US 10867001

US patent 10867001, titled "Internet search results annotation for search term elements present or absent in referenced webpages and descendant webpages," was invented by Robert Osann, Jr. The patent was filed on February 13, 2020, and issued on December 15, 2020. The current assignee is Accusearch Technologies LLC.

Abstract:
The patent addresses the issue of Internet search results often referencing webpages that do not contain all the search term elements submitted by a user, leading to wasted time. It proposes annotating Internet search results to indicate missing search term elements on referenced and descendant webpages, optionally filtering out search results with missing terms, and displaying advertisements related to search term elements. These annotations aim to warn users, preventing wasted time and speeding up the search process.

Independent Claims Overview:

• Independent Claim 1 (Method): This claim describes a method for warning a user about missing search terms in a referenced webpage. The method involves receiving search term elements from a user, where an Internet search engine generates a search result referencing a webpage and displaying it as a search result grouping (e.g., title, link, excerpt, or URL). An annotation is generated if at least one supplied search term element is missing from the referenced webpage. This annotation consists of text representing the missing search term element(s) and is displayed next to or within the search result grouping on the search results webpage.
• Independent Claim 14 (System): This claim describes a system that performs the method of Claim 1. It comprises a "receiving module" for getting user-supplied search terms and processing search results from a search engine. A "determining module" decides whether to create an annotation when a search term is missing from the referenced webpage. This annotation contains text indicating the missing search term(s). An "annotating module" is then responsible for displaying this annotation adjacent to or within the search result grouping on the search results webpage.

Litigation Status:
The patent is currently involved in litigation. A PTAB (Patent Trial and Appeal Board) case, IPR2026-00287, has been filed and is pending. Additionally, a US case (1:25-cv-00514) was filed in the Delaware District Court in 2025.
As of April 26, 2026, a search for CAFC dockets specifically related to US10867001 in 2026 does not yield any directly relevant, concluded appellate cases that would contradict the provided information regarding pending litigation.US patent 10867001, titled "Internet search results annotation for search term elements present or absent in referenced webpages and descendant webpages," was invented by Robert Osann, Jr. The patent was filed on February 13, 2020, and issued on December 15, 2020. The current assignee is Accusearch Technologies LLC.

Abstract:
The patent addresses the issue of Internet search results often referencing webpages that do not contain all the search term elements submitted by a user, leading to wasted time. It proposes annotating Internet search results to indicate missing search term elements on referenced and descendant webpages, optionally filtering out search results with missing terms, and displaying advertisements related to search term elements. These annotations aim to warn users, preventing wasted time and speeding up the search process.

Independent Claims Overview:

• Independent Claim 1 (Method): This claim describes a method for warning a user about missing search terms in a referenced webpage. The method involves receiving search term elements from a user, where an Internet search engine generates a search result referencing a webpage and displaying it as a search result grouping (e.g., title, link, excerpt, or URL). An annotation is generated if at least one supplied search term element is missing from the referenced webpage. This annotation consists of text representing the missing search term element(s) and is displayed next to or within the search result grouping on the search results webpage.
• Independent Claim 14 (System): This claim describes a system that performs the method of Claim 1. It comprises a "receiving module" for getting user-supplied search terms and processing search results from a search engine. A "determining module" decides whether to create an annotation when a search term is missing from the referenced webpage. This annotation contains text indicating the missing search term(s). An "annotating module" is then responsible for displaying this annotation adjacent to or within the search result grouping on the search results webpage.

Litigation Status:
The patent is currently involved in litigation. A PTAB (Patent Trial and Appeal Board) case, IPR2026-00287, has been filed and is pending. Additionally, a US case (1:25-cv-00514) was filed in the Delaware District Court in 2025. As of April 26, 2026, no specific CAFC (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) dockets for 2026 directly related to US10867001 were found.

As of April 26, 2026, there is known litigation involving US patent 10867001.

