case words include "request", "motion", "objection", "claim", and "verdict". If the rule locates "point" or "points", then the sentence may be scanned forward to the end of the sentence and if "case", "cases" or "supra" is located, then the status of the sentence is unknown and it is passed on to the human reviewer.
Another rule may locate "overrule" and scan backwards or forwards, and reject or accepts possible overrulings based on the other words within close proximity to the word "overrule" since these additional words will provide the context in which the word "overrule" is being used. For example, once "overrule" is located, four words before the word may be scanned and the following actions are taken when the following words are located: 1) if "we"
is located, and the word prior to "we" is "that", the "we" is ignored (discussion about overruling only), but if no word "that" is located, then the sentence is a possible overruling; 2) if the verb is modified by a word that indicates uncertainty, such as "rather", "might", etc... the sentence is rejected since the court may be only indicating it might overrule the case; 3) if any word indicates a discussion of an overruling, then the sentence is rejected; 4) if a word indicates that another person did the overruling, then the sentence is rejected; and 5) if "will" or "should" are located, the process looks back five words for a positive word in order to accept the sentence. There may also be a similar set of rules for the verb "overrules", the infinitive form of the verb and the passive voice of the verb.
Another set of rules may look for various words which indicate a discussion of whether to overrule, whether a court has the authority to overrule or a past overruling since these sentences are rejected as not containing an actual overruling. Another set of rules may reject sentences which indicate that someone else is doing the overruling (i.e., another court in the past). Still another rules may look for "overruling" and then determine if the sentence is rejected or accepted based on the sentences surrounding the word, as described above.
There are also other rules which look for particular features of a sentence independent of the verb "overrule". For example, if the phrase "COURT:" is located at the beginriing of a sentence, which indicates a direct quotation from the judge, the sentence may be accepted. If the word "Congress" is located at the beginning of a sentence, which may indicate that a Congressional statute is being overruled or that Congress itself is overruling a case, the sentence may be rejected. If the word "circulated" is found in a sentence near the word "overrule", the sentence may be accepted to catch unusual language, such as "because the decision overrules an opinion of this court, it was circulated to all active judges..." which could not be automatically identified in some other manner. Another rule may look for "overrule" within a quoted string and reject the sentence since it is usually an overruling by another court of a case which is being quoted by the current court.

In addition to the word stem "overrule", other synonyms may be searched for and identified. For example, the rules may also detect the word stem "abrogat" for California cases which use the term "abrogated" and the phrase "receded from" for Florida cases since these terms are used to indicate an overruling in each respective state. These verb tense rules may be applied in any order and the invention is not limited to any particular set of rules or any particular order of execution of the rules.
The output of the set of verb tense rules from the automatic negative treatment process is a list of possible overrulings. Then, a proximity rule is applied to each possible overruling to determine if the overruling applies to a particular legal case. For example, the proximity rule may eliminate a possible overruling if the sentence containing the stem does not contain a citation, if the previous or next sentence does not contain a citation or the sentence with the stem "overrul" does not contain a word or phrase used to refer to a case such as "case", "opinion", "holding", "precedent", their plurals or "progeny" or "v.", "ex rel", "ex parte" or "supra". Any sentences which contains the stem "overrul"
and satisfies the proximity rules are added to a suggested list 222 of overruling in the legal case. These suggested overrulings are then reviewed and checked during the manual review process step 152 by a human being. The human being, during the manual review process, also determines the case which is overruled and that data is entered into the case control database 124 which tracks legal cases within the legal cases database.
In accordance with another aspect of this negative treatment process, the automatic process may also identify relationships other than overruled, such as "disting" for "distinguished" or "apposite" in a legal case, by extending the method to the language that characterizes those other relationships. In summary, the negative treatment process aids the human reviewer in determining possible overruling in the legal cases by automatically determining possible locations of overruling so that the amount of text that has to be actually reviewed by the human being is significantly reduced. Thus, the negative treatinent process increases the speed with which overruling in a legal case may be identified and added into the negative history of the legal case. Now, the depth treatment process will be described in more detail.
Figure 9 is a flow chart of the depth treatment process 114 in accordance with the invention in which a depth treatment symbol is assigned to each citation within a legal case so that a person using the system may quickly determine the amount of text devoted to discussing a particular citation. This information may be utilized as one indication of the relevance of the citation since a court will devote more text and discussion to a highly relevant citation.
At step 230, the file with the text of the legal case and the marked up citations and quotations, as described above, is received by the depth treatment process. At step 232, the depth treatment process identifies a citation in the legal case, and then in step 234, the type of citation is determined. Each citation in the legal case may be 1) a citation at the head of a string citation; 2) a citation without other accompanying citations; 3) a citation within the interior of a string citation; or 4) a pro forma history citation (i.e., a citation that, in the context of the document, are cited solely as a ancillary historical references for one of the cases cited in its own right). Each of these types of citations has a different amount of significance. For example, a lone citation or a citation at the head of a string citation tends to be more significant than a citation in the middle of the string.
The depth treatment process next determines if there are any additional citations in the legal case in step 236 and loops back to step 232 to process the next citation in the legal case. Once all of the citations in the legal case have been identified and sorted into one of the types described above, they are fed into the grouper process 126 as shown in Figure 3. After the grouper process, in step 238, the depth treatment process determines, for each different citation, the total number of each type of citation in the legal case. For example for a citation to Pleasant v. Celli, there may be a total of five cites in the legal case of which three are at the head of a string citation and two are within the interior of a string citation. This information about each citation in the legal case and any data about a verified quotation which is associated with a particular citation are used in step 240 to determine the depth symbol which will be assigned to the particular citation. Once the depth symbols have been assigned for each citation, the depth treatment process has been completed.
One example of a technique for assigning a depth symbol to a particular citation will now be described, but the invention is not limited to any particular technique for assigning the depth symbols. In addition, the invention is not limited to any particular type of depth symbol. In this example, a citation in the legal case with one to three occurrences of any type of citation (i.e., the citation standing along, the citation is the head of the string citation or the citation is in the middle of a string citation) in the legal case is assigned two stars (e.g., **), a citation in the legal case with four to eight occurrences of any type of citation is assigned three stars (e.g., ***), and a citation with nine or more occurrences of any type of citation is assigned four stars (e.g., ****). To fiu-ther refine these assignments, a citation with three occurrences of any type of citation and a verified quotation associated with the citation is assigned three stars( e.g., ***) while if a citation has only internal string citation types, one star is deducted from that citation. Thus, the depth symbol for a particular citation in the legal case is automatically assigned by the system in accordance with the invention.
The depth symbols help a user of the system more quickly determine which citations are probably more relevant. Now, the subject matter text assignment process in accordance with the invention will be described.
Figure 10 is a flowchart illustrating a method 250 in accordance with the invention for assigning a piece of text nom the cited case to the citation in the legal case. In the example described below, the text of a headnote in the cited case is assigned to the citation, but the text assignment process in accordance with the invention may be utilized with a plurality of different pieces of text in the cited cases. In step 252, a citation locus (i.e., a region of text likely to correspond to the text supported by the citation) for each citation is assigned according to the a set of rules which are now described.
To identify the citation locus, several text-parsing rules may be used, some of which are stronger than others, but which collectively would be highly likely to identify the text. To allow for varying effectiveness of the different rules, the extracted text may be divided into three groups, "high", "medium"
and "low", according to the likelihood that the extracted text was part of the correct citation locus. These rules may include:

Category Text High 1. any non-citation material contained in the sentence that includes the base citation.
2. all of the first non-citation sentence preceding the base citation within the same paragraph.
3. if there is no type 2 sentence, then all of the first non-citation sentence following the citation within the same paragraph.
4. all text that can be identified as a quotation form the cited case.
Medium 5. all sentences occurring between the citation next preceding (but not contiguous to) the base citation and a type 2 sentence.
6. all sentences occurring between the citation next following (but not contiguous to) the base citation and a type 3 sentence.
7. if there is not type 2 or type 3 sentences, and theparagraph containing the base citation ends with a colon or comma, the whole of the paragraph next following the paragraph containing the base citation 8. if there is not type 2 or type 3 sentences and no type 6 paragraph, the whole of the paragraph next preceding the paragraph containing the base citation 9. if any of the text areas identified by any rule includes a headnote reference marker, include the headnote and its keyline Low 10. the whole of the paragraph containing the base citation General 11. if the citation occurs in a footnote, it is treated as if it occurred at both the footnote location and the location of the footnote marker Not Posted 12. citations occurring only in the subsequent history of another citation Then, in step 254, the terms in the citation loci are weighted according to the rule that was used to identify them, with a high, medium or low matching corresponding to weights of 2.0, 1.0 and 0.5, respectively. Different types of documents, such as legal cases or law review articles, may require a different set of rules to determine the weights. Once the pieces of text have been identified and assigned a belief value, in step 256, the identified pieces of text are matched against pieces of text which may be within the cited document. In one example, the pieces of text within the cited document may be headnotes, but the invention is not limited to any particular type of text which the identified pieces of text are matched against. The matching may be done using natural language query as described in previously referenced U.S. Patent Nos. 5,265,065 and 5,418,948 which are owned by the assignee of this application and are incorporated herein by reference. The results of the search is a list of possible pieces of text from the cited case, such as a headnote, which may be assigned to the citation in the legal case and a belief score for each possible piece of text.
Next, in step 258, the one or more pieces of text that are going to be assigned to the citation are selected though a thresholding process. The thresholding process ranks the pieces of text for each citation based on the belief score. The piece of text may be posted to the database whenever the following quantity equals or exceeds 0.5:

i+e- 0o +,81 belief - 0.4 +,82In( freq) +,(33In(belief - lag2 + 0.0001 The beta values for this equation are as follows:

Document Rank (3o R1 R2 03 non-ALR 1 4.0451 3.1975 0.8477 .9033 non-ALR 2 0.5573 9.0220 1.0348 0.6743 non-ALR 3 -2.0421 11.2619 0.8949 0.2954 ALR 1 -1.4256 50.4929 0.3488 0.0000 ALR 2 -2.8199 65.6148 0.6207 0.0000 ALR 3 -2.3701 40.8479 1.2445 0.0000 ALR 4 -3.3474 60.8075 1.7349 0.0000 ALR 5 -3.0805 55.6003 1.3188 0.0000 where the columns marked "ALR" contain variables for ALR articles, as described above, which have a higher belief score than the non-ALR documents.
The columns labeled "non-ALR" contain variables for non-ALR documents.
In the equation, Freq is the total citation frequency for the citation pair, and lag2 is the belief score of the second following candidate when the candidates are sorted by belief score in descending order (or 0.4 if there is no such candidate). Once the thresholding has been completed and the one or more pieces of text has been assigned to each citation in the legal case, one or more pieces of text are stored in the database in step 260 as described above so that it may be retrieved for a user when requested.
hi summary, the subject matter assignment process automatically generates one or more pieces of text for a citation in the legal case based on pieces of text in the cited case such as a headnote. The process first automatically identifies supporting text in the legal case and assigns a belief value to the supporting text, matches all of the piece of text against pieces of text in the cited cases, and then automatically assigns a piece of text, such as a headnote, from the cited case to the particular citation. These subject matter assignments permit a citation to the legal case to be sorted or selected by the subject matters which helps during the collocation process.
Thus, the machine implemented system in accordance with the invention automatically processes a document, such as a legal case, and generates information about the document which may provide the user of the system with useful information about the contents of the document. In a conventional system, on the other hand most of this information about the document would be generated by a human being reading the document and making notes about the document which is a slow, expensive, error-prone process. For a legal case, the system may automatically generate information about the negative history the legal case, about the depth treatment of a citation by the legal case, about the quotation in the legal case which are verified as originating from a particular source, and about one or more headnote which are assigned to a particular citation in the legal case. Thus, the operator of the system may rapidly generate this information about the legal case and a user of the system may quickly locate this information since it is all readily accessible from a graphical user interface.

Appendix Slide 1 , _ _ .. - _. ~.'_ : . ~ ..~ _ . ... . .... ~u=:~dfft , ;....

Graphical ~..~

KeyCite Slide 2 'I

.. . .._ _ ..... . .. .. ..........:...~_ _ .. . _. . ..:_ .. ~F:.DL't =
Visual display of KeyCite direct history for cases = Designed to make cases direct history easier to understand and use = Majority of direct history displays not difficult to understand now, however:
- Customers still prefer the graphical display - Customers who said that they preferred the textual display were able to get more questions correct when they used Graphical KeyCite = Will play large role in Academic market - instructors will use to teach direct history Slide 3 ~

Some Motivating Problems Recog n ized by Inventor(s) Slide 4 Some case Histories in text format can be -challenging to follow...
: ~-- -tt Full Screen ~ ......&p SrCir l~&- '.,... . F . . ~ -...w. ~ .... .... . 384 U.S. 436 86 S.CC 1602 . . .. .. Tt10M5am ryIJ5t U,S.Niz, 1966.
Jun i3, 1966 ._............
-........_...M....~......... , _........._......... _.._ ....
...................... ....... =,._....... .................. .... .......
..................... ...-.......
Find Citation:
History G,Some negative history but not Ke)+{, (Showing 104 documents) overruled *Historq Citing References Direct History Monitor With KevCite Alert i People v. Vignera, 21 A.D.2d 752, 252 N,Y.S.2d 19 (N,Y,A.D, 2 Dept, May 04, 1964) FulhText Document a Case 0utline Motion Granted by 2 People v, Vignera, 14 N,Y,2d 951, 1964 WL 18481 (N,Y, ]ul 10, 1964) (TABLE) Petitions. Briefs & Fifinos AND Motion Granted by RBSU)tSPit.iS'- About 3 People v, Vignera, 14 N,Y,2d 981, 1964 WL 18577 (N,Y, Oct 01, 1964) (TABLE) ALR
1 Comment Note Necessrtv of rnforminq AND 3udgment Affirmed by suspect af nqhts under pnvtlege aaamst selt 4 peo Ie v. Vi nera, 15 N,Y,2d 970, 207 N,E,2d S27, 259 N,Y,S,2d 857 (N,Y, Apr 15, 1965) prtor ta po6ce interroaatiorr p g ) ALRao 1054 Remittitur Amended by ALR ~ W I! Ha People v, Vignera, 16 N,Y,2d 619, 1965 WL 18822 (N.Y. May 20, 1965) (TABLE) 2, t~hat constitutes assertiorLof right to' AND Remittitur Amended by counsel folle+afing Mirande wamings-state H 6 People v. Vignera, 16 N,Y.2d 614, 209 N.E.2d 110, 261 N.Y,S,2d 65 (N,Y. May 20, 1965) cases 83 ALR4TN 443 AND CeYt10r8ri Granted by .,. ...=. _..,.........~. _.....,_=.=_ .~ ...
H 7 Vignera v. New York, 382 U.S. 925, 86 S.Ct, 320, 15 L,Ed,2d 339 (U,S,N,Y, Nov 22, 1965) AmJur,Zd (NO, 397, MISC) 3, Evidence Confessions. Othgr Matters Affecting AND 30d ment Reversed b Admissihilrtvc Canstitutional Riahts, y~ keyCited Citationc generally: Fi h A ndmen Ri ht : Mirand N+arninas MiCanda v, Arizonar 384 U.S. 436, 10 Ohio Misc, 9, 86 S,Ct, 1662, 16 L,Ec{,2d 694, 10 ~ - ~ A.L,R.3d 974 (U.S,Artz, Jun 13, 1966) (N0. 759, 760, 761, 584) -of Authorities Rehearing Denied by ~ '' tl H 9 California v, Stewart, 385 U.S. 890, 87 S,Ct, 11, 17 L,Ed,2d 121 (U6 S.Ariz. Oct 10, 1966) West Kev Numhers (N0, 584, OCT. TERM 1965) ... a... ..,_.._..-. ..,_ ,.:__ ......_.:. _ _ . .. W. ...r., ..., r Slide 5 KeyCite case appearing more than once in history result can be confusingi <~~e#~~ ~p :y ~_ ,, - -- ----- } ..
A 8t S.CC, 15Us. : ~.. _..~]4G ..._ ..._ .. . ..u~..... .. .-. ...384 U ~.
4'jFi=86 S.Ck.16(t2 '~ ' P U.S.~,ft. 1966. vaexc .fun 1.3, 1?86 F[nd uFation: ~ ~.~ ~ ~.....~. ~ ._ ~ .
ki 'z uignara rs. New York, 382 U.S. 925, $Er S<Ot. 320, 15 t.Ed.2d 339 (U.S,N.Y. Nott 22,1965) Some negatixe hi<tory but riot: (NO. 397, tAiSC) ovarnflad MNisC iy NrA Adgment Res+e:xed bg+
Ehf ,P.a.~i~= > f'~"'-a +~~ ~Ez'~ff,~1tE>d ~it.'~~i0rt: . ', .., , . , . . ' ..
Fkonftar tziiih t'r.vGire ptert tv3iranda V.Arizotlar 3S4ll.S, 4336, 10 Ohio Aqisc, 9, 56 S.Ct, 1602, 16 L,Ed.2d 694, 10 A.i..R.3d 974 (U.SAr=iz. .iun 1$, 1966) (NQ< 759, 760, 761, 584) ~i~ L~ 3S~ +rnrmf?!t~ Rai"rt~9 Dert: v ~ OaS~s Ua ;i~nf~
~2 Califorrfia v. Steurart> 3$4- U.S8890, 87 S.Ct. 11, 17 L.l:d,2d 121 (U.S.firiz. Oct 10, 1966) ~~Eit ons tlrir Es ~ f tin w~ (NO. 564, OCT. TEPM 1965) .....
ALR :. .r__ _ _..~. _..
om naffr ~.. 4 rit mf rcri ~ nt~ ~' J-1 Peoplrs v. Vtgrtate, 15 M "F,2d 970, 227 N.r;,2d 527, 259 N.Y.S,2d 857 (N.:'. Ai'st' 15, 1965) i:~~r~ ~ f rratl , f r?r1~r , r a!t?~~ Minci ~iF a2,~rYftttur Ammde# by 10, AM3a 1054 ~11 People v. Idignsra, 18 N.Y.26 752, 1P66 Ndl. 20M (11Y. Sep 22, 1966) (TABlE) .. ..,.m._. y ...,...~.,,- ~..~ ....... =
AM 1t?miL=0tur Amanded by a ~tLR ~ People r. fignera, Zt3 M.Y, d 723, 22Q tt<i .2.d $Q5, 274 N.Y. s.2d 162 (N.S , Sep 22, 1966) cr~rtins~rl Pui'o~irab t't3rar~~t~ s~~a~n~n t~~
E3 AtWH 443 h" 1 Wf;s7,trsu2r v, U, 5., 342 F.;?d 6134 (9tft C'ss,(CaI,} Mar 11, 196 s) (tY~1. 19543) Xcm..TUr.2d nz-rtiarari GranW by . ~.,..~~. , or, Cti ~r 'Ur4 fSsaun ~.i4 !"49stovar Y. U,o., 382 U.S. 924, 86 S,Ct, 81$, 15 t,.Ed.2d339 (U.S.Cal. No+r 22, 19b5) (fd4, $Or h1ISC) _ .., .- 13 KeyOited Citatirn:
t-q s r ;crlh,LOe~ hiirandu v. qrizano,r -~$+U<S. 436, 10 Ohio hRisc. Q; $a S,Ct< 102, 16 ln,Ed.ad 6R4, 10 w'- $ " t'IMP-kg~ ~ ~ iFebaarirrg E?errad bf Slide 6 ~ , ~7~~
~ We5Y-ato A..; J! 4 ,, r , r~,. ji, n,d, i= , t., .tF~~di. iluw ~.
1 ehle of Contents ( KevSearch More -And then there are the "gaps" ... Miranda a. Arizona ~'84 .S 436 86 SCt. 602 Z ;,u.: ... . ,...:... ... ; '.~ ._ " . ...._ .. U,S,Ariz11966, wesr . . . ... ., .,.~:.... _ :.:. ...._-~.._~..~_.. ._:_.~. ~ ..
Jun 13, 1966 , ';'-~ =~..._..~.-_....~.._ .............._..._.-._.........._ ...~........._.._......_......_......
..... .. .....
-C _ J-Find citatiqn N g C ornia v. St art, 385 U.S, 890, 87 S:Ct, 11, 17 L.Ed.2d 121 (U,S,Ariz.
Oct 10, 1966) Some negatrve history but not (N 84, OCT. ERM 1965) overruted =DHistory Citina References Monrtor With KeyCite Alert ~' 10 People v. Vign a, 15 N.Y,2d 970, 207 N.E.2d 527, 259 N.Y.S.2d 857 (N:Y, Apr 15, 1965) Full-TectQocument Remittitur An ; r7ded by 0 Case Ovtline People v. Vign a, 18 N.Y,2d 752, 1966 WL 20838 (N,Y, Sep 22, 1966) (TABLE) __ ..._ -.__.s ...._.., Petrtions. Brief5'LL Filinns RVD Remittitu Amended by ReSU(t5plUs - ~Abou H 12 r kr n!e V. Vign 18 N,Y.2d 723, 220 N,E,2d 806, 274 N.Y.S.2d 162 (N.Y. Sep 22, 1966) ALR
1 Comment Note-Necessitv of +nfc~rrnina s~gectof riahtt imder brivileoe aaainst self-incriminatron, nriorto notrce interroaation P i 12 Westover v: U. 342 t=:2d 684 (9th Cir,(Cal,) Mar 11, 1565) (NO119543) ALR3D1054 Certiorari Gra ed by ~ALR H 14 Westover v. U, 382 U.S. 924, 86 S.Ct. 318, 15 L.Ed.2d 339 (U,S,Cal.
Nov 22, 1965) ~~ What constitUtes assertioh of right to (NO. 80, MISC) cr unsel allnwina Miranda warninas-state AND Reversed cases 83 ALR4TH 443 "013 KayCited Cltatlo - _ ' -~..: ..-.--.- -= --- --- ----- -- -- ---. --- -= E Mirasida v. Ariz tta, 384 U.S. 436, 10 Ohio Misc, 9, 06 S,Ct. 1602, 16 L,Ed~2d 894, 10 A1ri Jur.2d A,L,R,3d 974 (U Anz. Jun 13, 1966) (NO. 759, 760, 761, 584) 3 Evidence Rehearing Den -~i by Canfessions othe'r Matters AfPectina , ttt, A H15 California v. Ste ,art, 385 U.S. 890, 87 S,Ct: 11, 17 LEd.2d 121 (U.S.Ariz. Oct 10, 1966) cl~rii+bility= Constirutlonat Rrghts, Generallv Fifth Amendment Wahts: Miranda: (NO5584, OCT: '=IM 1965) ]UVarnmas . ~

