Prior art

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 11468497, I need to access the full patent document, including its cited references. The provided patent text includes some high-level information and definitions, but not the detailed list of prior art citations or claims themselves.

Since I don't have direct access to the USPTO database for live querying, I will explain the general process a patent analyst would follow and then, based on the provided patent text, identify any internal references to prior art within the document's own definitions or descriptions.

General Process for Identifying Prior Art from a Patent Document:

1. Obtain the Full Patent Document: The first step is to get the complete patent document from the USPTO website or a patent database (e.g., Patent Center, Patent Public Search).
2. Locate "References Cited" Section: Within the patent document, there will be a section titled "References Cited" (or similar). This section lists all prior art documents (patents, patent applications, non-patent literature) that the examiner and/or applicant considered relevant during prosecution.
3. Review Each Cited Reference: For each listed reference, the analyst would:
   • Retrieve Full Citation: Record the patent number, publication number, inventor(s), assignee, and publication/filing dates.
   • Obtain the Document: Access the full text of the cited patent or publication.
   • Brief Description: Summarize the core invention or relevant teachings of the prior art.
   • Anticipation Analysis (35 U.S.C. § 102): Compare the teachings of the prior art reference to each claim of US 11468497. A claim is anticipated if every element of the claim is disclosed, either explicitly or inherently, in a single prior art reference. This is a detailed, claim-by-claim analysis.

Analysis based on the Provided Patent Text (US11468497B2):

The provided text for US11468497B2 does not include a "References Cited" section listing specific prior art patents. However, it does mention and distinguish itself from existing technologies and general concepts, which are forms of prior art even if not formal patent citations:

• Google, Amazon, Bing, Yahoo, Wikipedia, Mozilla Firefox, eBay, Skype, FaceTime, Apple.com, Dominos, Papa Johns, Pizza Hut: These are mentioned as existing services, websites, or entities that provide functionality related to searching, purchasing, social networking, or communication. The patent often describes how its invention improves upon or integrates with these existing systems.
  • For example, the patent states, "the present disclosure overcomes the above-indicated deficiencies in current search implementations by providing a unified search field that enables a user to provide user input and achieve, in very few steps, one of a set of goals, such as completing a purchase, executing a search, executing a program, or interacting with an online service." This implicitly acknowledges that prior search implementations exist.
  • The patent also notes, "the current use of input fields is simple. The user inputs text related to a search and hits enter or clicks on the search button. Google processes the search and returns a list of results." This describes the existing state of the art for general search engines.
  • Regarding e-commerce, it mentions, "search Amazon® to purchase an item. The user then must enter the address www.Amazon.com into the URL field of the web browser and hit enter or click “go” or provide some similar input, at which point the web browser contacts Amazon, retrieves the page data, and presents the Amazon web page user interface with a separate search field." This sets the context for existing online purchasing methods.

Without the explicit "References Cited" section from the patent document itself, it is not possible for me to provide specific patent citations, their publication/filing dates, brief descriptions, and which claims they anticipate under 35 U.S.C. § 102. This detailed analysis requires access to the full patent document.