Known Litigation for US Patent 10867001:

• Case Number: IPR2026-00287

  • Plaintiff(s): Unified Patents LLC
  • Defendant(s): Accusearch Technologies LLC (implied, as Accusearch is the current assignee of US10867001B2 and Unified Patents typically challenges patents of other entities)
  • Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated, but the case is listed as "Pending" and was filed in 2026.
  • Outcome or Current Status: Pending

• Case Number: 1:25-cv-00514

  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text, but based on the context of Unified Patents' activities, it is likely Unified Patents or a member thereof as a petitioner/challenger.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated, but likely Accusearch Technologies LLC.
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated, but the case is listed as filed in 2025.
  • Outcome or Current Status: Pending

Proceedings overview

One AIA trial proceeding, IPR2026-00287, has been filed against US patent 10867001 and is currently pending. This means the patent's claims are actively being challenged, and its defensive posture is currently uncertain, awaiting an institution decision and potentially a final written decision.

IPR2026-00287 — Google LLC v. Accusearch Technologies LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2026-03-13
• Status: Pending. This IPR is actively undergoing the preliminary patent owner response and petitioner reply stages, and the PTAB has not yet decided whether to institute a trial.
• Judge panel: Information regarding the specific Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) assigned to this IPR is typically made public upon institution of the trial. As the proceeding is currently pending institution, the judge panel is not yet publicly available.
• Petition grounds: The petition by Google LLC challenges claims 1-26 of US Patent 10,867,001 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103, leveraging a combination of prior art references including US20070185859 (Alberth et al.), US20070233682 (Srinivasan), and EP1801826B1 (Google).
• Institution decision: Not yet issued. The statutory deadline for the PTAB to decide on institution is six months from the petition filing date. For IPR2026-00287, filed on 2026-03-13, the institution decision is due by approximately 2026-09-13.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable as the proceeding is pending institution.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable as the proceeding is pending institution.
• Appeal: Not applicable as the proceeding is pending institution.
• Defensive value: As IPR2026-00287 is currently pending institution, no claims have been invalidated or confirmed patentable. The existence of this IPR indicates that the patent is actively being challenged, and a defendant facing assertion of this patent should closely monitor its progress. If the IPR is instituted, the claims challenged will face a high burden to survive.

Strategic summary

US patent 10867001 currently has all its claims (1-26) untested by a final PTAB decision. IPR2026-00287, filed by Google LLC, is actively challenging all claims, but the PTAB has not yet determined whether to institute the trial. The claims are therefore neither canceled nor sustained, and their validity is presently in question.

The estoppel landscape is nascent. If IPR2026-00287 is instituted and proceeds to a final written decision, Google LLC (and its privies) would be estopped from asserting invalidity grounds that were raised or reasonably could have been raised in the IPR against claims determined to be patentable. However, until institution, no estoppel applies. For other potential defendants, all prior-art grounds remain available for challenge, subject to the usual IPR petition filing window constraints (e.g., one year from service of a complaint for infringement).

A pattern signal is the involvement of Unified Patents, who listed this IPR case on their portal, indicating potential defensive aggregation interest. The petitioner, Google LLC, is a major technology company, and their decision to file an IPR suggests they believe there are strong invalidity arguments against the patent.

Recommended next steps

• The institution decision for IPR2026-00287 is expected by approximately 2026-09-13. A defendant should monitor the USPTO PTAB E2E portal for the institution decision on this date.
• Review the IPR petition (available on the PTAB E2E system by searching for IPR2026-00287) to understand the specific prior art and arguments Google LLC is presenting against claims 1-26 of US10867001. This petition provides an initial assessment of potential invalidity arguments.

https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2026-00287
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10867001/en## Proceedings overview
One AIA trial proceeding, IPR2026-00287, has been filed against US patent 10867001 and is currently pending. This means the patent's claims are actively being challenged, and its defensive posture is currently uncertain, awaiting an institution decision and potentially a final written decision.