7able of Authar+tres 17 People v. Stewart, 62 Cal.2d 571, 400 P.2d 97, 43 Cal.Rptr. 201 (Cal. Mar 25, 1965) (NO.
West Ketr Nuin6ers. CR. 7662) ~ ~Emaihc ~I - 36 Slide 7 , Help-ne =
... and ANDs ~
I Fmd { KeyCite Directary j Table of Contents ( Ke+lSearch i More ; ~--~ ----,r Links for Miranda Y. Arizona 86 S.Ct. 1602 384 U,S. 436 86 S.Ct. 1602 Te18MSOtu Full screen Ltsz U.S,MIz, 1966. ~
Jun 13, 1966 , .._.,..._.. ._........ ......... _..._.__. .... _....... ,.......
~,.-.....m.... _...._._... ,, Fin(.l Citatloni i '+ a~.
~ ~- 19 KeyCited Citation.
G,Some negatit+e history but not Miranda v. Arrzona, 384 U5 S4436,10 Qhia Mtsc, 9, 86 S,Ct, 1602, 16 L,Ed,2d 694, 10, overruled A.L.R.3d 974 (U.B,Ariz. 3un 13, 1966) (NO, 759, 760, 761, 584)' *History Citina ReFerences Rehearing Denied by Monitor With KevCite Alert H_20 California v, SteiMart, 385 U.S. 890, 87 S,Ct.
11, 17 L,Ed,2d 121 (U.S,Ariz. Oct 10, 1966) Ful1 Text Qocumettt (NO. 584, OCT. TERM 1965) 0 Case Outline Petnions. 8riefs Fifinas 2-1 State v. Miranda, 98 Ariz, 16, 401 P.2d 721 (Ariz. Apr 22, 1965) (NO. 1394) R8sUj*~53x~u5'" A ou Certiorari Granted by ALR H 22 Miranda v. Arizona, 382 U.S, 925, 86 S,Ct, 820, 15 L,Ed,2d 338 (U.S.Ariz. Nov 22, 1965) 1, Comment Note Necessttv of informing sUsoect of rights under ortvrteae aaarnst sglf-rncrimination,irrortogolrce thterroaahon AAtD ReUersed by ALR3D1054 .. ~ . . ~- 2 ei+ t e I .a ton:' Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 10 Ohio Misc. 9, 86 S.Ct, 1602, 16 L,Ed.2d 694; 10 _._.. . ~...._.... _ .. ... ~_ ~A-~ . ', un 13, 1966) (NO, 759, 760, 761, S84) 2. What constrtutes assertion of rtaht to Rehearing Denied by coungel following Miranda troarninos--statg c ses H-Z4 California v. Stewart, 38S U.S. 890, 87 S,Ct. 11, 17 L,Ed,2d 121 (U.S.Ariz. Oct 10, 1966) 83 ALR4TH 443 (NO, 584, OCT. TERM 1965) .. .__ _ . _..._.u., Arll,Jur.2d Negative Indirect History (U.S.A=) 3. Evidenca Su ded b Stated in Canfessions. Other Mattars Affectina ~ Perse Y Stat+lte as Admissibilitw Canstitutional Rirahts, P" 25 U.S. v, Dickerson, 166 F.3d 667 (4th Cir,(Va,) Feb OB, 1999) (NO. 97-4750) Generaiiv= Fi h Aniendment R"tahts= Ntiranda trVarninas HN: 71 77 78 (S.Ct.) . r H 26 people v. 8anks, 2000 WL 33519258 (Mich.App, Apr 21, 2000) (NO, 211439, 216965) ~
Table of Authorities, HN: 1(S.Ct.) _ _...._, - ~ _~._. ..... . .w. _'... _..
West Kev Numbers Declined to Foilow by ....... . .:... _.... _.. ......_._. ... ._.:..., _.-........._,.....,... - ~
27 4hata : Mnntnva "~,. N M_?44 4~n ~_7ri..RR . '.r. liSn'~(l Y457,~_(hlfl.
R247)_{-IA{-_..
. ,._........_._......_..__ . _... ..... _ _ _ . ...!' Slide 8 .f . ..~_ .. .
. = .

Alternatives to the Conventional Text Interface -,5 Slide 9 - 2I1(rtrin)_ ... ~..1, 1~'/, A vertically oriented thread-focused design Pfta ~ ----._.. __._ .. -._.......
-user selectable hyperlinks for retrieving and/or displaying referenced case documents .,.'",.:~
,.~.,=

'SS.ciB2 mrnri-{ IH ryStq Iwv, _as . i ..., .rs,. ~
r~ ~lE~ ! i ~ I 7~ .Hr) i ~ .~. . .- I . . ._. . . ~

34ZF2d683 . n . _,~?~, kh J*Mar}} yg~5 H ]11~1-Y~

~
_,.
ie.

~ , . .14.~ ... ~., ~ .... ~ .~... ...

"1 420 7s2 (fnem)
f.Y A bg Dept M9Y4,1461 .. .. i. . _:.'_._.. _.._......_ ,.A ''._.;....._...It Slide 10 ~ ~ ~ j~~= y , sc~..r,- 1r ,,.., irw ~.~- i _ Vllestlaw 7 - -~ Fvan=t~evr~idu (' smrn.'r!~'tro t.e,h sr,.t ~,:., ,, e,, . .

...... ..... ..... . .. . .. ....... .. ............. . .. . . . ., ........
.. . ............ ... . . ..._.. _ . t--~~ ... ,..~. .. .
.... .. ... __. . ~ . ~ ~ .._~.___...... .. .
N Miranda v A2 ; n t Cali(omia v.5temart g 1,r,t p Miranda v A2 rt,~so~7 N CA
Stew ait 86 S Q. 395 86 S 8t 1602 ~. -9 roc ~- 87 S.~,11(mem) ~ Nov22 1965 Dec6 1965 ]un 13 1966 lm Oct 10, 1966 ~ US~ I7c unnne< ~ , .~~~~ 7 ca rooc , .. , , . _ . _ . - i . . _ ,. .. . '~.

~ .... ~~ -.. ~ ..' ' ,.,. . ~~.... ,.- . .., . ..~ .. ~~... .. .~ ~ '~_~_~
~~.
Horizontally oriented time/court level focused design ~
~
t Slide 11 =~~ ., p =
Westlara ~ ~
lVetcorne I Fin d I Ke Cit CtirectarY I Table of Contents I KeYSeOrch MDre ~
" DA .stewart 87S.Ct. Si (mem) A vertically oriented 4Oct 10, 1966 thread-focused design ~__._...-...._.....i ."_..,.""......____.v._.
."h,:J~;:Ti-crS ;+3i'J
.~
Miranda v. A2 86 S,CG 1602 Jun 13, 1966 0 Court Dacs ...
~.._......,..._.....'__......~_..; -.:.....-._......._...-,..__....'.._ H H H
Yianera v. NY Miranda v. AZ California v. Stewart 86 SCt. 320 86 S.Ct. 320 (mem) t~r",~g, d,. F. 86 S:Ct: 395 y Nov 22, 1965 ~ i Nov 22, 1965 Dec 6, 1965 PN'~ ~H y E __' 1 Peoole v. Yianera Peoole v. Yionera 16 NY2d 619 (table) 18 NY2d 723 (table) NY May 20, 1965 NY Sep 22, 1966 IPaI
+ State v. Miranda People v. Stewart Westover v. ll 401 Pd 721 400 P.2d 97 (~;~Jl< 342 F:2d 684 AZ, Apr 22, 1965 CA, 61ar 25, 1965 9th Cir. Mar 11, 1Et~ 3k>:

~ Peoole v. Yianera yE~ peoole v. Yianera Ie) 18 NY2d 752 (table) NY 17ay 2116 LL tlY Sep 22, 1966 f .li . . . . . .

Slide 12 ~ , , ~~~ ResearrhTrail ., , Wesdaw ~, , ~ ;,,:
t~let~me Find ~ K~ite f Directory f l'ahie of Gontents ( KeySearch ~More ' H N ~4rt 3ea.nee: a; i r~:,ei:3t'3nted 6'd ~ People Y. Vianera Peo le V. Vi nera ~.~_ 16 NY2d 619 (table) ~ 18 NY2d 723 (table) NY May 20, 1965 NY Sep 22, 1966 --, State Y. Miranda Peoole v. Stewart ~~ Westo-401 P.2d 721 '-'- 400 P,2d 97 f; / 342 F. 2 AZ, Apr 22, 1965 CA, Mar 25, 1965 9th Cfr ........ ..._.~~ .. '~.r~#"~~ u i H
""- Peoole v. Vianera People Y. Vignera 16 NY2d 61a (table) T~~ 1a NY2d 752 (table) NY May 20, 1965 ~ NY Sep 22, 1966 P7 flr: h~t W
People v. Vignera Legend ~ 15'NY2d 970 (mem) ~~ NY Apr 15, 1965 Federal High Court ~ Federal Appellate Court H N
People v. Vionera Peoole v. Vinnera -- ~' 4 Federal Trial Court 14 NY2d 951 (table) - 14 NY2d 981 (table) --d ~s s NY Jul 10, 1964 NY Oct 1, 1964 5tate High Court E S+ State Appellate Court ~-., d3~;~ 'v~ ~ ~-~ State Trial Court ;,~ ... Peoole v. Vianera 21 A~D.2d 752 (mem) xE,~'I N.Y. A.D.2 Dept May 4, 1964 .. ~~ - ...._ - -_.. _ ...... . __ _ ......-_ . _- .. .... _ _ -_ 1y,.- ,~nail['~.. i. . ... : , ~ . . .. . . . . . , ~ . . s Slide 13 =
~J-~Ili VYeStIdW ~ ~~~~~ ~.i I. ~.. .-~_._.~..
Vt*elcome 1 Fid KevCite 6irdetory ~ Table of Content4 Ke~each ~ More H LA y. SteNHI'[
A vertically oriented thread-focused 97~~=Q ~966m' design - with designated court level zones ~R h aHr - F. rlir~rrda >. r t a ~ I . . ~. . . - .. ~ 86 S.Ct, 1602 lon 13, 1966 DOCC 4~ ..
m . . . . ~. . . . _ ~ ..
. . . . . ~ . . . . . ..
H
S,Ct, 320 (mem) Nov 22, 1965 .. . . .. . . . .:...... .. ~ t _.. _. ~. ..
.... . . .. .. .
Judument ...
. .. . ~ ~ ~ ~ . .. . ~ . . . ~ rze~=rsed by ~I -._...;~ ..._,..-, ._..., .,,,.,:,...A,. . .. ~. .:,~....,_.a,,,. . ...._, ,.>-~.a...- _..... - _._ -.
H Peonle v. Vianera ; H Peoole v. Yianera H Peonle v. Yionera People v.
Vianeri p,rt Jy ? crsnt,d by ~~ i rev~
16 N.Y.2d 614 (table) 18 N.Y,2d 723 (table) 16 N.Y.2d 619 (tabl ) I F 18 N.Y.2d 752 (table) NY Aday 20, 1965 NY Sep 22, 1966 NY May 20, 1965 ; NY Sep 22 1966 E ~ ='-=~
..,=.M tr n t m~nd. .,....~ ~ ."" .._, . . ..= ~~--. - ._W ~ Plcticn t nJ .~ .
.
~- ~ r r*ur , .. ~ R m kur n.:njed by ~, _. . . . ..~...~...._~.. m...[...-,_.....~~. ~~-......~..:
Gi-, . . . . . . .
S~"', - ..~ . . . . . . . ~ . .
-,- - . .._.._ ....__.._. . _~ ,.. _..._. _. .__~ ~.... . ~_._._. . ..__-_. .
.._.
(.{ Peoplc . +lianera ~ y P~o ~L1c v. Yi4r~ora ; - ~ P oolu Vignerd 14 N.Y 2d 961 (tble) ~~. 14 N.Y.2d 9E1 (tablel , 15 N.Y.2D 970 48 Jul 10, 1901 MY' _. 1"E"3 IiY Apr 15, 1965 A2, ._..._.-._ . _i . .~ +, .~.. .~-.. ~~_... .._ . .~ .

P, o+nn arrt~d by c drtAd ba ly u .~

Slide 14 .. .. , ~~. . t Welcome Find j ke Cite Directory ~ Table of Contents I KySearch [More . H ~ .= 1 . . . ..
~x ~' ~ ~ ~ = Yii .. - a . ~~. . .. .. ..... ..,.. , .- ~ ~...

~ = = N . . N anGic-af H ~ ...
, . . ~. .._... ...t -.

_ _..._. . ~.~: ., ~ ~ -- -- . ~ - --- ~- ~ ~~~

P.iJ6 e A vertically oriented thread-focused design - with designated court level zones, minimized procedural boxes -~a-Slide 15 L s -- -- -- _ .. r ~' CHALLENGE RESOLUTION STATUS
TECHNOLOGY Use GDI+ in Net. This solution produces an RESOLVED
image that can be displayed in all browsers.
BUSINESS RULES Produced a "Rules document" that broke our RESOLVED
decisions down into short defined rules LOGIC Devised "grid" solution RESOLVED
BILLING/TRACKING Requirements clarified for Billing groups. No RESOLVED
charge for Graphical display, but we do track usage. Some embodiments may charge a per transactional access of the grid; others may add a lump sum option fee to flat-rate type accounts to make this feature avaiable PRINTING WSDL file recently completed; rest of In Progress development in progress Slide 16 ~ ~~k'' . . . ~ ~. . ... .

r = ~i'~ ~~t ~ . .. ~
a'-E13 ~ . .
. . ... - & ;; ,.
~ .3 t Early embodiment omn=
, ~. ~ . . . . _ . . ~~ .
~I .. : . .. ~ .. ,ia=
. . . . , l.lldi ~ ~ PILUI ] LlL..tf c ll11E .xy ~ .
~.~

~ " ~uwwixa ~ : . .. . _ . . . . ~ . . . . .. . . ~ '.
. - ~. .. .. ~ ---._-,~.. .... . _ . . _ _'-L. _ . "' ~ . . . , . . ~ ; - ~ .
~ ~ .. . ..

