Prior art

Analysis of Prior Art for U.S. Patent 10,372,793

An examination of the prior art cited on the face of U.S. Patent 10,372,793, "Hyperlink with graphical cue," reveals several key references that the patent examiner considered during prosecution. The most relevant of these are detailed below. This analysis is based on the information available in the patent's file wrapper and public patent databases as of May 12, 2026.

It is crucial to note that the '793 patent is part of a continuation chain, claiming a priority date of March 20, 2006, from U.S. Application No. 11/384,957 (now U.S. Patent 7,529,795). Therefore, any prior art must have a publication date preceding this priority date to be considered for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Examiner-Cited Prior Art

The following references were cited by the USPTO examiner during the prosecution of the patent application.

U.S. Patent No. 7,249,326 (Glazer et al.)

• Full Citation: US 7,249,326 B2
• Title: System and method for navigating a network of linked documents
• Filing Date: June 29, 2000
• Issue Date: July 24, 2007
• Brief Description: Glazer discloses a system that generates a "visual sitemap" or a graphical map of a website's structure. This map can include thumbnail images of the web pages. A user can hover over or click on nodes in this graphical map to see previews or navigate to the corresponding pages. The system is designed to give users a better sense of a website's layout and content before navigating.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims: Glazer appears relevant to the general concept of using graphical representations for navigation. However, it differs from the specific steps claimed in the '793 patent. Glazer's primary focus is on generating a sitemap of a single website, whereas the '793 patent claims a system where selecting a textual category link (first set of representations) then displays a set of graphical links (second set of representations) to various external websites. Glazer does not explicitly teach the two-step process of displaying textual categories that, upon a hover interaction, reveal pre-downloaded graphical logos for external sites. Therefore, while related, it does not appear to fully anticipate independent claims 1 or 23.

U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0069279 (Perkes)

• Full Citation: US 2002/0069279 A1
• Title: System and method for providing a graphical user interface for a search engine
• Filing Date: November 30, 2000
• Publication Date: June 6, 2002
• Brief Description: Perkes describes a graphical user interface for a search engine that displays search results as a collection of graphical objects, such as logos or thumbnail images of the websites. The user can interact with these graphical objects to navigate to the corresponding websites. The interface is intended to make search results more intuitive and visually appealing than a simple list of text links.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims: Perkes discloses the use of graphical representations (like logos) as hyperlinks. This is a key element of the '793 patent's claims. However, Perkes's system is in the context of displaying search engine results. It does not teach the specific claimed method of first displaying a set of textual hyperlink categories and then, in response to a user hovering over one of those categories, displaying a second set of corresponding graphical links. The two-tiered interaction model (text hover revealing graphical links) is a distinguishing feature of the '793 patent's claims that is not clearly present in Perkes.

U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0071754 (Bier)

• Full Citation: US 2005/0071754 A1
• Title: Live preview of link destinations
• Filing Date: September 25, 2003
• Publication Date: March 31, 2005
• Brief Description: Bier discloses a method for previewing the content of a linked webpage without navigating away from the current page. When a user hovers the cursor over a hyperlink, a small pop-up window appears, displaying a thumbnail image or a summary of the destination page's content. This allows the user to quickly assess the relevance of the link.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims: Bier teaches the concept of a hover interaction triggering the display of additional information related to a hyperlink. This is relevant to the "hovering" element described in claim 1 of the '793 patent. However, Bier's invention is focused on providing a preview of the destination content (a thumbnail of the page itself), not on revealing a second, distinct set of graphical hyperlink representations like company logos. The '793 patent claims a system where the hover reveals a menu of selectable logos, not just a preview of a single link's destination. This difference in functionality suggests that Bier does not fully anticipate the claims.

U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0144573 (Hattori et al.)

• Full Citation: US 2005/0144573 A1
• Title: Link information display device, method, and program
• Filing Date: December 25, 2003
• Publication Date: June 30, 2005
• Brief Description: Hattori discloses a system for displaying additional information about a hyperlink when a user's cursor hovers over it. This additional information can include text summaries or a thumbnail image of the linked page, presented in a pop-up window. The goal is to help the user understand the link's destination before clicking.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims: Similar to Bier, Hattori describes a hover-activated preview mechanism for a hyperlink. It shares the same limitations as Bier when considered as prior art against the '793 patent. Hattori's system displays a preview of the content at the link's destination, not a second set of selectable graphical hyperlinks (e.g., logos) that are thematically grouped under a textual category link. The core inventive step claimed in the '793 patent—the two-step, text-to-graphics navigational menu—is not taught by Hattori.

Summary of Prior Art Relevance

The prior art cited by the examiner establishes that the concepts of using graphical representations for hyperlinks and using hover interactions to display additional link information were known before the '793 patent's priority date of March 20, 2006. However, none of the cited references appear to explicitly disclose the complete combination of limitations found in the independent claims of the '793 patent, specifically:

1. Displaying a first set of textual representations of hyperlinks (e.g., categories).
2. Upon a user hover over one of the textual representations, displaying a second, different set of graphical representations of hyperlinks (e.g., company logos).
3. The graphical representations being pre-downloaded to allow for quick display.
4. Navigating to a destination upon selection from the second (graphical) set.

The novelty of the '793 patent, as allowed by the examiner, appears to reside in this specific workflow, which combines these known UI elements into a particular two-tiered menu system for web navigation. An invalidity challenge would likely need to find a single reference teaching this entire combination or argue that combining the teachings of multiple references to arrive at this system would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time.