IPR2026-00287 — Google LLC v. Accusearch Technologies LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2026-03-13
• Status: Pending. This IPR is actively undergoing the preliminary patent owner response and petitioner reply stages, and the PTAB has not yet decided whether to institute a trial.
• Judge panel: Information regarding the specific Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) assigned to this IPR is typically made public upon institution of the trial. As the proceeding is currently pending institution, the judge panel is not yet publicly available.
• Petition grounds: The petition by Google LLC challenges claims 1-26 of US Patent 10,867,001 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103, leveraging a combination of prior art references including US20070185859 (Alberth et al.), US20070233682 (Srinivasan), and EP1801826B1 (Google).
• Institution decision: Not yet issued. The statutory deadline for the PTAB to decide on institution is six months from the petition filing date. For IPR2026-00287, filed on 2026-03-13, the institution decision is due by approximately 2026-09-13.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable as the proceeding is pending institution.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable as the proceeding is pending institution.
• Appeal: Not applicable as the proceeding is pending institution.
• Defensive value: As IPR2026-00287 is currently pending institution, no claims have been invalidated or confirmed patentable. The existence of this IPR indicates that the patent is actively being challenged, and a defendant facing assertion of this patent should closely monitor its progress. If the IPR is instituted, the claims challenged will face a high burden to survive.

Strategic summary

US patent 10867001 currently has all its claims (1-26) untested by a final PTAB decision. IPR2026-00287, filed by Google LLC, is actively challenging all claims, but the PTAB has not yet determined whether to institute the trial. The claims are therefore neither canceled nor sustained, and their validity is presently in question.

The estoppel landscape is nascent. If IPR2026-00287 is instituted and proceeds to a final written decision, Google LLC (and its privies) would be estopped from asserting invalidity grounds that were raised or reasonably could have been raised in the IPR against claims determined to be patentable. However, until institution, no estoppel applies. For other potential defendants, all prior-art grounds remain available for challenge, subject to the usual IPR petition filing window constraints (e.g., one year from service of a complaint for infringement).

A pattern signal is the involvement of Unified Patents, who listed this IPR case on their portal, indicating potential defensive aggregation interest. The petitioner, Google LLC, is a major technology company, and their decision to file an IPR suggests they believe there are strong invalidity arguments against the patent.

Recommended next steps

• The institution decision for IPR2026-00287 is expected by approximately 2026-09-13. A defendant should monitor the USPTO PTAB E2E portal for the institution decision on this date.
• Review the IPR petition (available on the PTAB E2E system by searching for IPR2026-00287) to understand the specific prior art and arguments Google LLC is presenting against claims 1-26 of US10867001. This petition provides an initial assessment of potential invalidity arguments.

https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2026-00287
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10867001/en

Inventors

• Robert Osann, Jr. (Independent Inventor).

  Robert Osann, Jr. is an independent inventor and intellectual property consultant. He has founded or co-founded five venture-backed startups and has extensive experience in engineering and marketing. He has personally written and prosecuted 42 of his 69 issued US patents pro se. Robert Osann, Jr. performs consulting services through Nif/T, LLC, an IP consulting firm located in Reno, Nevada. Since 2007, he has sold 8 US patents and 10 pending applications in five transactions to four different buyers.

Original assignee

The original assignee, as named on the issued patent, is "Individual," referring to the inventor, Robert Osann, Jr. Robert Osann, Jr. is an independent inventor and consultant and does not ship products embodying the claims of this patent himself. He has a history of selling or licensing his patents. He is currently operating as an independent IP consultant.

Assignment timeline

• 2025-03-18 (executed) / recorded 2025-03-18 — Reel 057169/0073
  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: Osann, Robert, Jr.
  • Assignee: Accusearch Technologies LLC
  • Correspondent: Matthew Dock, 3523 N Star Dr, Stillwater OK 74075. This correspondent's name and address are associated with RPX Technologies, Inc., a defense contractor.
  • Context: Transfer to asserter

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 10867001
    2011 : Priority Date
    2020 : Issued to Robert Osann Jr.
    2025 : Assigned to Accusearch Technologies LLC
    2025 : Litigation against Google filed
    2026 : IPR filed by Unified Patents