Slide 17 Refined Embodiment ne Y ~ ~ . .. shl6ax . ~
v . - vJUnlYlfse ~
. .,._......._ ............. .. .

, . . , , . . . . . , .. . ~ .
T ~ _ . . - . . .. .
, ' . . . . . . . . . . ~ . _..~ ~. . . . . .
.:.... .w,_ . . . ....,.,.y ~ ~ . ~..... . ~ - - . . ..
:. .i.,,- ~ . ..
. ._. _ _. _. . .." ._ . .. .. -I . . .
. ... V 11.. . ,,.. ~ c ~: . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .
Y, .... . .. . ~ .
~'~ - ~ : , .. ~ .-fs)I.. Is~.YI . .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
rn.o [,~ .n+~ ~:' oYl ... ~~ .. , ... . . ... ... . .... .. ..... ... .. - ;

Slide 18 .. ~
Architectu.

Westlaw Web Servers Reusable UI Framework Client Desktoo control that renders an image Fax Stand Alone Printe ~ -, HTML Page with image and Image 14AP Ut and Image map. Takes XML
i.d.. .. ". ........__ . .... ''""' A plication and processes it into an object ul model for rendering using KeyCite CDO get XML GDI+1n.NET. Itwilibreak from Westlaw Server, Framework large images up into many stream image(s) to image CDO's small ones for printing Brokerandsendimage keys with print request ~~ ~ =':tp e E
/Q LL
Attached Printer Di ~c~ J Archive ~M( a u~
9 Database a?a ~, m , Archive INF Servic ~,/'~ Ar%qf ~ L
Insert and retrieve Re n o 3 image and metadata Retri 94eSf ~ ~
eve image image INF Servic s 1. ~ ~
printwesttaw.co Calls Archive to get Image 19 Existing print/delivery eg eveym servers will pull Retr' ReU
image(s) from the fo epe / Westlaw Serve image broker and d%P 9e( Image Broke Westlaw Server vtlll build an XML
deliver it for DLD, lma e Broker will call Ima e INF Retrieve TIFF
g g Image(s) for delivery representation of direct history with Email (attached or Service to get image(s) with key --- existing KC request. It will also process inline) in the specified and convert to TIFF if needed. print format (word, pdf today and (STP delivery w h changes es in the etc...) or ATP GP for KeyCite to include image key(s) A
OPD Recor The OPD record could have 1 to n image keys stored in the record OPD
_.._ _,.. ........
because of prinGng large images will ADABAS Case Controi be broken into many small ones. ADABAS or Galasry DB/2 Red boxes represent systems that required changes ... ._._ ._ r r .~
~/ 1 f . - . . . . . . .
~ . ~~y . , . , . .
' . .. . .... . . ... _ . ........ . _. ..... . .. . .,...,a~. , . , ~ ~.

= KeyCite engines to build and return xml representation of direct history chain(s) = Metadata enhancements to meet new display requirements = Printing via OPD of images created by the client UI

THOtM50N
19 ..'~.-. , vueSr Slide 20 . --- -;

e + Citk ~ . _ . .

..., .. ,.._....., a..'.:._'. _ . ... ...... 4. ~... . tPi . ..

History Documents in history (5hawing 4 documents) Dfred Hlstory P' ,, Goldherg v. Rostker, 509 F.Supp. 586 (E.D,Pa. ]u{ 18, 1980) (NO. CIV. 71-14e0) T~
Stay Granted by 4 2 Keycited Citation:
Rostker v. Goldher~8 U.S. 1306, 101 S.Ct. 1, 65 LEd.2d 1098 (U.S.Pa, Jul 19, 1980)-(N A-7 AND Probable Jurisdictfo ote by H 2 Rostker v. Goldberg, 449 U.3. 09, 101 S,Ct, 563, 66 L.Ed.2d 467 (U.S.Pa.
Dec 01, 1980) (NO. 80-2 1;
AND Decision Reversed by F' 4 Rostker v. Galdberg, 4S3 U.S. 5, 0 , t. 2646, 69 L.Ed.2d 478 (U.S.Pa, Jun 25, 1881) (No. 80-251) How the documents are related THOMSON

Slide 21 -p - - j :, XML Documents in history ~umenlid=s198014007.5-_;DaUon>101 S.Ct. tUCileUen><DecidedDele>198407-19</DecidedDate><IsOnWesUaw>WevlsOnWasUaw>
uns wwn is ey>USPa.UJursdicllonDispley><FuIITiUe>Roslkerv.GoldbergUFuIITiUe><Flag>blue</FI
ag>
<IsKeyCitedByUsenbueUlsKeyClledByUser><IsPraceduralMoOcn>falseNsPraceduralMoUon ><IsFederalJurisdicllon>false</IsFederalJurisdkUon>
A<teteAbbrevilin><CourtDisplayLevel>USSupremeCaurt</CaurtDlsplayLevel><HasCOUrt Docs>falseUHasOouMocs>UDacumenl>
acumenlld="s1981112321">< lion>509F.Supp.586UCiteUon><Dm1dedDate>1980-07-18</Dec1dedDele><IsOnWesVavnhueUls0nWasUew>
<JurisdicllanDisplay>E.D.Pa.4JurisdiclionDispley><FuIlTille>Goldberg v.
RoslkerUFullTille><Flag>red</Fleg><IsKeyCitedByUser>felse</ISKeyCltedByUser>
<IsProcedurelMation>falsa<AsProceduralMollon>QsFederaUurisdiction>f alseUlsFederalJurisdiclloN<StateAbbrevialion>PAUStateAbbreviation>
.~,-.._.~F;asrlBispley6ev >
Oaurt<fCOUr101splayLevel<HesCOUrtOacs>falsecMesCourlDocs></DOCumenl>
CDOC_ u~m'enlid="s1981127851" tion>1g15.CL2646UCiletlon><DecldedDele>1981-06-25</pacidedDate><IsOnWesllavnlme</IsOnWesUavn <JurisdkllonDisplay>U.S.Pa.UJudsdicllonDlsplay><FuIITiUe>Rostkerv.
Galdberg</FuIITiUe><Fleg>yellow</Fleg>
<IsKeyCitedByUser>falseUlsKeyCitedByUserxlsProcedural Mclion>falsa</IsProceduralMolion><ISFederalJurisdlction>falseUlsFederalJurisdic lion>
~~.sSt oteAbhrovWt' SlateAhF.reviatioN<COUrtDIsplayLavel>USSUpremaCourtUCOUMIsplayLevelxHasCourtDoc s>VUeUHasCOUrtDocs></Dacumenb D~' ocum nl ld="s1981200130"x Uon101 S.CL 563</Citetlon><DecldedDate>1980-12-01</DecidedDale><IsOnWesVaw>bue</IsOnWesUew>
<JudstlicllonDlsqay>U.S.Pa.UJurlsdi <Flag>blua<lFlsg>
<IsKeyCitedeyUsenfalsaUlsKayCit How the documents are related IonxlsFederalJurisdklion>felseUlsFederelJurisdictian>
<StaleAbbrevlatlon>PA</SlateAbbrevi emecua isplayL
vel><HesCourlDocs>felse<MasCourlDacs>
</DOCUmenu realmentPassiveVoice>SlayGrentedby4freatmenlPassiveVclco>
TreelmenlActlveVoice Granling Slay</(realmentActiveVoicexIsLateraILifgellon>falseUlsLaleralLitigation>
elatiaqsp,p'Gqau~cliracd4Ralatianship~ypa>4cRenuwdafal~
sRemand><If2elelionship>
Releho ho Parentd 1081112'+21/ Chldld s19811)7851/xA"reatmenlPessiveVoice>Decls,onReversedby</FrealmenlPassiveVoice>
<TreatmentActiveVoice>Reversing Decision</rreatmentActiveVoicexlsLaleralLlUgelian>false</IsLaterelLitigalion>
Remad>UReltionship>
Relationshi ><Perentid="s1981112321"/><Childid=s198120g130"/x reelmentPasslvaVoice>ProbableJnrisdicOonNoled y ree men assrve ome>< rea men rva ome> o mg ro ableJUrisdictlon</FreatmentActiveVoice>
<IsLaleralLitigalion>f elsaUlsLateralLiligallon><RelalionshipType>d'vectURelallonshipTypexlsRemand>fal seUlsRemand></Relaticnshlp>
e i e is ory>

THOMSOH
-.~-_.....

Slide 22 ~-~- ; ----~---' .=.

~-'= Assign an attribute to each court (approx. 5300) to represent court zone:
- U.S. Supreme Court - State High Court - Intermediate Court - Trial Court = Assign new attributes to each treatment phrase:
- Substantive Weight = Procedural Motion = Full case - Lateral Litigation THOMSON
22 WF.ST

Slide 23 7-T_~- r _ r a= I I = . al~ ~ ~sl U.S. Supreme Court Zone State High Court Zone Intermediate Court Zone Trial Court Zone po . ...
::!rth ~ ' !~ ~ ~ r, , 1Jelcome Find ~ Ke CiCe Directary nl lc uf tontanis ( Ke arch ,: More _.., rv (Text1 Show Ne ati v Histor View all Citino Refs M nitor r ith Ke ite ert Direct History for Boise Cascade Co v. Board of Forestry, 63 P.3 598 (Feb 12, 2003) 66~F ~d rN
~u . .. . : . } .. .
a I , - H~ . ~ .
- .
_ _. ' ' . .
_ . . + . __ . ~ ~ ~ . .. ~. . .
_ ~..... .,.,~
...._. _ t, =, i,~r~. ..r ~~ a I

~ . . . . . .... _ .. ... ,,.. ~~.... ,~....., ~".._, . ~ M._.- . .~..,."~ . .
,,.~ ~.~.~. , .. . .

Full Case Lateral Litigation Procedural Motion , Slide 24 Print - -~- ,--.'.... .. ,. '.._ .. . ........... ..:.. . . , ,: ..-. .~...- -.i.4 ~F I
tBi:'v.E(...
= New print options - Graphical History - Graphical History combined with Textual Citing References = Modify workflow to build a print result from client created image(s) - Images stored and retrieved via the Archive service - Image key(s) passed to Westlaw server on print request = Billing changes to allow separate charges for printing graphical results THOMSON
WEST

Slide 25 NIII

' Fx . ~t;. . . . .

. , . .< , . . . _I'~ .

Exemplary rule set for building basic diagrams.

THOMISON
25 wes r Slide 26 --~--Need a set of rules for building basic diagrams.
Parents should be centered below their children Slide 27 ~ -~-r _ - ---- , A..S. Need a set of rules for building basic diagrams.

A
Parents should be centered below their children (When possible) o*,o ~

Slide 28 i T _ ...._ . - . . ..

Need a set of rules for building basic diagrams.
11965~ 1972 1979 Children should be arranged in date order (left to right, for example) Slide 29Need a set of rules for building basic diagrams.

Supreme gaud High Court TriIl CQ~rt ~ ~ Boxes must be in the correct court level ~ ~o n sa Slide 30 Let's examine the "Miranda Rights" case in detail.

Slide 31 ~;..

Cases = i USSupremeCourt (Westover v. U.S.) Nc = a StateHighCourt (People v. Vignera) Jul 10, 1964 = 1 USSupremeCourt (Miranda v. Arizona) P
= b StateHighCourt (People v. Vignera) Oct 01, 1964 = K StateHighCourt (People v. Vignera) Api = C IntermediateCourt (People v. Vignera) May 04, 1964 ' L StateHighCourt (People v. Vignera) Ma!
= D StateHighCourt (People v. Vignera) May 20, 1965 ' m USSupremeCourt (Vignera v. New Yor = E IntermediateCourt (Westover v. U. S.) Mar 11, 1965 = N StateHighCourt (People v. Vignera) Sel = F StateHighCourt (People v. Stewart) Mar 25, 1965 = 0 USSupremeCourt (Miranda v. Arizona) = G StateHighCourt (State v. Miranda) Apr 22, 1965 1966 = h USSupremeCourt (California v. Stewart) Dec 06, = p USSupremeCourt (California v. Stewart = i USSupremeCourt (Westover v. U.S.) Nov 22, 1965 . Q StateHighCourt (People v. Vignera) Se Slide 32 _-& ,H

Relationships = G -> 0 = Ca = KD
Cb = K->L
CK = Km E->i = K->N
= E->O
= K->0 = F->h = K -> Q
= F->O
=
G->1 O->p =

TilOMS.ON

Slide 33 ~. . -. ., .. ___.1.._--J___,._ ,_ . ...~ - ,- =-- - - - ~_. . . }. _. ~
t t --- , , ~ ~
-T---;----~-."-'I----'=Y----r----I----r--'-r~----'~--- 4----r---i----~t---' ---'-----i r_--_r_--r-___7____~____~____'_____' _-__ I__'_-__i____ --------------- - ____I -..__' ___-r___-~
t t Z t { , t ____y___--____7.______-_-____y____-__-_--____ ----~---- , t , ------- --- --- --------y--------------------r---- r ---------;r----r---- ;----;----;-~
_-__ ___ ,_____' ..___' __.._t ____1 )1 i __- --___ F-__ F-_-- 4-_-.-}____}~_--_ _--_y____.tI____ 1 ' I I 1 ~ 1 I ____4__.._-_-__1_-__i___-.y___..a_____I____-1- rHdenuiNl Slide 34 *#t~rk~.tFrt _ ---------~--~----~---~--'----~-- -~----~----~--~----,------~ ---__ ----~-t . .,-..._.~.. . ,..__~I-, :-......!
.... -, ... -.!.__ _..~_.. , - _~.., .~. ._ . t - _.,. ,. = _f ~=__~,... ...t _. ~..~._ i i. . ... . . .
' . . . . .. .~ . .. . . . , ..
i ___ J__ .____r__ r____7_ t ____I-__,._r____r_.. _ ____-___ti____-;____-1____ ------------------------- ---r----~
~----r----; -- ----7---- ---- ;---,--- ~----I __'_-__y_..__1____r____r____i____'____r-___r____t-_____-_y__--y____ r.____ y_ __- _~

___}_-_..__-_~____~____.t____Y_____~__-t +---- y ---- y___,-___ -__-'____ i__,..., ____ 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I , t ~~itacMnsOnl .
____i_...._.. ; -___ ____4__-_l.---- l.-__-y_-__l__~1_ -___.1____ Slide 35 ----~~
== rc ~~ii i~ ~~_.._...__ . _ ___ _~~~~

J ___l____L____L __-1__.._J
, !
1 k"
y. .- E
t ____ ..J -I . it t 4 4-4 '____r____i____' _~.____T ~..,...t____i __I ----~j___'r_"_~_--_ -_'--T-___T
~ ---j---- ;---- ----- -------~----~
----y----~----~----~-----~----~----;----~ ---'----'---- ---- { ----1---i----~-----~---_ ____{____y____ _____-r_ , , , , , {

, , ' Nm5o,u1 M Slide 36 pI
----~-----'_..--1-----t-----L---._L__..-~--- ----1---- ,_.._._ i---i "-l ----~----~-----~ ~
--- ;
----~ '_ - ,- - - --- -F---- --r- -- -T---_ ~----____'___i-__ __--i__=
i__-i____i__~~i~-;____i ,____~ ___T __ { ----T----I -_'_ -_-_I _T_-__ _-_I ~__- ___-r-------r_-- -r r"-__- ~-__-- -__-_r , r , , t , ----~-------------- -T--- ----- - ----' ---;----, ,--- { { --!----r----r- --~----~- ----- ; ----; ---, ------------- - - ---- , , t t , j---- ;---- ; --- ;----~---____y____y_____H____f-___F____j.____1.____}____}___-i____I________ F___-I
, _____-- 1---_y_-__y__..__j..,___ , , { { t-Hr,il,~.isciw aB 62 Slide 37 . m --J- _ ..
~-- ---i----i--~----f-'--r ~---F- f'--'-r--i --r r------- ---' -------- ~---'-- --' , ~---- ~---;--- - ,- ----; ---- r----r-------- =--------- I ---- , --- ----,----,----y---- T ---------- ------ r----r----r----~----~----,----y----,----------t t s t t ___-}____.____Y____--_______y__-_.y_____r_-__ . .
_-__y_____ r____f___..4__-_..--_}____..___y____y____y___~
----a-- t --i----~----~-----~----~----~----~----}--------- ~----;-----~----~-----,-----~----S
;---- 4 - r~dk~~l ___,.1__ ]T Slide 38 . . , .. ~.,;, .
... .. . . .I_ . ..,.. r .
. 9 t p _.. J
J {
=
! L 3 ~ -t t. ' . .1..---_- t t ~
A _ - F L..__.~L,-~.~._ e .~..-". _ 1---.~J~
e.- t '{
T .Y_+---------- 4--_-..-. t J C
...~ ._I _~____ l_______ r.'T T-_Y_ '_ - , ~~{ t t t t t ----;----;----; ;---------;
R I;;~ ~~{ t , , ---------- ~--- ~----L ---- -----'4 ----I---- a ----; ----~'--------_ t Slide 39 .., P = e "

~ {I l_aj_ - 3 _ ~- ~;
} E ( . ~, . -- L-_ E ' - ( } .
~
~ 1- 4 ....... 4 . ....-~_ -_-n - _,. ;..-, ,. ,._~. .1~..,.......}
..,~.,.t,.... _ - __ ..---- T
- , t - r 4 !
I ___ -' _ _ _ _ -t~ -~.~--:

____ ____ ___ __ ____ _vr_~_ _rv_- _r____i__ ~r _~y_~ _ ___ 1____ ;____ '.....__' __- y_--- --___ ---___ ---____r _---} , __-_y__-_y___-____f_-__ , , ___-__-----F__-----, , f I 1 1 I 1 I I itidwi=.:onl ---- _-__;--__a__-_J_-__ Slide 40 AT
. . . , . ... .... . i.
P
E"~. __ _ -_ __ 1_ J ~..__ 0 H ~
-~-- - - - - -- .T--1- - - ~- ~----~-, ---~- r----- - r --r- -- ------;-- ~ -. f -- - --r --,- ----- -- T --r- r _ , ---------;--- ---- --- ----; --- --------- ;----y---- - -; ----__-_-' --__' __-F____}____}-___{____y____y____y____ I I I ;
I I I ~
} I i 1 1 1 1 ~
I 1 I I 1 ;
' 1 1 I I I 1 rv~snN

Slide 41 g-' 1 = = = ~t ~_ _ -- . ~

.. L .-~ _- _I 3 ___j _- t-__ . L -- ~---1--1---- ly- -O H
+

--- --- -- - -- - - - - ---- - - - - - ---, - - ;- --j- -i-- -- ----j- t _ - _ - _--~
-----~------- r---------*----r-------- - __--~
' --- iII , ---~----'C ----' ----+----+--------- ;---- ;---- ;- ____......

____J__..-+__--_--{-_---}___-____- ____ , 1y -, Slide 42 K~.
;~-~_ p ~- a ---~_ ~----4 --; - - -, 4 ----1-Q H
--,-- ---~ - --; - --; -- --T- a = I-- -3 - ~
, ---,---~,----, ----~ --- ~----~ r----,---T----,-- . ----,-----,----------- ;---- - ,----~
~ ~ -- - ; ;, - ~-:, - -- ,- --,~ - - -~
, ------ ;

____y___.~-_ ___'_____r_-_ I r__,;r__ - r----~ ~ i ~----------- ___ -__-_-__.y____ r___ r__ _r_-__f____+____+____}____y____y____y_-__.y_____r__ I I , I , 1 1 I , , , , , , I , , I I I i I
----'----y-----'----y-------'-;----;----;--- ;--- ;--- ;--__i----a----''----''-----~----'1 ' 4 { _- -v-~
J___-----__L____L_._.. 1 -__1.V__;_____-__J_..~HdmsONl pC I 1 1 1 1 1 1 Slide 43 -p L
~~~ ( . . i.~ i .
.. ~,...__..1__!__ _t- - ____ Q H J I M

- - - - -_ -- - , ~
-_ , -- --3--- -;--_ ----r-- - - --- - - -- -- -~
____r_.__y____-_-__y____ T ____r____ r____r____ r_--_, , r_..______yi____yi____y__-_yi____ , ____r____r____f____-____7____-_________r____ -~__.{____-__-_ , qyNSON
__-___-4____4________.,__-_J_ Tn , 1 1 I 1 Slide 44 !_ O M JJ .I M
, , y r q . .-.... .
- - ----' ~.a:.-..._ - -- - -r- -- -- --- --i-- - ~ ~~
' --- - - --- ~ - -- --- -- - - --- - -" - - - --I I , ~ ~

y_____~__1-____It____1f____'____i____j_-__.____'1____; ___ ___-_1 ____F____f____ -__- ____-.___-____y____y____y____ ----' i { rnd~.+snwi ---- F.____L__--Slide 45 --~
- - - -------------9',:il , . _ . . . .. _.1tEE~' = i ' ~.i i " { t . .. _.._J L___L-___L__-_EL__-LI___-1_-_-lti__1..-__-J_~__ -__L-_-_L
Q H J I M , -...--E ---- -,-~-- - ,----- --~ --- - ---- ----r--- --,,---- --; ---- - -----, ----, -_____Ir r f r____ . ,____ .._~____ ____y_-_.. _ y_ __r___-~__,__' 1-----I 1 ; 1 1 I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 ____i ___i ___ r____-_--___y_-__y____ ____.1 _- .-_,{____,{____..1___-_ti___ F___ F____IF____----_}~__+-_-_.1 _--_-____ y__ 1 y~,~yotu a6 1 Slide 46 _ --- _ - t~ 31'a'!r _ =.e,~ioc i _i~ ~..t . ' .
- . ~;: ~~E~w f' ~-~ ~
- _J -~----;--_~_~ ---~ - -~---~ ----~-___?-_._~ - --- - ---;- -;-, ....
1 ~ -;-----;
O H J I M

____-- __-___.i____~
r _ ~
. ~... . , , .

.; . . _.:~r~ .. r____r= - _c-_..__r ~..:__~_ __ -i---_ r r____~_-_ __~r____i___ ___yi_ - ___yi____-i____ }____}-- __y_ ___y________ -_ ----i~R-I----i----~__..-..1----'~----~-----F----~----+----}----i----~ - - - i a----~-----'-----~

, Ytlo'nnsoNl ----~----a----a----~-----'---- ~----~----~----'----_~-_--~----~----J----a-----'---<6 I 67 Slide 47 will !T!T ' E
--~ !
~
, --- , , ---, -r--- -;-- --- -- --- ---~-----'----'.L~--;
~----; ~----~ __--, ----~ - ~----~ ---,---- --~ ---;
Q H J I M
Q N L b r__. _ _._"'~ -~___~=y-_..-,~...._.-,?
. --, ~ - -- --- - --- _. -_.-~
, , ---, -r- ._ ---- -------- 'r-- ---- i ---- '----*i-----,----'----' -i y----'+----'+------__-y ___y_________f____y____y_____r___ , 1--__y-----~~---I , , , _4 4 I iHdmsc~u n1 Slide 48 L
1 , j_-...J- L
U H I M J
-~- i --- T --- + -- - ~----a-NL.
~ ----~--- ~ , , , , r---r---i----r----r----- ----,~--- '----~---_ ..;. .. . . _ ~~ - - ---~
. , , . . .
- -- ,-- -, ' ._-- r- ~--r- _ , ____r____.'____ ' , , -- I 1 1 I I 1 ----_---- j----, ____ ' _ ____ ___' ___y____ - __ -;; i -;~ - i 3 ;
__--+----~----~---------------~----~----~--- ~----~----~----, ~ , , ~___ ~
____8___i__-.,_i____i____ ' I I 1 Slide 49 =.= =a - ~"_ ~*~i f= ~, :~~~i i~._~ ~~, 7 --i -i i,- -1~ t 4 t J, __--I
J ---- L
---- ---- ---- ---'~-=_I-__-}___'_-_i---- ~---~ __ 3 _.__~
Q H I M J
C~ N L a , A
e f y n 4 ..; _,.__ . __ _ . _ - _ Y '_l_.:-_ , .._..~ _ ~_....._~
r____Y_-__ [
____y____y____y_____________r_- _r________-____I____'_-__-___i___ [ [ i---- ,{_________.._ [ Slide 50 ~ai , . ..
e.= a- ~~ti~ ~Fn,~ .~i~

p ----- '---- a ----~
H I ~~ Q
---- ---r ---- , --~C~N L D ' ~~ {
. ,-----~----~--- ~--- , , , r----r-----T----~---- , ------~
----; , , - ---~ - ---~ ----~ , , -- ~---- -- ,----- ,-----~

~ ~ [ ~ --~-----;---- ;~----; --- ; - r--- ; ---; ----~- --y----y----y----~ r----~ ____y____y____ r____r--_ -__-{____y____y__ F _ - I---- ---_ -1 ~saNl . I I I I _{..__-_IL-_.._L--_-_ _,.,-1_-__ 3_-__.1__--.~__~,~__ Slide 51 T - - ._-_ = a ~ ~i'~i +~~,: - ~.t t >'~,~: _.~ f i.. _.. i-..i LL_t _..
H I M ;_. 4_ !
C~ N L D r ' --~ - -_--, , , -- - ---- -- -, __ _,-_ -i f' _-_-'----i___-y ----- ___ Y--_ r-___-___},.___1 .._-_Y___..y1..___- -_-_r__-..

_-_-+--__y____y.____y_ , -_-_y_____1-____ ' , TndmsONl ' ] -___J__ __ 1____{---------- }~__ _1-_ __ ___ _J _ _ __ _ ___.~_ Slide 52 - - - ---------~.

p i 4 t _ -- --- E
H 1 MJ O.~' ~-- ~ -~- ~- -, _ ..r__ r 7=.- [

------------------- -~ ~-- 1 -~ - -- --. _.. , _ -__-y_ -_y--__y__--_r__ r_ _r_ _-___ r_ } ---- ____-__--y_ -_-____- _ - _ _ ----i_v_,V,{___-___ 1 I 1 1 1 ] 1 1 -_J-_-_a____J-..___M.-_ --1___--___-M__.._L--__;____1____;____.1____.1__~.J_ ~NOMc'vNl , P_ Slide 53 D . .

J E
____J__~_L..___L____ .,..~L _-_---- s E E E E_~~E ;~~ E

__- __J ____ ( H I M J O;;; _ 4__4 _-,._~
Q N L D
r _T' ---- ~T ---- 4 mMm4 M, <_t k t E~ E G ~, , 1~ ' -- '-----~ .t T~ ~_- <---,__-_ ----- -- ~---- ---r----F
f----_~ ~1 , ,---- ; -----------~ ------ --_ -- ---- -- - ~~~
-_-__-~
, _-__f__.._f____I ____y___ r-_--F----}----}----y----~ E 1 I I

~_-__ _--_-----l'HdmsoN
+__ vLesT
Slide 54 .~..-_ ! P, ~
t ___i ___ _ ---'~
= F
L____L____ - t__-Q IE ~i.
H I M J
----, ----~ --;- , , , --------~
---- ~
. r-- r---~ -~{-.. . . . i.
Q rv L L3 r_____ _________ . k~
t ._..._.__i . , . ...__r.._....
t .....,.. --___._ . .~......... ...i-___.. ____.. .....~_._-.. . ,....,, _____E- - -t..____r _____r_ y-_-_.1 ____r____t____-___, }____}____y____ E' E~ ' ____y_-____-_--___.._F_---, I Y'Hd~wscaN

Slide 55 ~- - - -- -1.1110 M#oo ~
p ~ . , .
__...L.._ .._ _1--....~-_ H { MJ-I o~~
t~ (~! l.. D~
, .. ~ M~ } !.. , _-r.. ......'~--_~,.... '- ~....'1_==
~__,..,..7.._..,._~.,~,. .
( . # .. }~ -- - . s ~ _.___ _ = .__._ __ r._. _ _..~.__ _._r._ r_ _ s_ 7 .-.~_.-I l~LL-~ t ! t t ! ! YHONHSONI
__.. -_--4____y____s__.._i____,i____,1____.1____~_ est 56 t =
Slide 56 _~.

Y~ii ..__ . ; 3_ , H
i nn 0 a?=~~;!" T-,- _'~_ ~-~ J.' 1' _ .....
Q ~ D- ---------- ------ ~=~ -G
_ _ , ---r- --,---- -- ----, - ----~ - --~-t- 1-4- 4 , -,. -----:.

J' ~ ~ ! I I I I I I ! 1 I !

1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I ~ I
_____-__y-___y-___ r__- Y____'__-_f-_ _____i_..__i__ i ____-y ~ ! 1 1 1 I I
1 1 1 ~ I 1 ~ t 11 1 1 I I -=
~~
__ ~ --__'___ ..___.1-___--_F._ I I 1 1 1 1 ! 1 I I I i ~
t 1 S 1 , ~ , 1 YsfdmB~~~N1 ____h___ l Slide 57 = = ! ~,~~ ~'.. .

! t ! 1 ~ r , t .: F. 1 < t -I.
t L t j_ F
nn ~y H~{[ I tV1'~ o 1-4-- 4 ___-i~-=,-~- __~W
~VC.. 5,s ... - D " {
-- -- -~-- ------ -, ,---- --- - - -- ---T__T-- - -~ ~-- ~_ ---~- . ~---~ -~- - ";

, ! ) '___.f.._-_ __-'-=,_ ; _--rt-__ F,._~ ,"__-~ }.--....4-.=----_... ----y-----I..----~___ ,1+
3 ! -~
..-__;---- y---- 4 ____- _------ '4 -__-.._-__ti___ ! ! t t !
= TMdmSON~
.1 ---- a _ _-_.,___-.{_ 5f Slide 58 t -}' = i 1, :;i~i t _ ,i~~; t ~_ ~ . , \

p 1 J-~ ,. i-- \
~' 1 --~ t -~' = 1 M"i a .- -- __ t _ Q N L D
- , - --~
- - --'-s:.._7..._ .. ~:_.. .i____.y_. .~ ~-.._r..-. r..~.-__~._ ~.._._..:....1.- _._-~._ == -_== , =-__~ ..
f 1-~ I_ ! / f -__--__==-- -_-_!.-_.._t.---_-....-_q..._--_--y_ .~..,__=.i---~____Y_=.__=~=.___-~'_-~ !
' ! t ! !
--- -------- ---- *-------~----a--~a----~-----~----~----~-----~----~----~____,-__.1_---a---------I--sa Slide 59 r = ~~~if~~ i~ ~
.
. , L_-_------ lY -_----f t t --+ ---- -- ---_ L_-__~ __'~.i__--~----~_-_-'-----L-=-H I a s_!
.~._,.
-- - - -~--;--~-- r ~
- -- - -- - ,---- -7-~---r --_ t 1'; f t, ____y--_.._~ ___ -- .____y____y____ r___ -, , s \ Y \ \ ___..}_____L-_-_L____-___3-___.{____ Ji____J___.-.1-so r \ \
Slide 60 ., .

p ~# ~=~~ ~. :~ f, t ~f tf ~.I ~
"'~--_ - --- -- - - -;- - ---~
G
f !

__ - ~... .__.~... ~...._. \._ ...__.._~... .
t ___' t.. _._.:.
{
t , , ~
__-_y__y_-__y_-_- r___ t____}__ _}_-__\.____fi____fi_-__y____y___-y____y___-_F___ -I! I~~ --- -;-----_- -_-__------~- --; ----; ----;----;----;----+----j-----~---_ __.._~___-, -- ; --- --- - L ------------+----1----;----a- -'T4 Slide 61 . - ...

- __~ 1 H ---- ~ ----~ -; ----~----; ----~---- M ---- d ---- o ----;
Q~~
+
--~ - r ---r_-- ~--r- ---- _ ---~ --i ---e -i-- n -- - - ----~-- -w--~-~-- ----~-.::. 1....---,._ .,----*- --r----,__ .., ...--~- '-----~
t - I-- r ~
__-_F____Y___ ___-Y____}___}-_-_y._-__y-_______y____ t ___}_-__3_-__i____.1____ ___,.._ ____ 1 1 1 1 ' el Slide 62 V. _ -tt.. Ff.i ~~.. p . , , a t .
~-~j '~ iQ' D l~: { ~ o , --~----~ , , , ----~----~----,----, ---'-- r---- , ----1----~,--- ----,----~r----, Y
t , '_.._'-__=-7 -. . , ' f --~I _--t -- -y----y_____Y________Y________1.__,__}____+_____-_-y_____F____ 1 I ] J I -_ iY-' 1 1 I 1 1 y____JF__- - ____p_-_____-_I_-.,__ I
1 THdMSVNI
J___-_-_ ti______.....1___., QP .

Slide 63 . . ..

--1..- -.. 1_- ..L.- _L_.. L _ ~ ~-' ~-, i ' S' - - e At ~1 1~- 1r L___L____~ --- __-..._ __'-L-__-L--'!
F{ ; M. d' 0 I
t....W~ 4.... t ; A...... r N Q
I 'r ( ~
t .. J L' R r..-..
T
t SSS
. -___ ___I___ __-____r_ f. _____. __--__' -! __ --___ -__ _ ___-I__ ___t____ ___-'____ ____y____ -__~ ___ H____+___i____4 ---- .{

a---- .+____a_ "'O~"~soN
Slide 64 ~ F ,_ ;.. _ _-._.. .. . . . . '.

~:~ . . . . . .. . . ..
~. T ~ ~ . . . ..
P ! ,!
_ 1 l_ t t 1 t t t i 1 ~ ~
-_ L .. .L_ m i ~ -g~----, -~'-I - '~-'--a- --- - -, -- ---9- ----~
Q L
-,-- __~___ --~- -,, -~ - ---- ;
, --,-- -,--G t .. . . + . .
-~ I I
~ ~
t { I
_.'__..... . ;._ ---1 ~ ~ ~
~
] 1 I 1 1 1 I
____ ti___ F___ F_..__ I I I ~ ~ 1 1 1 1 I 11 t 11 ~
a-__.. --___ -___W-_- +____-J_ 'r~+dmsarvl s9 1 1 1 1 ~

Slide 65 ~,----= :,r1fi a , f rt -=
= ==-. P
___-_J__?~
---- -- -- -H I M - - J O
D N Q
t 3 - -~
f ~ !
---?- - - - - -- - - - --- - '-- _ i -____y.,___w_______y..-_-y_-...__r..~_-1 ! t ! t ! Y ~
+-__..+-___-______..~~__ _-__ y t ! , 1 ~
f , ! , I Slide 66 = ~~',~~, ai

i t r { ~ t !,_t J O 9 , r----i-~ DYT~ ~----r , - --- ----_-~-__-*----.,--_a----y _----___.._i _---,.' ___ F___ F____F_.._..j.__.._'-___;-___;-_____-_y--__ ] I ~ 1 t I I

I~--- 4_--_ L __--____1 ~____ Slide 67 t =
make - = ;

-I --.,.-.,i;~ O ..jl,. ..' ' _'__ 33 , , } r r ~r ~ -; - --~-- -~---; ~--- M ,~ , -~--J
~ ---i-- --i'- { k 7 D I N~

.._~.. r_ r ._.~.. ..___._ ..-:..... ' .... .. _...
K .~ .. .
____.:.........~_...._~....__.,...._.__~....___i..____r.___..I.__...:~___..:_._ __ _..__y_____ ._.i.._ ..___....._ .:.. _...,_ .~__. :-_., L_ ....:.... ......_r. a ...i.:
,~..:._,,.,__ .:___='..r.
t I --__ -Slide 68 e =~~=~~ ,~:

__ -_----- - ---r- --~-- -- - L ---_ -------------- ----F A ! ' I-_ _ t ! C. . _ __ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ __- - _ _-1,'-'-!- --~--~ -- - - M - 'l -D L~

;:.. _.._. y i- i... __~_ { ._... ...~. ~.. ._.. .} _;- .._ r 'P
....-- ..,..~.. .. .
...., .~_.. . .~.._...i..___~.__.. r._ _.....:.. ........_...:..
_i..___.:,..., R .._..., ......i_,.
t" t t ...i . . .~ S
t t Slide 69 = =

__-- _ L _-__ ~ 3 t { ! ! , , , O
{ ---- .,4--4 ____. ..... _W---- { -___ -..__-__ E { y E , --------H I - - , ~
~_ IV/I ,l -- _ Q
E E !
Gryu~, r ~
K

, e -- -; ---- - -----~ ~----_ ~---- =----~ ---- --- - -----~--~.
Slide 70 -:~ T,~----.
:

P

L--L ----- E" .__;__-~ ---~~--;-----i - - --; ---.-E
-;
! ! , '____ ~ __-_J
4 _____ --- ~r--- ~.. -r----r r---- r----~
-----r----___------r----r'---i'------------- ---- ----''~

D L G NQ
i_.
=-~ - - ---- --- - -K
__.., F E t ---= - --- ~--- -~ -- _~...__.. ~--- --~,~

Slide 71 e = = t, _i iT; ,+.., t ' t t ..
[ [
t .L _-_ _ L- --L_ uL_._..-.L t ~ r t t t t , ,t t , -L----L- ---- - _ -__1_--- -- - -- ------~- - ~----t - t P_ 1__--~----' , - Q
~_-__.}:...--~4,...,.. _.~.,..._..~
_~-,-- ~~------ r [
N ----m - --- ------..~ ~
~- --"'- -- ~- - - ~=- -- G ~ ~~~.
....h..- ..... ~_ ~ _....y.. ..,.k.. .....r.. .._ _ _ _ ___' t ." t t t T f .' k ____.i_.___. _ _.~... . _.. ... x.- . _N .. __ _~._.. .F _._ ...a .~._ _.,._'t~ _ ~.
.~_ __i___ Slide 72 ---~
#.
= ~ ~n~~
~ }P t ::i "-~ ; 7;---_k -~--i- ~, - f r-- ---- r---- T -- T-- -' ~--- , r----~
~
-- .._ _ r _ [H
Q L LG)"
- ~- - - _ , '....i . .. ,.t. . JI-. 'F .. ,~. _- ...
_-~-..J -Slide 73 Fm-r, _ ,.
1 i. 1 -- 1 P---' , --~-___--_-M-I-~D _~_i _-__ - _ L N t~

t,k K -z 6 L. a_ __~_. ...-a_-_ Slide 74 ~.-r-- , , _ - -L' G A~ . . . .
. . . _. . . ., p , - _ '_ .....-L._ ,~ . ...-L.. _L......'. A.....~i ;- {~.._..' ~ ~i' t t= x 11~
. ..:i . f"..~_..}... ..~_ },. ......I
T ('~ T_ 4 .
'i.- _ _ --- -_-t --------------- ~!--- ~ M ~
[D FL
- t- ~- - - -- -~ -- - ~
.. , .
K
-, - t ---~-_ -+ _ --_ _ --------_ ---- - - --- ~- - - ---i t t J L [ r + r ( Slide 75 -___--. . ,'~~,( - ._-t ~~e=1r! ~r= ' ~

= ~ = . = -it 3 W!: ~ l . . . _ ,.
___,i. ____ _ ! -- -J
J L
~ , ~ ! __ ___~_____1_ 1__-_ .I ' ~= .
0 ! ! -, ........ ~ _ - ,t-f ----,- ---~ - ---- ~

T~_~W~- = f . ~_ E "t _ - . ~--~ ------K
._.. ..:_.. . _... ..__.-_ ~._. ..,:._ ..._~.__~._. _ ._._ .. ._-~

Slide 76 _ ' k ! t '! 1. , i== ; ~! ~, 1. '!
L ---- L_e _-~-_-._.t- A----.1..
!
_ _ 9 ---4 ---- q -1-71 H
"
--'- -- ---r T 7 - , - --;--~-Slide 77 I ~ ~ -, ~~.
- . . ~ ; ~.~ ';,: -_,. ~- __ ~ -, , . .
t ~ - ' ~ ~ Z ~ , i i ~ I L ~ ~ I~ ~ ~~ ~ i ~ ~
, ~.. ~ _-_J_- J-____L- L_---t-_ -L-_-_ __~1- __ f_-_.1_ - 1____~_ _. _I __-..
1~_ 1 ~
Y 1 ~ 1I I ~ ~ ~ ~ rI 11 I~ _~ I 1 E ~ 1111 i t I- I 1 I I t ( 1 1 ' -_..,...-~____~-__ _J-~.__i ... __I _.,.,._f -..__i ____. ____.1_ -1-__.._1_..__J_~_J_ -__l-___t ~ F i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; r ~ p ~~ i i ,~ ~~~ f i ; ~ ~
__.._ ~__ _j____.~~_ ~ ___;.~ _, ~____ ____ _r__~_ ' ~_~~____~____ +_ __~ __~-, ~ ~--__ , E ; _ _ ~ t t F ; ~~ _, F ~ ,~ ~ ~~ _~ _;_ ~~ ~ F
---'s-- 'ypi ~ ---r- r___- ' ..~i~-- r-- r~ ~-'~-- 'tr ~---i- '~--"~
! ~,,:, j~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ " 1 ' ~ ~ 3 . ~ 1 . ; , 1 1 '..
~
__.. .t.._ _~_~ -_ -~_-P-~ r..._-_1_ ..T...._..,1T..__.~_,-..-.~_ __T........' I H i 3 M ;; ;,.' i'! E i. ;
---,~----~------ ----,--, ~ :~ L~ i ~ t'"'z ~N t~ ~~ I i i ~~~ i ,- ~ ~ : ~ , t _.t ' .F. i ,,-__ -- -- - - --,-- - ;---k_- ~ t : ~ ~ ! ' ,.. ~ 1 a"
._.
... _.. __ .. .. _ .- -?- . -i "t.
~ i . i ~ t ~.. t ~ , K ~t ; t ~~
, ~ ,~
_, , , -- - x - -- _ __ _. . -~----,_ -- --- --~
, . , , , , , ~ , ~ , , , , , , ~ ~ , ~
~
- - - -- -- --- - , - - --- - - ---;

Slide 78 ~',.. ----~ i t . ~ . . . - .
t >t " F~,11it1~~ _.I.~1~ ..- I: - ~ i:;~.
r~.
. .. _~ .. . ~.:~~~.~;~ -~ ~ ; , , , ,~~~ , , ~ : ~ ~ ;
~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~,; ~ , ' ~~ ~p~ ~ ~ ~~ i ; ~' ; ;
~
-,-- t , , ~ ~ ~ - , -, ; ; _ ; L ~
t . t t ~ ~ ;.; t,~ , ~ , ~ t t ~ ~ ~ ~- ~_ ; ~ __ ~ ~ ~ ~I----; - - ~J--- '--~-, , -i ~' C? 1 t 4 t 1 r . ~ r~ ...~...r~ __..n~.....-..rr~.
......... ~ - _ _ ... ... ~... .._....' ~- 1---_~1_ ~__-~ ~_--_~'- ~ k.__-~ i~, ~----, ,~~ ~ I,~, r , I I I !
~
-_~- r- '~~ r -~- r----' --z t -j , -~ ~ -~ r ' ~" ~, i # ~ ~ ~ ~I ~ ~ ~
t t ~ I ' ---'-~- - - r-- ; ~ ~--~ ~ ~
I H ! ; M ~; ~, y ~ ; ;
~ .__ ~ ~ i ~ N ~ , ~ ~- - t ~ -~ - ~ -, - , ~