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Present. The patent was transferred from Robert Osann, Jr. to Accusearch Technologies LLC on March 18, 2025 (Reel 057169/0073). Accusearch Technologies LLC is an entity that has initiated litigation against Google over this patent family and related patents, and is identified by RPX as having received a large patent portfolio from the inventor for assertion. While there's an entity called "Accusearch, LLC" that provides background screening services, the context of the patent litigation strongly suggests AccuSearch Technologies LLC is a separate, licensing-only entity. RPX specifically refers to AccuSearch Technologies LLC as the entity that received a portfolio from Osann for assertion, and Unified Patents has initiated IPRs against Accusearch Technologies LLC concerning this patent family, which is a common action against NPEs.

2. Known asserter in the chain — Present. Accusearch Technologies LLC is identified by RPX as having received a patent portfolio for assertion and has initiated litigation against Google. Unified Patents has also filed IPRs against Accusearch Technologies LLC related to this patent, a common practice when dealing with NPEs.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Unclear. The sole assignment recorded for this patent lists Matthew Dock as the correspondent. While Matthew Dock is associated with RPX Technologies, Inc., a defense contractor, there is only one assignment recorded for this patent, so recurrence cannot be established in this chain.

4. Cascading transfers — Not present. There is only one assignment recorded for this patent.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — Present. The assignment to Accusearch Technologies LLC was executed and recorded on March 18, 2025 (Reel 057169/0073). Accusearch Technologies LLC filed its first litigation against Google on April 29, 2025, which is within two months of the assignment, well within the 6-month window for this signal.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. There is no indication in the patent records or available search results that the original assignee, Robert Osann, Jr., filed for bankruptcy.

7. Privateering — Unclear. While the transfer to Accusearch Technologies LLC and subsequent litigation suggest assertion, there is no public information definitively indicating an operating company transferred the patent to Accusearch Technologies LLC to assert on its behalf against competitors. Robert Osann, Jr. is an independent inventor.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The chain terminates with Accusearch Technologies LLC, which has been identified as an asserting entity. Unified Patents has filed IPRs against Accusearch Technologies LLC, which is a defensive action, but Unified Patents is not an assignee in the chain.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence

The assignment of the patent from independent inventor Robert Osann, Jr. to Accusearch Technologies LLC on March 18, 2025 (Reel 057169/0073), immediately followed by Accusearch Technologies LLC filing litigation against Google on April 29, 2025, are strong indicators of an NPE assertion. Furthermore, RPX has identified Accusearch Technologies LLC as an entity that received a portfolio from Osann for assertion, and Unified Patents has filed IPRs against Accusearch Technologies LLC, a common anti-NPE action.

Verify at: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/

U.S. Patent 10,867,001 (US10867001B2) is titled "Internet search results annotation for search term elements present or absent in referenced webpages and descendant webpages" and was published on December 15, 2020. The application number is US16/790,057, and it has a priority date of June 17, 2011.

Here's an analysis of the most relevant prior art cited within the patent document itself, along with potential anticipations under 35 U.S.C. § 102. The patent document provides a list of "Applications Claiming Priority" and "Related Parent Applications" which are continuations of the original priority application, indicating they cover related subject matter. The "Cited By" section lists patents that cite 10867001, which are generally not prior art to 10867001, but rather build upon it. The "Families Citing this family" section is also not directly prior art for 10867001.

Therefore, the most relevant prior art would be the family of patents that US10867001B2 claims priority from, as these represent earlier disclosures by the same inventor(s) on related subject matter. These documents are directly referenced within the "Cross-Reference To Related Applications" section of the patent's description.