~
F ,.. ._ ; - --~-~ ;
~ ;
~ .~.-~.y_ _-.,i_- _ _ r ___ _ _ . _ _y____y _ __ ~~: ~_ ~~~ ~ i i ..~ 1 i _ ~ '~~ -_~ ,~ _~ ___~ . ~_____ ~____-t ~ F
~~ ~~- ~ ~ i ~ ~ i I ~ ~ ~ 1 t t .
t ' i' ~ ~ C
rcJ- . ~. t - _-~ _~_..~; --i- r- j . ~_ --~ __-- __-_'a I~--__ Slide 79 The - = . ~~i- E q i E ~ ~ I ~fi~~ ~~+,t, ~

If t ~ .
t ,, J....w....4 l. ........1-.. J _ ~_.._ -....L ....~
----~- --~- _~-----p- --~---i- : ~----~---- ----~----~-----~---- --; ----..-_-, ~---I H , M
L T-T

----_.~_ { _tf .~_t -"{ 1 = t .~..~.."[
t BI-I K
E
{ Y t . J -..~.d.~,_ _- I....:.. c .l.____ .._~....--.i .-.-i_ __ ..M .-....:_ Slide 80 MiN
Is re =ere = A
rs ' .
~. ,. , . .;e.,....--;

' a....:.eiL2z~eA."_.....,a.._ . . .. .
. ~~.. , , ., . .
' ~'~ = a...,.,,a~eam.u-ntN&,zla , . . . . ..._ _.. _ . .
. . :. - . .. . , {~ ,r ~ .. , , . . . ~ ~ .. l... _ .. -3 - . .. ..
~~ I .: ~~''~ ~ ~ I .,-r= ~_ - . ..' ~ .
_.. . ., t _ _ ._.
, ..'~ ~ L IP Y1 M fll ....Ic . ~ .. . ~ ~ IC t ~ 1 12 ' . N (( lY .. ~
lEtOMC].l e i l e n..; .a ( u . . , . ~ . . .;
. . .. ___.. . . .. . . . . :.

riw.
~"~ . _.. . ~ . . . tw..~~.~~~n~.. ~ . . . ~ : . . ~ . _ .
. ~ . . ~ ~ . . . . , . . . '..
z ~.I . . . . . . ~. , . . ~ . ~. ;
Ti fON
WE

Slide 81 ~~,_ _.
~.. ~.. . ~

E~ {

= Use Microsoft Windows GDl+ (Graphical Device Interface) = Used to draw a bitmap dynamically (vector graphics can also be used.) = ,qes and text.
Combination ofrarectanqles, lines, ima.

U~~S.CaI.Ju29,959 GalfeYV.Cal~tornla In_~ US.CaI,Mar07,1960 ... __.__ __.__._._ -------_ =
Pev=YsingJudgment332P2d447 ~~ .. . . . ~ ~ .
.. _ '. .. C~~., .. - ~ 312P.2&1-17 . ~." ~.
. ~. ~~ Ca1.RPP=Super4Nov 17, 1 S8 ~ L -... - .. i . ._. -.... . ~... . .. :.:: . ... . .. . .. . . . ..

Slide 82 -~ -r--- -- - _ ~ - ' ~a~ ~'' ~ ~~'r.~.' ~ ;-~~ ~

The rendering functionality (renderer) was made generic for re-use possibilities (Graphical Statutes?).
An intermediate piece converts data from KeyCite specific data to generic data.

Slide 83 .~; .

The Renderer only knows about text, images, lines and arrows.
Each cell of the grid can contain either text and images or lines and arrows.

Text & Images --_, ~ - H GrantlnaC rci r i ~~ _ ~~- ~~ I y U.3.Cal.] n 29 1 ss .hJ' { ~ =-_ ~I =,3x ~~r,aj _ J L GIM ft ir~~
i _ t N
'+i ~< '~'~ f-~- ~.~ t F?da_~ir = .
" ~ I: ~+ PPO~IP. ~.Tallev .
33' P 2d447 : ~ .
' ~~ Cal-0pF.9 F No:=f.,7,195r' . . ~i ~ . ..... .
Lines & Arrows Slide 84 .. ..

.:>n Each cell of the grid is processed individually to determine its size, and then graphing offsets are determined for the whole grid to know where text and lines can be drawn.

(200,75) (600, 300) (900,1 N Williams Y.
U.5. 11 91SCt,1148 U,S.Anz 0.pr05,19_71 ~AffirmingJudgment419F.2df59 ' _ _ _ .,~.... ~.._ .,...,.. ~ . - _ , w...~~ ~. ..-.""'~ " . .M.;... ,~.,.,.
,.~...., .
.. . ~Ma.~'.a' ' . . . ~ . .
~G~, ~ .. . . .
. . *13_ -...~~N Mackey V. U S. U.S.nti [1ar23,1 470 69 4CU.5,In Afli d.r051971 __....rming Judgment 411 F 2d 504 * m Trv ~..TlL ..====-, =
_ 4.; . . ~ . .i . .. ~ . . . ~ . _ ,_ ...,,.,.~. . . -,., .~... .. ., , ~. . ~~
~.4 ..., i ~.~.~.~. .. . _ ,. _... .. ,..,;. ...,' ., ~,~w m .._ . .,_.., ....
..... . ,......,.. .. . ... .~.....,~w ...,,.
1. .._ -~~_.
~ wll~lanl5 4 U.S.
115 F.2d 1. ; {a[keY V. U.5.
9tP Cu. (Atiz:1 Oct17, 1969 411 F3d504 Cir.(Snd.)Jun 04. I 9 ._ ... .. .. . _.. _H.... .... . .. .~ 1 ...~ ._ ... ._ ... ~. .._ .... . ._.
.. ._... .. ._ ._.._ Slide 85 ~ . .:
Functionality to shrink the image horizontally With a grid, the width of each column is constant.
Squishing pushes each column as close to the adjacent columns as possible.
This results in columns that overlap the adjacent columns, effectively removing the grid look.

Slide 86 ~

;.~

Start with the rows in each column a fixed width.

t 4 ! [

. .. .... . . ... . . . . ~. . - . : . .. ,~. ~ . .. ........ .. ....... .... -,~ . .. . .. . .-..._ ... .. ..,... ..~ ,. ... ,.... .... --. ,. .,...:.
H Williams v, U.S.
91 S,Ct. 1148 .. S,Ariz.Apr05 1971 _ _.._..U, _ AA t _ _... . .
A1Trming Judgm 418 ent F Pd 159 ...
~.~,.........-. _ ....,_.- .
Go E
. ~ . .. . ~ ,.
~.~ 7 I n Gr ntno Cerciorari ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ H P
Ci an*Ine Cerciorari ~~ . ~ J[ Ma[key V. U.S.
'n ~ U S Ara Mar23, 1970 &[nd, Dec O8, 1969 91 S,Ct, 1160 N ~~ _ ...................
, . . . ...._ ...._. __ ......
AffirminAJudgment 4iiF.2d504 . . . ., . . _ . ~ . . ~ . ,.
.. . . _ . .. ~ . . .
i' ~ ~ . _.._~ . .......:.,. i. .. . .. ~.
~ [ ~ 44+illiams v. U S ~ ~ ~. i {
418F,2d 154 9thCir(Ara.)Oct17.1964 -Y . ....~,,. -.,,. ...... . ~ 411F.2d564 .7th Cird "ind.)]un 04. 1969 . . .... ..._ .._. ~ . . .._ _..... .. .. .. .. ~. . .. ~... . ~ ... . .. . .
.. ... .... . . _ .... ..

Slide 87 3, ".3_~~.. ~. . ' .. .
;E I
c- } = .

Move the second column as close to the first column until the cells oollide.

N Williamsv.U.B.
91S:Ct,1148 ! ~ t U,SAiz, Apr05, 1971 A4irmingJudgment 418F2d159 3 , :,. .. .'. ~ , ~:::,. ....,.....,m. .._....,.._....-- . ~ '.
=,' . , ... .,. . ~-_ , V .., . , . . . . ., ~ ff . . . , , ~... '.. ~ ,. - '~, ~ . . . . _ .
a ~ ,~y : . ',.. . ._....~..........,..~..~.,-,..
3 N flOrantina Cerhorari G,.ntina Cerciorari , 3,~=~=~~' Tp MackeV V. U.S.
U S Ai~. ar2, 1970 U,S.Ind, DWec 08, 1969 91 S.Ct: 1160 U.S.Ind.Apr05,1971 AflirmingJudgment 411F.2d504 ~
. ~ . ~ . . . . . . . ~ ~ . ~ . .
~D ~ . ..._ ~ .

41BF.2d159 U.S. ~ . ~ . . . .
a 9thC'rn(Ariz:)Oct17,19f,?
M . _ ._.., _.... _.. __ ... .
7thCir(ind,)Jun04,]969 . . _ J . ._. ; ~ ..
.. _ . 1 . _ ~.. _.. ~ .~ - ~ , Slide 88 ..
,. L
R4' Fg~ ~ =b ~# 3 Move the second column as close to the first column until the ceils coliide .

N Williams v. U.S.
91S,Ct,1148 ~"... _ . .
.. U.S.Ariz, Apr05,1971 Affirming Judgment 418 F.2d 159 ~.

0 =

m ( a p t oH Grantina Certiorari ~ Grantma Certiorari Matkeyv. U.S.
v' - U.S.Ariz, Mar 23, 1970 1d U.S,Ind Dec 08, 1969 i 91 S.Ct, 1160 U.S.Ind, Apr 05, 1971 ~
. ~ Aftirming Judgment 4.11 F 2d 50<
,2 F llia _ms v. U,S. 418F,2d 159 ckev v. U.~_ chCir.(Ariz.)0ctI7:196~1 411F,2d504 ch Cin(IndJJun 04,1469 ~..' Slide 89 -_ 1~E-F, ~~--- - - -~ 1,F
f 'T .E , i <h~~ ~; 4~-= ~ ~i I 1 .~. . . . .
~ ~Ct V +15~~ .
. a ~ . ~ )c . . ... .
..............
.:
,, . _ ~ .. . - .., ,. . .. . ~... .
2.'... . . . .
kc'>
.f ~
I i .
ir~'.'ti . --..... .. - .. . ... .. _. . ~..a~JS.~~ ]vGt=.l~i~r~i~~iii~~ ..=

Now move the former third column as close to the second column as possible.

H williams u. U.S. 91 S~Ct~ 1148 ~ .. . , U,S,Ariz, Apr 05, 1971 , rming JUdgment 418F.2di59 Z Afli ,V ,.. . . ~ .... .

N Grantina C t> r N r3ntina Cerciorari Mackey v U.S.
U.S.Ariz.P1 i 331~970~ ~ U.S.Ind.Dec08,1969 918,Ct1160 U,S.Ind, Apr 05, 1971 AffirmMgJudgment 411F.2d504 a~ ~~ ~ . . . . ~ . . . . . ~ . ... .

9 _ Williams v. U.S. t 418F,2d159 Mackevti U._~_ ( ?chCir.(ArizJQCt17,1964 . I
L 411F,2d504 N. . . . .. . .. ~ . . .._.. 1 -.~. . .... . . ~. .. ._ ... ..~ _.. 7th Cir,(Ind,)Jun 04, 19~'~ . ~~... . .. ~ . ~ . ~, Slide 90 ---I F x x 3r~~h~~, .~ ~
V-~
i Now move the former third column as close to the second coiumn, as possible.

N SYilliams~~~' 41S,Ct,1148 . . . . US,Arit.AprOS,1J71 ' ..._..... ...W.._.._ ...._.....~... -. A$rmrng Judyment 418 F.2d 159 ~p ~ W_.,..~....,_...~..:

6~~1 ~ . . p . ~ ~...~ . . ..
a a' EI Grantinq Cerciorari H Gr'anHn Certiurari MaCkOY V. U.S.
U.S.Arie, Mar 23,1970 U,S,Ind, Dec 08, 1969 91 S.Ct, t 160 U,S.Ind, Apr 05, 1971 Affrrming Judgment411 F.2d J14 ~
. 7 .. . ~ .. . ~ p . .

4 1E: F2d159 .. . }~ r'MdGkCYV.J.a. , . ~ .
c.. 411F.2d504 ~ -~ . ..._...~ ' F ... . . ~ . . . . ... . . , .. ' ~ .. . ._~ ~. 7th Crr,~[nd ) Jun 04, 19c4 ?
.. .. . . . ... ... . . . ~~~

Slide 91 ..

... , ~.. . .' ...: . .._..... . . . ......,_. . ... . . t ~3c And the next column, etc Ej il liams v. U.S. 91 S,Ct 1148 Anz,..udgment 418F2di54 0 ~,,, ~ . I$ o , , ~ ,. . . . . . . . N
@ - . ,. , . , -._ . . . ~. . ~.:.
~ 7 l antlna Cerciorari H Grantina Cerciorari -FH U S Ariz Mar23, 1970 U 8 Ind. Dec OB 1969 91 6 Ct 1160 -_ ,._ _...... . .
~ . .. . USInd.Apr05,1971 AffirmingJudgment 411F.2d'04 . . . _._.._.__M ,.. ,.
~... . ... . . . . ... . . . .. . . . .... . . _ . .. . . . . .... ... .
. ~.~ .. _ . . .. . . ~ _ .. ~~ ~, = c1 T. . . . .... ......~.._,_ 14flli.ams V. U.g.
41@F'j159 . - ~ . . 1 pMackey v.U.9.
9[hCin(n z)9ct17,19b9 '~. . . ~ 4 11F.2d504 7th Cir.(Ind,)JUn 04, 1969 _ . : - _.._.. .__. .. ; ~
.. .. . .. . . ...... .. ... . ... . f . .. . .. . ... ... . . . } ... . . . .
. .. .... ......

Slide 92 .- r.. ~..

}
_ L~
And the next column, etc {( H Williams v. U.S.
91 S.Ct,1148 ((__ U.S,Ariz.Apr05 1971 ~ . . .
~ AfFrming Judgment 418 F 2d 154 ' ~:, ~ ~ ~ . .. ...~..~....~.,...~..... .. .. ~.# ~ ~ ~ ~ . . .
U

n . . .~. . . .,~ . . , .
.3 ~~ ~ ~ .. _.:.,..w.....,., ...........-i i . . i .....~.y .
z H Grantina Cerciorari H Grantino CerHorari P1a[keY . U
0! U.S,Ariz,Mar231970 ~U S.Ind. De~m c 08, 1969 91 S,Ct.1160 . , 114 . .. , . . . ~ ~ ~. . . ~~ U.S,Ind.A r05,1 A4ArmingJudgment 411 .. . .--. . ' . .. . ~ .. . . :f ... .. . . ... . .. . . . _ . _ ~.~., i:~ . ~ ~ ~. . . . .
, . . . . . f . ...~ . . , Williams v. U.S.
41aF,2d159 i'la[keyv.U.S.
. . _ . i ?rhCir(Ari )Octl,,ld'e4 411F.2d504 . __-..... .,~, ~ . .
7th Cin(Ind.)Jun 04, 19E9 ._ _.. . . ..._- _ .,..__ -. _ . . . , _.... .. .. .. .. ~.. ~. . . . .. . .. .. . . . $.. .~~._.: . . _. ... . .. .
. _. .. ...... .._... ~~~.i Slide 93 f~
~. +.

... . ....... = c?'~ ~e . ~

And finally we end with . . , H Williams v. U.S.
.. ~ 91 S.Ct. 1148 . . ,.. . . . - ., ~- U,S.Ari2,Apr05,1971 ~ ~ , = ~~ =~ Affirming Judgment 418F,2d 159 Q . , . . . . .. .. . . ~ ..
u u st y E m ~. s. ~ ~ =... - ~ . r.
D 1'1 Grantina Certiorari ~'1 Grantina Certiorari ~ G7 MackeY y, U.S. z '~ U,S,AR9ar23 197~,, U S Ind. Dec 08,1 ._969 91 S.Ct, 1160 ._., ,___ .........__ I _ . . ~ . ~ . U.S.Ind. Apr 05, 1971 , A$irming Judgment 411 F.2d 504 . .__ ~ ... , . . .
U . .... . .. . .. ... . . .. ... .~..... . -m ~ . . . . ~ ~ . . . ~ . ~~~.

o P lVilliams t. U.S. 5t 41,F2d 15- I'tackeYv.U.S.
. . ~ ?tF Gn(F~ri: ) C ct 1', 1 Ur.u ~ 411 F,2d 504 c 7th Cir.(Ind.lJun 04, 1969 Slide 94 E=+2 } ..;~~..

The first time we display an image, we shrink it to fit the screen Back to Full History (Text) Show hJeoative History Vietv aIl CitinrJ. Fefs I
Monitor with KeyCite Alert Direct History for Miranda Y. Arizona, 86 S.Ct. 1602 (Jun 13, 1966) (430~~
I

_..-_...__._ . _. .,..__.. _. . _ . _'-- ~-- . .
Cone trwt.it:

Slide 95 ~ -7--it can get cOmplex,..

Slide 96 t f4 t <4 k A '} L

f .... .., .. .._. . .. .. . .. . ., . ..
.Q'~ .. ~._ r ., .... A M~ Pf 1 Albo t[ [~1vAM1~fe.LH
.i, . .- . ~ ~ . . _......a~~e~1e , . . . ~. . . . .. . ~ ~ nu . .. . ~ _[ . ~ . . . . .. . .. . .._. .
. . . . . <,,. i v : z. .
c ne... ~ __... .
c . . . . ~.u ' ... .. ..
..... ~ .~...L- ~ .. . .

, . . . . t~~ .. . . . ~
. . . ~ . i. , L~'~_ .... ~ . ~ . ~

. ...., ...:.. . , ~ ~
.. . ..~ ~'-:~r. - . .
' . ... . . .. ~ . . . . . ' . . .
- ...J.:: .A ...tf0116~..1 A ..@ . . . . . . . . ~ .. . ~
WiAtWVS . . . . . . . .

Slide 97 4 z ~
t _ E[
~ 7 C a ~ ...
~ 1 .
z . ~ ..
...... _ ..._ _~_~. . . .. . ... .. . . ........ ... :__.,. . rv..a.ttimE~W~ .

Graphical KeyCite for statutes takes legislative research even further with a clear visual representation of statute versions and legislative history Slide 98 The statutory credits are "demystified" through clear Ite I DirecEory ;Table of Conte- nts KeySearch I-~ re - ~ , M~o~
iscA_iisa-presentation ofi ...
,sion of nonimmigrants Text Nistai-r' Uisdlab= Current Citing References I Monitor with KeyCite Alert Effective Effective Effective Effective Effectiue Prior Text Prior Text Prior Text Prior Text Current Text 8 USCA 1184'M' 8 USCA 1184 USCA 1184 ~ 8 USCA 1184 8 USCA'1184 ...... .. . ...........
_...... .._....... ......._ ..................... .... ____........
_............ ..... e................ _...... ..
.......... _.._..._ . ........ ............. _ .. .__.._.._ ...........
:...............
Amended by: Held Amended by: ; j Amended by: Amended by: Amended by: Pending P,L 107-45, Unconstitutional P.L. 107 125 P.L. 107-273 P.L. 108 73. ~P.L. 108-193, Legislation 115 Stats.258, By' 115 Stats. 2403. 116 Stat. 1758 117 Stats.970 ' 117 Stat.
2878 1. 2003 CONG US
HR 2278 i I HR 2215 i HR 2739 HR 2620 S 3031 SR 1424 U,S, v, Hilton, 10/1/2001 (1/16f2002) (11/2/2002) (9/3/2003) (12f19/2003) 108th Congress, 363 F,3d 58 I! 2d Session ~......__.... _.._. ......; .._.......... ........... _......._ ................. ............ ........._...._...................... _......
(12/7/2004) Cong. Record: Comm. Reports: Comm. Reports: Bill Drafts: Bill Drafts : 2. 2003 CONG US
Senate Bills and House Report No. House Conf. Rep. 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG

Joint Resolutions 107-188 No. 107-685 2739, Enrolled Bil{ 2620, Enrnlied Bill 108th Congress, approved by the (8/2/2001) (9/25/2002) (7/31/2003) (12/9/2003) 2d Session President, (11/19/2004) 147 Cong. Rec= House Report No, 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG US HR
H8246-01 107-696 2739 Reoorted in 2620, Received in (11/15/2001) Cong. Record: (9/25/2002) House Senate (11/6/2003) Message from the Anniversary of the House Report No= (7/22/2003) House: reorganization of 107-125 2003 CONG US HR
147 Cona. Rec. the Senate (7110/2001) Comm. Reports: 2620, Engrossed in 510151-01 Judiciary House (10/03/2001) Committee, House Report No, (11/5/2003) 148 Cong. Rec. Cong. Record: 108-225(II) S6702-03 Bills and Joint (7/22/2003) Presidential (7/12/2002) Resolutions Comm. Reports:
Messages: approved by the House Report No. House Reports No.
Communication President prior to 108 ~29 108-264 Statement by the from the Clerk of (7/22/2003) sine die (9/29/2003) Press Seoretary, the House; adjournment, 2001 WL 1152894 148 Cong, Rec, 148 Cono. Rec.
H3820-01 H9131-01 Cong. Record:
(6/21/2002) (12/16/2002) United States-Australia Free Presidential mare.,. New Public Laws: Trade Messages:
148 Cong. Rec. Implementation Statement by the D1124-03 Act, 150 Cong. Press Secretary Rec H5690-01 9t1(13 W1:7?477749 _. , .
~t: -Slide 99 -yestlaw Research Statute effective dates at the top of ' the display ~
, I I Tableaf contents iKeysearch a~a~ , _ . S USCA 1184 8 1184. Admission of nonimmigrants Text History Disnlav Current Citinci References Monitor with KeyCite Alert E 1 Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Prior Text Prior Text Prior Text Prior Text Current Teftt 8 USCA 1184 8 USCA 1184 p 8 USCA 1184 PW 8 USCA 1184 8 USCA 1184 ...
........... .......... ..__..... _....._.._...... ....
........., ._v.... .._......._......
Amended by: Held Amended by: Amended by: ~~Amended by: Amended by: Pending P.L. 107-45, = Unconstitutional P.L. 107-125 P.L, 107-273 P,L, 108-78, P,L, 108-193 Legislatiai 115 Stats,258, By 115 Stats. 2403, 1116 Stat. 1758 117 Stats.970 117 Stat, 2878 1. 2003 CO
SR 1424 U.S. w, Hilton, HR 2278 HR 2215 HR 2739 HR 2620 S 3031 10/1/2001 (1/16/2002) :(11/2/2002) (9/3/2003) (12/19/2003) 108th Cong 363 F,3d 58 2d Session ........... ......._._...., {12/7/2004;
Cong. Record: Comm. Reports: Comm. Reports: Bill Drafts: Bill Drafts : 2. 2003 Ct?
Senate Bills and House Report No. House Conf, Reo. 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG

Joint Resolutions 107-188 No. 107-685 2739, Enrolled Bill 2620, Enrolled Bill 108th Cong approved by the (8/2/2001) (9/25/2002) (7/31/2003) (12/9/2003) 2d Session President, (11/19/200, 147 Cona. Rec. House Report No, 2003 CONG US 2003 C NG US HR
H8246-01 107-696 HR 2739, eoorted in 2620, Received in R
(11/15/2001) Cong. Record: (9/25/2002) House Senate (11/6/2003) Message from the Anniversary of the House Report No. (7/22/2003) House: reorganization of 107-125 2003 CONG US HR
147 Cong: Rec. the Senate (7/10/2001) Conim. Reports: 2620, Engrossed in S10151-01 Judiciary Hause (10/03/2001) Committee, House Report No. (11/5/2003) 148 Cong, Rec, Cong. Record: 108-225(11) S6702-03 Bills and Joint (7/22/2003) Presidential (7/12/2002) Resolutions Comm. Reports:
Messa es: House Report No, g approved by the 108-229 House Reports No, Communication President prior to 108-264 Statement by the from th Clerk of (7/22/2003) sine die (9/29/2003) Press Secretary, the House: adjournment, 2001 tNL 1152894 148 Cong. Rec, 148 Cong. Rec. Cong. Record:

(6/21/2002) (12/16/2002) United States-Australia Free Presidential more.:. New Public Lau~s: Trade Messages:
148 Cono. Rec, Implementation Statement by the D1124-03 Act, 150 Cong. Press Secretary [p ,, 1 (11/7/2002) Rec H5690-01 pppi WI 27Q77745 ~ . .. . _ . . . . ... . . .. . ,._ ..... -.. _ :. .... .. .. .. .....
.~r,''.. . ... .. .. . .. .....< .,,.,. . .. . . . . : ..

Slide 100 Current codified text, along with prior versions -ie i C?irectory, ~ Table of Contents C iC

8 1184. Admission of nonimmigrants Text History DisplaV I Current Citina References ~ Monitor with Ke+rCite Alert Effective Effective Effective Effective Effei Prior Text Prior Text Prior Text Prior Text Current 8 USCA 1184 PM' 8 USCA 1184 ~ 8 USCA 1184 8 USCA 1184 ~' . 8 USCA, Amended by: Held Amended by: Amended by: Amended by: Amended by:
Unconstitutional P.L.107-45. P.L.107-125 P.L. 107-273 P.L. 108-78, P.L.108-193.
115 Stats,258, By. 115 Stats, 2403, 116 Stat. 1758 117 Stats,970 117 Stat.

SR 1424 U.S, v. Hilton, HR 2278 HR 2215 HR 2739 HR 2620 10/1/2001 363 F.3d 58 (1/16/2002) (11/2/2002) (9/3/2003) (12/19/2003) :
Cong. Record: Comm. Reports: Comm. Reports: Bill Drafts: Bill Drafts Senate Bills and House Report No. House Conf. Rep. 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG
US HR
Joint Resolutions 107-188 No. 107-685 2739, Enrolled Bill 2620. Enrolled Bill approved by the (8/2/2001) (9/25/2002) (7/31/2003) (12/9/2003) President, 147 Cong. Rec. House Report No. 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG US HR
H8246-01 107-696 2739,Reoo tedin 2620. Received in (11/15/2001) (9/25/2002) House Senate Cong. Record: (11/6/2003) Message from the Anniversary of the House Report No. (7/22/2003) House: reorganization of 107-125 2003 CONG US HR
147 Cong. Rec. the Senate (7/10/2001) Comm. Reports: 2620, Engrossed in 510151-01 Judiciary House (10/03/2001) Committee, House Report No. (11/5/2003) 148 Cong. Rec, Cong. Record: 108-225( II) S6702-03 Bills and Joint (7/22/2003) Presidential Comm. Reports:
(7/12/2002) Resolutions House Report No.
Messages: approved by the House Reports No.
Communication President prior to 108-229 108-264 Statement by the from the Clerk of sine die (7/22/2003) Press Secretary, the House; adjournment, (9/29f2003) 2001 t4+L 1152894 148 Cong. Rec, 148 Cong. Rec.
Cang.Record:

(6/21/2002) (12/16/2002) United States-Australia Free Presidential more... New Public Laws: Trade Messages:
148 Cong, Rec. Implementation Statement by the D1124-03 Act, 150 Cong. Press Secretary (11/7/2002) Rec, H5690 01 9f111~,_Ltfl ?79,7745.:, ....., 3~
~.

Slide 101 Clear association of amending laws with codified versions , te f Directorv Table of Contents KeySearoh ~ More~

8 1184, Admission of nonimmigrants Text Historv Disolay I Current Citino References I Monitor with KevCite Alert Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Prior Text Prior Text Prior Text Prior Text Current 7eitt .._....... ....__._ ............... ....._....._.
......._.._..___.................. ._.............
.._....._...................__ ................ /
Amended by: Held lAmended by: ,Amended by: Amended by: Amended by: Pending Unconstitution legislat n :
P.L. 107-45, By. P.L. 107-125 iP.L, 107-273 P.L. 108-78, P,L. 108-193, 115 Stats,258, 115 Stats, 2403, ,116 Stat, 1758 117 Stats,970 117 Stat. 2878 1. 2003 ONG US

U1S, v. Hilton, 10/1/2001 363 F,3d 58 (1/16/2002) 1(11/2/2002) (9/3f2003} 1(12/19/2003) ~
108th Co gress, 2d Sessi -' - (12/7/20 4) Cong. Record: Comm. Reports: Comm. Reports: Bi11 Drafts: Bill Drafts : 2. 2003 ONG US
Senate Bills and House Report No. House Conf, Rep. 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG

Joint Resolutions 108th Co gress, approved by the (8/2/2001) (9/25/2002) (7/31/2003) (12/9/2003) essian President, (11/19/2004) 147 Cong. Rec. House Report No, 2003 CONG US HR
H8246-01 107-696 2003 CONG US HR 2620, Received in (11/15/2001) (9/25/2002) 2739,Reoortedin Senate CongRecord: House (7/22/2003) (11/6/2003) P9essage from the Anniversary of the House Report No, House: reorganization of 107-125 2003 CONG US HR
147 Cono. Rec, the Senate (7/10/2001) Comm. Reports: 2620, Engrossed in S10151-01 Judiciary House (10/03/2001) Committee, House Report No. (11/5/2003) 148 Cong. Rec. Cong. Record: 108-225(11) S6702-03 Bills and Joint (7/22/2003) Presidential Comm. Reports:
Messages: (7/12/2002) Resolutions House Reoott No.
approved by the House Reports No, Communication 108-229 President prior to (7/22/2003) 108-264 Statement by the from the Clerk of sine die (9/29/2003) Press Secretery, the House: adjournment, 2001 WL 1152894 148 Cong. Rec.
148 Cong. Rec. Cang. Record:
H3820-01 H9131-01 United States-Australia (12/16/2002) Australia Free Presidential more... New Public Lawst Trade Messages:
148 Cong. Rec. Implementation Statement by the D1124-03 Act, 150 Cono. Press Secretary (11l7/2002) Rec H5590-01 Slide 102 Legislative history clearly associated with ' relevant amending legislation and codified tbYV ~ TableofGontents I KeySeatch ~MOre ~~
statute mmigrants Text History Disnfay Gurrent Citina References I Monitor with KevCite Alert Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective ...............
F
Prior Text Prior Text Prior Text Prior Text Curis 8 USCA 1184 !- 8 USCA 1184 8 USCA 1184 8 USCA 1184 r B US
____._.._.-_.._. .._........-._ ._._.____ ... .-._ _.._.__ _. _ . _~-._.-_.. .
_ Amended by: Held Amended by: Amended by : Amended by: Amended by: Unconstitutional P.L.107-45. P,L,107-125 P,L.107-273 P.L.108-78. P.L,108-193115 Stats.258, By' 115 Stats. 2403, 116 Stat. 1758 117 Stats.970 117 Stt, 2878 G US

SR 1424 HR 2278 HR 2215 HR 2739 HR 2620 10/1/2001 363 F,3d'58n (1/16/2002) 1(11/2/2002) (9/3/2003) (12/19/2003) 108th Congress, 2d Session (12/7/2ao4) Cong. Record: Comm. Reports: Comm. Reports: Bill Drafts: Bill Drafts : 2. 2003 CONG US
Senate Bills and House Report No. House Conf. Rep. 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG

Joint Resolutions 107-188 No. 107-685 2739, Enrolled Bill 2620, Enrolled Bill 108th Congress, approved by the (8/2/2001) (9/25/2002) (7/31/2003) (12/9/2003) 2d Session President, (11/19/2004) 147 Cona, Rec. House Report No, 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG US HR
H8246-01 107-696 2739, Reported in 2620, Received in (11/15/2001) Cong.
Record: (9/25/2002) House Senate Message from the Anniversary of the House Report No. (7/22/2003) (11/6/2003) House: reorganization of 107-125 2003 CONG US HR
147 Cona. Rec. the Senate (7/10/2001) Comm. Reports: 2620, Engrossed in S10151-01 Judiciary House (10/03/2001) Committee, House Report No. (11/5/2003) 148 Cong. Rec, Cong. Record: 108-225(11) S6702-03 Bills and Joint (7/22/2003) Presidential (7/12/2002) Resolutions Comm. Reports:
Messages: approved b the House Reoort No Communication y 108-229 House Reanrts No, Statement by the President prior to (7122/'2003) 108-264 from the Clerk of sine die Press Sacretary, the House: (9/29/2003) 2001 NeL 1152894 adjournment, 148 Cong. Rec, 148 Cong. Rec. Cong. Record:

(6/21/2002) (12/16/2002) United States-Australia Free Presidential more,., Neve Public Laws: Trade Messages:
148 Cong. Reo. Implementation Statement by the D1124-03 Act, 150 Cona, Press Secretary ., ... . . . .._.._., _-_. . . . . . .. . ._ Pn - ~:~h:,~ ~.
~.. - .. _ . :_. _ ._. . ___.., .. .

Slide 103 JtMLestlavt Unconstitutional/Preemption postings clearly associated with ,~ I Directory I Table of Contents j KsvBearch More relevant statutory version ~SCA 1184 ;sion of nonimmigrants Text Historv Disolav 1 Current Citina References I Monitor with KevCite Alert Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Pri riorA Text PriorText PriorText CurrentText8 US 184 R B 8 S 1184 ~ 8 USCA
1184 P- 8 USCA 1184 r- 8 USCA 1184 F-~...._...,._....~_._.
Amended by: Held A ended by: Amended by: Amended by: =Amended by: Pending Unconstitutional Legislation P.L. 107-45, By. P. 107-125 P.L. ~(107-273 P.L. 108-78, P.L. 108-193, 115 Stat5.258, 11 Stats. 2403, ;116 Stat. 1758 117 Stats.970 117 Stat. 2878 1.

SR 1424 H 2278 i HR 2215 HR 2739 HR 2620 v, Hilton, 24 S 3031 10/1/2001 363 F.3d 58 ( 6/2002) (11/2/2002) (9/3/2003) (12/19/2003) 108th Congress, 2d Session (12/7/2004) Cong. Record: C m. Reports: Conim. Reports: Bill Drafts: Bill Drafts : 2. 2003 CONG US
Senate Bills and House Report No. House Conf. Rep. 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG

Joint Resolutions 107-188 No, 107-685 2739, Enrolled Bill 2620, Enrolled Bill 108th Congress, approved by the (8/2/2001) (9/25/2002) (7/31/2003) (12/9/2003) (11/19/2004) President, 147 Cong. Rec. House Report No. 2009 CONG US HR

(11/15/2001) 2739. Reoorted in 2620, Received in (9/25/2002) enate Cong. Record: ~USe (11/6/2003) Message from the Anniversary of the House Report No. (7/22/2003) House: reorganization of 107-125 2003 CONG US HR
147 Cono. Rec. the Senate (7/10/2001) Comm. Reports: 2620. Engrossed in S10151-01 Judiciary House (10/03/2001) Committee, House ReoortNo. (11/5/2003) 148 Cong. Rec. Cong. Record: 108-225(II) S670 -03 Bills and Joint (7/22/2003) Presidential (7/12/2002) Comm. Reports:
Messages: Resolutions HoUse Reoort No.
approved by the 108-229 House Reoorts No, Statement by the Communication President prior to 108-264 Press Secretary, from the Clerk of sine die (7/22/2003) the House: adou (9/29/2003) 2001 WL 1152894 )rnment, 148 Cong. Rec. 148 Cona, Rec, Cong. Record:

(6/21/2002) (12/16/2002) United States-Australia Free Presidential more.., New Public Laws: Trade Messages:
148 Cono. Rec. Implementation Statement by the D1124-03 Act, 150 Cong. Press Secretary (11/7/2002) Rec. H5690-nl . ... . ,_........ ...... . .......:..._ . .. .. . . 'nnR WI 7'a77745 . . . .
. , , ;, .. _: . _ .. .....,.. ,. . ..:
y'. us Slide 104 Pending Legislation and Future Text Wolcvmo ~ Find ( xKevCite ( Directory ~ Table of Contents ~ KeySearch ' More ~ _ s USCa lis4 8 1184. Admission of nonimmigrants Text History Disolav I Current Citino References ~ Monitor with KeyCite Alert Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective PriorText ............ PriorTest PriorText PriorTest Urrent xt 8 UscA 1184 r- 8 USCA 1184 ~ 8 USCA 1184 C
p" 8 USCA 1 84'"
, 8 USCA 1184 p-._....._..._...... ..............................; _........................
_.
........... _. . ...._. ...._........ . _... + ~
Amended by: Held ( Amended by: Amended by: Amended by: Aniended by: ~ Pending P.L. 107-45. Unconstitutional Legislation :
P.L. 107-125 i~ P.L, 107-279 P,L. 108-78, P.L. 108-193, 115 Stats.258, Oy: 115 Stats. 2403, i116 Stat. 1758 1117 Stats,970 117 Stat.
2878 1. 2003 CONG US
SR 1424 ,HR 2278 HR 2215 iHR 2739 HR 2620 $3031 10/1/2001 U.S. v. Hilton. ((1/16/2002) l(11/2/2002) 1(9/3/2003) (12/19/2003) !
108th Congress, 363 F,3d 58 j ' 2d Session (12/7/2004) Cong. Record: Comm. Reports: Comm. Reports: Bill Drafts: Bill Drafts : 2. 2003 CONG US
Senate Bills and House Report No. House Conf, Rep. 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG

Joint Resolutions 107-138 No. 107-685 2739, Enrolled Bill 2620, Enrolled Bill 108th Congress, approved by the (8/2/2001) (9/25/2002) (7/31/2003) (12/9/2003) 2d Session President, (11/19/2004) 147 Cona. Rec. House Report No. 2003 CONG US HR 2003 CONG US HR
H8246-01 107-696 2620, Received in (11/15/2001) (9125/2002) 2739,Reoortedin Senate Cong. Record: ~e (11/6/2003) Message from the Anniversary of the House Report No, (7/22/2003) House: reorganization of 107-125 2003 CONG US HR
147 Cano, Rec, the Senate (7/10/2001) Comm. Reports: 2620, Engrossed in S10151-01 Judiciary House (10/03/2001) Committee, House ReoortNo. (11/5/2003) 148 Cona, Rec, Cong. Record: 108-225(II) S6702-03 Bills and Joint (7/22/2003) Presidentia{ (7/12/2002) Resolutions Comm. Reports:
Messages: House Report No.
approved by the 108-229 House Reports No.
Communication presidentpriorto 108-264 Statement by the from the Clerk of sine die (7122/2003} (9j29/2003) Press Secretery, the Housec adjournment, 2001 WL 1152844 148 Cona. Rec, 148 Cono, Rec. Cong. Record:

(6/21/2002) (12/16/2002) United States-Australia Free Presidential more... New Public Laws: Trade Messages:
148 Cong. Rec. Implementation Statement by the D1124-03 Act, 150 Cona. Press Secretary (11/7/2002) .. ..... . ...... Rec. H5690-01 ~,pn3 W1 77977745 ,_ _ .
..,.<, . .. .. _... _ .. . ..
............. ... ... . . .. . . ..,.... _ .. _..... .. . . . . . ... . . . .

Graphical KeyCite for Cases Case Box Layout ...............................................................................
...............................................................................
...................111 Procedural Motion Box Layout ...............................................................................
............................................................................

Scenarios ...............................................................................
...............................................................................
...............................112 Sununary of Rules ...............................................................................
...............................................................................
.................145 Case Box Layout icon Short Title Citation Court Line Date File Line or UPO
File Line or UPO