Here are the details of the most relevant prior art identified from the patent's "CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS" section, as these are direct antecedents or related applications from which US10867001B2 derives priority:

1. U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 16/553,900

   • Full Citation: U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 16/553,900, titled "Internet Search Results Annotation and Filtering for Missing Search Terms".
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed on August 28, 2019.
   • Brief Description: This application generally relates to annotating and filtering internet search results, specifically addressing the issue of missing search terms in referenced webpages.
   • Potentially Anticipates: This application is a direct continuation of earlier applications and is part of the same patent family. It likely anticipates elements of claims 1 and 14 (the method and system claims) related to generating annotations for missing search terms and potentially the filtering aspects in claim 9 and 22, as indicated by its title. Given it is an earlier application in the same chain, it is highly likely to anticipate the core novelty of US10867001B2 in some form.

2. U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 16/199,192

   • Full Citation: U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 16/199,192, titled "Internet Search Results Annotation for Missing Search Terms in Descendant Webpages".
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed on November 25, 2018.
   • Brief Description: This application specifically focuses on the annotation of search results when search terms are missing in referenced webpages but present in descendant webpages.
   • Potentially Anticipates: This application is directly relevant to claims 5, 6, 18, and 19 of US10867001B2, which describe scenarios where annotations are not generated if missing search terms are found in descendant webpages, and the definition of a descendant webpage. It also anticipates aspects of the broader claims (1 and 14) that involve the analysis of descendant webpages.

3. U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 15/383,907

   • Full Citation: U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 15/383,907, titled "Automatic Webpage Characterization and Search Results Filtering".
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed on December 19, 2016.
   • Brief Description: This application deals with the automatic characterization of webpages and filtering of search results based on these characteristics.
   • Potentially Anticipates: This application likely anticipates elements of claims 9 and 22, which relate to the filtering function for removing search results. It also underpins the broader concept of analyzing and characterizing webpages, as mentioned in the summary and description of US10867001B2.

4. U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 14/820,433

   • Full Citation: U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 14/820,433, titled "Automatic Webpage Characterization and Search Results Annotation".
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed on August 6, 2015.
   • Brief Description: This application focuses on the automatic characterization of webpages and the subsequent annotation of search results.
   • Potentially Anticipates: This application would significantly anticipate claims 1 and 14 of US10867001B2, particularly the aspects concerning the analysis of webpages and the generation of annotations for display. The title directly indicates the core functionality of annotation.

5. U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 13/163,614

   • Full Citation: U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 13/163,614, titled "Automatic Webpage Characterization and Search Results Annotation".
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed on June 17, 2011.
   • Brief Description: This is the earliest application in the priority chain and introduces the fundamental concepts of automatic webpage characterization and search results annotation.
   • Potentially Anticipates: As the foundational application, this likely anticipates the broadest elements of claims 1 and 14 of US10867001B2 regarding the method and system for receiving search terms, analyzing webpages, and annotating search results based on specific characteristics. Its priority date also establishes the earliest effective date for much of the invention's core concepts.

These priority applications represent the most direct prior art as they form the continuous prosecution history leading to US10867001B2, and therefore their disclosures are critical in determining the novelty and non-obviousness of the claims in the granted patent.

Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103

A patent claim is unpatentable as obvious if, at the time of the invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) would have been motivated to combine prior art teachings, or to modify prior art without a combination, to arrive at the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success. This motivation to combine is a critical requirement that guards against hindsight reasoning. The mere existence of prior art elements is not sufficient; there must be a clear reason or rationale for a PHOSITA to combine those elements in the claimed manner.

The PTAB has identified the following prior art references in IPR2026-00287 as challenging claims 1-26 of US10867001:

• US20070185859 (Alberth et al.)
• US20070233682 (Srinivasan)
• EP1801826B1 (Google)

To establish obviousness of US10867001's claims, it must be demonstrated that a PHOSITA would have been motivated to combine these references to achieve the features claimed in US10867001, particularly the annotation and filtering of search results based on the presence or absence of search term elements in referenced and descendant webpages.

Potential Combination: Alberth et al. + Srinivasan + EP1801826B1

Alberth et al.

Without the full text of Alberth et al. (US20070185859), it is difficult to detail its specific teachings. However, given its use as prior art against a patent related to search result annotation and filtering, it likely pertains to search engines, information retrieval, or methods of presenting search results.

Srinivasan

Similarly, without the full text of Srinivasan (US20070233682), a detailed analysis of its contribution to an obviousness argument is limited. Publicly available information indicates various patents by individuals named Srinivasan in different technical fields, but none directly related to search result annotation for missing terms are readily apparent from the search snippets. For example, one Anand Srinivasan is listed as an inventor on patents related to aftertreatment systems, microfluidics, and memory systems. Another Srinivasan S. Muthuswamy is listed as an inventor on patents for network graph hotspot identification and fraud detection. A Sridhar Srinivasan is listed as an inventor on patents related to feedstock processing corrosion management and path-based layer stack connectivity checks. Given the IPR challenge, it is assumed that US20070233682 (Srinivasan) contains teachings relevant to search result presentation, content analysis, or user interfaces in the context of web searches.

EP1801826B1 (Google)

EP1801826B1, being a Google patent, is highly likely to address aspects of web search, search result ranking, presentation, or advertising, which are core to Google's business. This reference could potentially disclose methods for analyzing webpage content or for displaying additional information alongside search results.

Motivation to Combine

A PHOSITA in the field of Internet search engines, prior to the priority date of US10867001 (June 17, 2011), would have been motivated to improve the relevance and efficiency of search results for users. The problem addressed by US10867001—that users waste time clicking on search results where the referenced webpages (or their descendants) do not contain all the specified search terms—is a persistent challenge in search engine design.

• Motivation to combine Alberth et al. and EP1801826B1: If Alberth et al. and EP1801826B1 individually disclose methods for presenting search results and analyzing webpage content, a PHOSITA would be motivated to combine these to provide more informative search results. For instance, if Alberth et al. describes a generic framework for displaying search results and EP1801826B1 details methods for content analysis, a PHOSITA would naturally combine these to enhance the search result display with insights derived from content analysis. The motivation would be to provide users with a better understanding of the content of linked pages before clicking, thereby improving user experience and search efficiency.

• Motivation to incorporate Srinivasan (US20070233682): Assuming US20070233682 (Srinivasan) offers teachings related to dynamic content analysis, filtering, or user feedback in search contexts, a PHOSITA would be motivated to integrate these functionalities. For example, if Alberth et al. and EP1801826B1 provide basic annotation of content presence, and Srinivasan provides methods for more sophisticated analysis, such as identifying missing terms or terms in descendant pages, the combination would be driven by the desire to offer a more precise and comprehensive warning system to users. The problem of "wasted clicks" due to missing search terms is a clear motivator for such an integration.

Specifically, the motivation for a PHOSITA to combine these references to arrive at the invention of US10867001 would stem from:

1. Improving User Efficiency: The recognized problem of users clicking on irrelevant links that do not contain their specified search terms (as acknowledged in US10867001's background) would strongly motivate a PHOSITA to find ways to signal the content relevance before the user navigates to the page.
2. Leveraging Existing Technologies: Each of these prior art references, in their respective areas of search result presentation, content analysis, or user interaction, would represent building blocks for a PHOSITA. Combining them to create a more robust and informative search result display would be a logical step in the continuous improvement of search engine technology.
3. Predictable Solution: If the individual references teach aspects of analyzing webpage content and displaying information, combining them to indicate the presence or absence of search terms could be seen as a predictable solution to the known problem of users encountering irrelevant search results. The specific formats for annotation (e.g., text, colors, symbols) or filtering criteria would be within the purview of routine design choices for a PHOSITA seeking to implement such a system.

Therefore, if Alberth et al. and EP1801826B1 disclose elements related to presenting search results and analyzing webpage content, and Srinivasan (US20070233682) provides techniques for identifying the presence or absence of specific terms, a PHOSITA would have a clear motivation to combine these references. The goal would be to create a system that proactively informs users about the relevance of linked content by annotating search results with information regarding the presence or absence of search terms, including those in descendant webpages, and potentially offering filtering capabilities, as claimed in US10867001.