History Tr=eatment Citation Histoyy Treatnaent Citation Procedural Motion Box Layout [icon] History Treatment Court Line Date [KeyCited Case Box]

-SCeYIIIYIOS

Legend:
Full Case = UPPER CASE = FA
lower case = procedural motion = a F

1 Scenario:
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 A& Bareincourt l B
Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.

2 Scenario:

A -> B: A is a parent of B
A -> C: A is a parent of C B C
A,B& C are in court l Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship A
arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.

3 Scenario:
A ->B:AisaparentofB 1 A ->C:AisaparentofC
A->D:AisaparentofD D B C
A,B,C&Dareincourtl Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children. A
~ When there is a T
intersection between a parent and child, the bottom vertical line will be offset.
4 Scenario:
A ->B:AisaparentofB 1 A ->C:AisaparentofC B C
D -> B: D is a parent of B
A, B, C & D are in court 1 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children. D A
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.

Scenario:
A ->B:AisaparentofB 1 Bisincourt l B
Aisincourt 2 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below 2 A
their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.

6 Scenario:
A ->B:AisaparentofB 1 A ->C:AisaparentofC B C
B & C are in court 1 A is in court 2 Rules: 2 ~ Parents are centered below A
their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ The relationship split wiIl occur in the court level of the parent.

7 Scenario:
A ->B:AisaparentofB 1 A ->C:AisaparentofC C
C is in court 1 A & B are in court 2 Rules: B
~ Parents are centered below their children.

~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent.

8 Scenario:
A ->B:AisaparentofB 1 A ->C:AisaparentofC C
Cisincourt 1 B is in court 2 A is in court 3 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship 3 arrows should enter from the A
bottom of the box.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent.

9 Scenario:
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 B->C: B sends case down to C B
B is in court 1 A&Careincourt 2 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below 2 their children.
~ Non-remand relationship A C
arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
Scenario:
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 B->C: B sends case down to C
B->D: B sends case down to D B
B is in court 1 A, C & D are in court 2 A (01/01/00) B (02/01/00) 2 C (03/01/00) D (04/01/00) A C D
Rules.
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-reinand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ When there is more than one case sent down from a single parent, the line from the right of the parent will continue on to accommodate the additional cases.

11 Scenario:
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 B->C: B sends case down to C
C->D: C is a parent of D B D
B& D are in court l A& C are in court 2 A (01/01/00) B (02/01/00) 2 C (03/01/00) A C
D (04/01/00) Rules:

~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ Parents that have a line coYning into the top of the case will have a lin.e coming out of the right that wiIl then connect to it's children.

12 Scenario:
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 B->C: B sends case down to C
C->D: C is a parent of D B D E
C->E: C is a parent of E
B, D& E are in court l A& C are in court 2 A (01/01/00) 2 B (02/01/00) A C
C (03/01/00) D (04/01/00) Rules.
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ Parents that have a line coming into the top of the case will have a line coming out of the right that will then coimect to it's children.

13 Scenario:
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 A->C: A is a parent of C B
B->C: B is a parent of C
B is in court 1 A & C are in court 2 2 Rules: C

~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the A
bottom of the box.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.

14 Scenario:
A->B: A is the parent of B 1 A & B's relationship is "Appeal A B
after Remand"
A & B are in court I
Rules:
Parents will be drawn to the left of a child, when they are in the same court level and there relationship is on the Lateral Litigation list.

15 Scenario:
A->B: A is the parent of B 1 B
A & B's relationship is "Appeal after Remand"
A is in court 2 Bisincourtl ~
A
Rules: ~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ When the parent and child's relationship is on the Lateral Litigation list, but they are not in the same court level the Lateral Litigation will not be used to determine the placement.

16 Scenario:
A->B: A is the parent of B 1 A->C: A is the parent of C
B
A & B's relationship is "Appeal after Remand"
A & C's relationship is "Appeal after Remand" A
C
A, B & C are in court 1 Rules:
~ Parents will be drawn to the left of a child, when they are in the same court level and there relationship is on the Lateral Liti ation list.
17 Scenario:
A->C: A is a parent of C 1 B->C: B is a parent of C C
C is in court 1 A & B are in court 2 Rules:
= Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship B A
arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ If a parent cannot be centered below a child, it wiIl be offset below a child.

18 Scenario:
A->D: A is a parent of D 1 B->D: B is a parent of D D
C->D: C is a parent of D
D is in court l A, B & C are in court 2 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below 2 their children.
~ Non-remand relationship C B A
arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ If a parent cannot be centered below a child, it will be offset below a child.

19 Scenario:
A->E: A is a parent of E
B->E: B is a parent of E 1 C->E: C is a parent of E E
D->E: D is a parent of E
E is in court 1 A, B, C & D are in court 2 Rules:
~ Paxents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship D C B A
arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ If a parent cannot be centered below a child, it will be offset below a child.
~ The width of the child wiIl expand to the point necessary in order for all of it's parents relationships to be drawn.

20 Scenario:
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 B->C: B is a parent of C C
A->C: A is a parent of C
C is in court l B is in court 2 Aisincourt 3 2 B
Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children. 3 ~ Non-remand relationship A
arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ When the parent would need to go around one chfld to get to another it wiIl be offset.

21 Scenario:
A->B:AisaparentofB 1 C
B->C: B is a parent of C
A->C: A is a parent of C
D->C: D is a parent of C
D->A: D is a parent of A
C is in court 1 Bisincourt 2 _, . ,.
A is in court 3 B

D is in court 4 Rules: 3 ~ Parents are centered below their children. A
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box. --------~ ---~-- - ------ ' ~ When the parent would need 4 to go around one child to get D
to another it will be offset.
A . . . . - _ _ - . .

23 Scenario:
A->b: A is a parent of b b is in court l 1 Aisincourt 2 b Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship 2 arrows should enter from the A
bottom of the box.

24 Scenario:
A->b: A is a parent of b l A->c: A is a parent of c ~
A, b & careincourt 1 Rules: ~
~ Parents are centered below -their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box. A
~ Motions for the same parent in the same court level are stacked on top of each other.

25 Scenario:
A->b: A is a parent of b 1 A->c: A is a parent of c ~
b & c are in court 1 Aisincourt2 D
Rules:
~ Parents are centered below 2 their children.
~ Non-remand relationship A
arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
= Motions for the same parent in the saine court level are stacked on top of each other.
26 Scenario:
A->b: A is a parent of b 1 d A->c: A is a parent of c A->d: A is a parent of d b 8ccareincourt 2 d is in court 1 c Aisincourt 3 ._ ., b Rules:.
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship A
arrows should enter from the bottom of the box. ~ -- - - -~ Motions for the same parent in the same court level are stacked on top of each other.

27 Scenario:
A->b: A is a parent of b 1 A->c: A is a parent of c ~
A, b & c are in court l A (01/01/00) ~
b (02/01/00) c (03/01/00) Rules:
~ Parents are centered below A
their children.
~ Non-reinand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ Motions for the same parent in the same court level are stacked on top of each other ~ Stacked procedural motions are ordered with the earliest on the bottom andthelatestontheto .
28 Scenario:
A->b: A is a parent of b A->c: A is a parent of c ~
A, b & c are in court l A (01/01/00) ~
b (02/01 /00) c (02/01/00) Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children. p' ~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ Motions for the same parent in the same court level are stacked on top of each other ~ When procedural motions have the same date, they are stacked in whatever order we receive them.

29 Scenario:
A->b: A is a parent of b 1 d A->c: A is a parent of c A->d: A is a parent of d d is in court 1 2 A, b& c are in court 2 a A (01/01/00) b (02/01/00) b d (03/01/00) c (04/01/00) Rules:.
~ Parents are centered below A
their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ Motions for the same parent in the saine court level are stacked on top of each other.
~ Stacked procedural motions are ordered with the earliest on the bottom and the latest on the top.
~ When ordering the children from left to right, an entire stack of procedural motions takes on the date of its earliest member.

30 Scenario:
A->b: A is a parent of b 1 d b->c: b is a parent of c A->d: A is a parent of d d is in court 1 A, b& c are in court 2 2 c A (01/01/00) b (02/01/00) d (03/01/00) b c (04/01/00) Rules:

~ Parents are centered below A
their children.
L I
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent 31 Scenario:
A->c: A is a parent of c with 1 history treatinent of x. C
B->c: B is a parent of c with history treatment of y.
A,B&careincourt l B A
A (01/01/00) B (02/01/00) c (03/01/00) Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ ,' Non-reniand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ If a procedural box has different history treatments to display, it shall be promoted to a substantive full case box.

32 Scenario:
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 A->C: A is a parent of C C
C is in court 1 A & B are in court 3 Rules: 2 ~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the B
bottom of the box.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent ~
33 Scenario:
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 A->C: A is a parent of C
A (01/01/00) B C
B (02/01/00) C (03/01/00) A, B, & C are in court 1 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below A
their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ The children wiII be in order with the earliest child on the left and the latest child on the right.

34 Scenario:
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 A->C: A is a parent of C C
D->C: D is a parent of D (01/01/00) A (02/01/00) B (03/01/00) D a C (04/01/00) A,B,C8cDareincourtl Rules:
~ Parents are centered below A
their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ If a parent cannot be centered below a child, it will be offset below a child ~ The children will be in order with the earliest child on the left and the latest child on the right.

35 Scenario:
C->E: C is a parent of E 1 C->D: C is a parent of D E
B->E: B is a parent of E
B->C: B is a parent of C
A->B: A is a parent of B
A->D: A is a parent of D
A, B, C, D 8i E are in court 1 D
A (01/01/00) B (02/01 /00) C (03/01/00) D (04/01/00) C
E (05/01/00) Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship B
airows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ If a parent cannot be centered below a child, it will be A
offset below a child ~ The children will be in order with the earliest child on the left and the latest child on the right.
~ When lines need to cross their wiIl be a bump on the horizontal line at the point where the lines cross.

36 Scenario (Miranda - 86 sct Rules:
1602): ~ Parents are centered below their children.
A->B: A is a parent of B ~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from A->c: A is a parent of c the bottom of the box.
A->d: A is a parent of d ~ When there is a T intersection between a parent B->e: B is a parent of e and child, the bottom vertical line will be offset.
B->f: B is a parent of f ~ The relationship split will occur in the court level B->g: B is a parent of g of the parent.
B->h: B is a parent of h ~ The width of the child will expand to the point B->i: B is a parent of i necessary in order for all of it's parents B->P: B is a parent of P relationships to be drawn.
K->l: K is a parent of 1 ~ Motions for the same parent in the same court K->P: K is a parent of P level are stacked on top of each otller.
J->m: J is a parent of m ~ Stacked procedural motions are ordered with the J->P: J is a parent of P earliest on the bottom and the latest on the top.
O->n: 0 is a parent of n ~ When procedural motions have the same date, they 0->P: 0 is a parent of P are stacked in whatever order we receive them.
P->q: P is a parent of q ~ When ordering the children from left to right, an entire stack of procedural motions takes on the A and J are in court 3 date of its earliest member.
B,c,d,e,f,g,h,K, and 0 are in ~ The children will be in order with the earliest child court 2 on the left and the latest child on the right.
i,l,m,n,P and q are in court 1 q P
2 ~

K O
~
e c B

37 Scenario (Festo - 172 F.3d 1361): Rules:
A->E: A is a parent of E ~ Parents are centered below their children.
A->J: A is a parent/great-grandparent of J ~ Non-remand relationship arrows should B->E: B is a parent of E enter from the bottom of the box.
B->J: B is a parent/great-grandparent of J ~ When there is a T intersection between a B->C: B is a parent of C parent and child, the bottom vertical line D->E: D is a parent of E will be offset.
E->F: E is a parent of F ~ The relationship split will occur in the E->G: E is a parent/grandparent of G court level of the parent.
E->H: E is a parent/grandparent to H ~ Cases sent down will start with a line F->G: F is a parent of G from the right of the case to the top of the F->H: F is a parent of H case sent down to.
F->J: F is a parent of J ~ When there is more than one case sent H->I: H is a parent of I down from a single parent, the line from H->J: H is a parent / sibling of J the right of the parent will continue on to J->k: J is a parent of k accommodate the additional cases.
J->L: J is a parent of L ~ Parents that have a line coming into the L->M: L is a parent of M top of the case will have a line coming M->N: M is a parent of N out of the right that will then connect to N->o: N is a parent of o it's children.
N->p: N is a parent of p ~ If a parent cannot be centered below a child, it will be offset below a child.
F, k, L, p & 0 are in court 1 ~ Motions for the same parent in the same E, G, H, I, J, M & N are in court 2 court level are stacked on top of each C & D are in court 3 other.
A & B are in court 4 ~ Stacked procedural motions are ordered with the earliest on the bottom and the A (12/00/1973) latest on the top.
B (10/12/1982) ~ When procedural motions have the same C (04/12/1982) date, they are stacked in whatever order D (02/03/1994) we receive them.
E(12/14/1995) ~ When ordering the children from left to F (03/17/1997) right, an entire stack of procedural G(06/09/1997) motions takes on the date of its earliest H (04/19/1999) member.
I(08/20/1999) ~ The children will be in order with the J (11/29/2000) earliest child on the left and the latest k(06/18/2001) child on the right.
L (05/28/2002) M (09/20/2002) N (09/26/2002) o (04/19/2004) p (04/19/2004) 1 ~
F k L

T r ~ , M G H

C D

---- f - -EBj 38 Scenario (Habeas - 666 NYS2d 463): 1 A->b:Aisaparentofb b C
A C:AisaparentofC
C-> D: C is a parent of D
D ->E:DisaparentofE
E->F:EisaparentofF
C-> F: C is a parent of F 2 b & C are in court level 1 A E
A & E are in court level 2 D & F are in court level 3 A (Dec 1997) 3 b (Mar 1998) D F
C (Dec 1998) D (Jun 2003) E (Oct 2004) F (Dec 2004) Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent.
= Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
= When there is more than one case sent down from a single parent, the line from the right of the parent will continue on to accommodate the additional cases.
~ Parents that have a line coming into the top of the case will have a line coming out of the right that will then connect to it's children.
~ The children will be in order with the earliest child on the left and the latest child on the right.

39 Scenario (CPC international 777 Fsupp 549): 1 A -> B: A is a parent of B
A ->D:AisaparentofD
B-> C: B is a parent of C
B -> D: B is a parent of D
D ->e:Disaparentofe D->F:DisaparentofF e G H
D ->G:DisaparentofG
D->H:DisaparentofH
F->I:FisaparentofI
I->J:IisaparentofJ 2-e, F, G& H are in court 1 B, C, D & I are in court 2 A&Jareincourt3 A(Aug 1991) C D
B (Ju11995) C (Oct 1995) D (May 1997) e (Dec 1997) B
F (Jun 8, 1998) G (Jun 15, 1998) H (Jun 15, 1998) I (Jun 17, 1998) 3 ---J (Nov 2001) r A J
Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ When ordering the children from left to right, an entire stack of procedural motions takes on the date of its earliest member.
~ The children will be in order with the earliest child on the 14PW #kvWst child on the right. 135 40 Seenario(583 So2d 276):
A ->B:AisaparentofB 1 B ->c:Bisaparentofc B->D:BisaparentofD c g A ->E:AisaparentofE
E->F;EisaparentofF
E->g:Eisaparentofg B & D are joined by a lateral B
litigation phrase A & E are joined by a lateral litigation phrase c& g are in court 1 D
B is in court 2 A,D,E&Fareincourt3 A (Aug 3, 1990) -_ t B (Apr 11, 1991) A E
c (Mar 2, 1992) D (Aug 14, 1998) E (Dec 16, 2003) - -----F (Feb 18, 2004) g (Oct 4, 2004) Rules:
~ Parents are centered below ~ Parents will be drawn to the left of a child, their children. when they are in the same court level and there ~ Non-remand relationship relationship is on the Lateral Litigation list.
arrows should enter from the ~ The children will be in order with the earliest bottom of the box. child on the left and the latest child on the right.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ Parents that have a line coining into the top of the case will have a line coming out of the right that will then connect to it's children.

41 Scenario(125 SCt 82): Rules:
B -> A: B is a parent of A ~ Parents are centered below their children.
C -> A: B is a parent of A ~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from D -> A: B is a parent of A the bottom of the box.
E -> A: B is a parent of A ~ If a parent cannot be centered below a child, it will F -> A: B is a parent of A be offset below a child.
G -> A: B is a parent of A ~ The width of the child will expand to the point H -> A: B is a parent of A necessary in order for all of it's parents I -> A: B is a parent of A relationships to be drawn.
J -> A: B is a parent of A ~ The children will be in order with the earliest child K -> A: B is a parent of A on the left and the latest child on the right.
L -> A: B is a parent of A
M -> A: B is a parent of A
N -> A: B is a parent of A
O ->A:BisaparentofA
P->A:BisaparentofA
Q-> A: B is a parent of A
R -> A: B is a parent of A
S ->A:BisaparentofA
T-> A: B is a parent of A
U->A: B is a parent of A
V -> A: B is a parent of A
W ->A:BisaparentofA
X -> A: B is a parent of A
Y -> A: B is a parent of A
Z-> A: B is a parent of A
AA ->A:BisaparentofA
BB -> A: BB is a parent of A
A is in court level 1 B,C,D,F,G,H,I,J,K,L,M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA & BB are in court level A
.. _ ;

B C D E F G H I J I{ L M~N O P~~ R ~T U'~V W X Y Z AA BB

42 Scenario (2002 WL 485700):

A->B: A is a parent of B
A->C: A is a parent of C C D
C->D: C is a parent of D
D->E: D is a parent of E

C & D are joined by a lateral 2 litigation phrase B
A (Mar 2002) B (May 2002) C (2003) D (June 2004) A
E (Nov 2004) C & D are in court level 1 A, B & E are in court level 2 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ Parents will be drawn to the left of a child, when they are in the same court level and there relationship is on the Lateral Litigation list.
~ The children will be in order with the earliest child on the left and the latest child on the right.

43 Scenario(212 Fsupp2d 1319):

A->B: A is a parent of B 1 B->C:BisaparentofC C
C->D: C is a parent of D
A->D: A is a parent of D

B & C are joined by a lateral 2 litigation phrase B D
C & D are joined by a lateral litigation phrase A (2002) B (Apr 2003) C (Dec 2003) A
D (2004) C is in court level 1 B & D are in court level 2 A is in court level 3 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ Parents will be drawn to the left of a child, when they are in the same court level and there relationship is on the Lateral Litigation list.
~ If a parent cannot be centered below a child, it will be offset below a child.
~ The children will be in order with the earliest child on the left and the latest child on the right.

44 Scenario(320 F3d 1073):

A->B: A is a parent of B 1 B->C: B is a parent of C

A & B are joined by a lateral litigation phrase B & C are joined by a lateral 2 litigation phrase A C
A (2003) B (2004) C (2005) B is in court level 1 A & C are in court level 2 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ Parents will be drawn to the left of a child, when they are in the same court level and there relationship is on the Lateral Litigation list.
~ The children will be in order with the earliest child on the left and the latest child on the right.

45 Scenario (179 BR 264):

A->B: A is a parent of B 1 A->C: A is a parent of C C
D->B: D is a parent of B
D->C: D is a parent of C
A (1995) B (2001) B
C (2004) D (1996) B& C are in court level 1 2 A & D are in court level 2 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the . ;:
bottom of the box.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent.
~ The children will be in order with the earliest child on the left and the latest child on the right.

46 Scenario(923 P2d 197):
A->b: A is a parent of b 1 A->C: A is a parent of C b C->D: C is a parent of D
D->E: D is a parent of E
A->E: A is a parent of E

A & C are joined by a lateral litigation phrase D & E are joined by a lateral litigation phrase A & E are joined by a lateral A
litigation phrase E
A (1995) D
b (1997) C (2001) D (2002) E (2004) 4 b is in court level 1 A, D& E are in court level3 C are in court level 4 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below ' Parents will be drawn to the left of a child, when their children. they are in the same court level and there ~ Non-remand relationship relationship is on the Lateral Litigation list.
arrows should enter from the ' A case has remanded Child and a lateral bottom of the box. litigation child there should have two lines ~ Cases sent down will start coming out of the right of the box.
with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ When there is more than one case sent down from a single parent, the line from the right of the parent will continue on to accommodate the additional cases.
~ Parents that have a line coming into the top of the case will have a line coming out of the right that will then connect to it's children.

47 Scenario(1998 WL 1285714):
A->B: A is a parent of B 1 B->C: B is a parent of C
C->D: C is a parent of D C
C->E: C is a parent of E
F->B: F is a parent of B

B & C are joined by a lateral 2 litigation phrase B D E
C & D are joined by a lateral litigation phrase C & E are joined by a lateral litigation phrase 3.

A (1998) A F
B (2001) C (2002) D (Nov 20, 2002) E .(Nov 20, 2002) F (2000) C is in court level 1 B, D& E are in court level 2 A & F are in court level 3 Rules:
~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ When there is more than one case sent down from a single parent, the line from the right of the parent will continue on to accommodate the additional cases.
~ The children will be in order with the earliest child on the left and the latest child on the right.

Summaiy of Rules ~ Parents are centered below their children.
~ Non-remand relationship arrows should enter from the bottom of the box.
~ When there is a T intersection between a parent and child, the bottom vertical line will be offset.
~ The relationship split will occur in the court level of the parent.
~ Cases sent down will start with a line from the right of the case to the top of the case sent down to.
~ When there is more than one case sent down from a single parent, the line froin the right of the parent will continue on to accommodate the additional cases.
~ Parents that have a line coming into the top of the case will have a line coming out of the right that will then connect to it's children.
~ Parents will be drawn to the left of a child, when they are in the same court level and there relationship is on the Lateral Litigation list.
~ If a parent cannot be centered below a child, it will be offset below a child.
~ The width of the child will expand to the point necessary in order for all of it's parents relationships to be drawn.
~ When the parent would need to go around one child to get to another it will be offset.
~ Motions for the same parent in the same court level are stacked on top of each other.
~ Stacked procedural motions are ordered with the earliest on the bottom and the latest on the top.
~ When procedural motions have the same date, they are stacked in whatever order we receive them.
~ When ordering the children from left to right, an entire stack of procedural motions takes on the date of its earliest member.
~ The children will be in order with the earliest child on the left and the latest child on the right.
~ When lines need to cross their will be a bump on the horizontal line at the point where the lines cross.
~ If a procedural box has different history treatments to display, it shall be promoted to a substantive box.
~ A case has remanded Child and a lateral litigation child there should have two lines coming out of the right of the box.
~ Only stack procedural motions that have a common single parent.

Highlights Beyond Citation Checking: Graphical KeyCite Paints a Picture of Procedural Case History A picture is worth a thousand words. For legal researchers, the powerful, new Graphical KeyCite may be worth even more because it literally illustrates the procedural history of case law.

Thomson West, a business within The Thomson Corporation (NYSE: TOC;
TSX: TOC) today introduced Graphical KeyCite, the latest innovation to KeyCite , the service that has revolutionized citation checking since it was first introduced.

In that year, law librarians at the American Association of Law Libraries applauded the intuitive KeyCite flags that instantly let legal researchers know whether a judicial opinion was still good law, as well as the depth-of-treatrnent stars and symbols that indicated how extensively the case had been relied on in other opinions. KeyCite also was the first citation checking service to enable researchers to effortlessly probe the history of a case.

Graphical KeyCite takes these innovations to a new plateau by literally painting a picture of a case's direct history. The feature links citations to later motions, pleadings and lower-court decisions as the case ascends to higher courts. This exclusive KeyCite feature helps researchers to instantly see how a case moved through the court system over time, and to quickly understand the impact at each level.

"For the first time, the history of the court case is illustrated, helping researchers understand the impact faster," said Jon Medin, director of Product Development for KeyCite.

Medin added that KeyCite combines analysis from legal editors at Thomson West with technology to illuminate issues such as how much the citing case discusses the cited case. "The same attorney-editors who author West's extensive collection of authoritative case law headnotes also assign the KeyCite flags and symbols attorneys and the judiciary rely on to see whether citations are still good law," noted Medin.

Documents on Westlaw include more links to related sources than any other legal research service. Medin noted that Graphical KeyCite leverages those links and uses proprietary technologies to illustrate the connections between court documents as they move through the judicial system. Additionally, researchers can simply click icons to open the full-text documents on Westlaw.

"In our tests, researchers using Graphical KeyCite understood the direct history of cases faster and more accurately," said Mike Bernstein, senior director of Westlaw Marketing for Thomson West. "For anyone performing citation research, a Graphical KeyCite picture is definitely worth a thousand words."

While the foregoing has been with reference to a particular embodiment of the invention, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that changes in this embodiment may be made without departing from the principles and spirit of the invention, the scope of which is defined by the appended claims.

Classifications
International ClassificationG06F17/30
Cooperative ClassificationY10S707/927, G06F17/30864, G06F17/30728
European ClassificationG06F17/30T6C, G06F17/30W1
Legal Events
DateCodeEventDescription
2 Jun 2011EEERExamination request