ANDREW JONES, DO
Marriage and Family Therapists at Red Riv, Austin, TX

2012001, Jan 12, 2012

Jul 8, 2010

12/832642

Ravi P. Bansal - Tampa FL, US
Andrew R. Jones - Austin TX, US
Brian M. O'Connell - Research Triangle Park NC, US
Keith R. Walker - Austin TX, US

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION - Armonk NY

G06F 3/01

715753

A privilege discriminator selects a first user to be in a first group of participants to participate in a screen sharing session. The privilege discriminator selects at least one second user to be in a second group of participants to participate in a screen sharing session. The privilege discriminator selects a first screen region for sharing to at least the first group of participants and selects a second screen region for sharing only to the second group of participants. The privilege discriminator shares the first screen region with at least the first group of participants, wherein the sharing is selecting a device authenticated as being used by one of the first group of participants. The presentation privilege discriminator sharing the second screen region with only the second group, based on selecting the second screen region and selecting the second group, excludes the first group from receiving the second screen region.

8266228, Sep 11, 2012

Dec 8, 2009

12/633176

Jeffrey D. Amsterdam - Atlanta GA, US
Swaminathan Balasubramanian - Southfield MI, US
Andrew R. Jones - Austin TX, US
Brian M. O'Connell - Research Triangle Park NC, US
Keith R. Walker - Austin TX, US

International Business Machines Corporation - Armonk NY

G06F 15/16

709206, 709201, 4554122, 37914204

To associate an email with a tag, an email client may receive a tag corresponding to an email attribute, wherein the email attribute is an historical email tag. The email client stores the tag to a record keyed by the email attribute, and receives an email tag request, the email tag request having a word attribute, and looks up at least one record based on the word attribute to find the tag. The email client presents the tag of the at least one record to a user. The email client receives a user selection of the tag to form a selected tag, and sends an email having the selected tag as part of the email header, wherein the email comprises the email tag request.

8589497, Nov 19, 2013

Dec 8, 2009

12/633467

Swaminathan Balasubramanian - Southfield MI, US
Bruce D. D'Amora - Hawthorne NY, US
Andrew R. Jones - Austin TX, US
Neal M. Keller - Yorktown Heights NY, US
Brian M. O'Connell - Research Triangle Park NC, US
Clifford A. Pickover - Yorktown Heights NY, US
Keith R. Walker - Austin TX, US

International Business Machines Corporation - Armonk NY

G06F 15/16

709206, 709220, 707 3, 726 23

A method, data processing system, and computer program product for associating tags with a person or user. A computer receives a communication file. The computer determines a tag for the communication file to form a communication file association of the tag with the communication file. The computer identifies contact information for a user from the communication file. The computer forms a user association between the user and the tag.

2012000, Jan 12, 2012

Jul 8, 2010

12/832728

Ravi P. Bansal - Tampa FL, US
Andrew R. Jones - Austin TX, US
Brian M. O'Connell - Research Triangle Park NC, US
Keith R. Walker - Austin TX, US

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION - Armonk NY

G09G 5/12

345 21

A feedback application may be executing on a data processing system to transmit a screen update to at least two computers. The feedback application receives an indication of completion from a first computer, in response to transmitting the screen update. The feedback application updates a completion gauge to indicate a partial completion among participants, in response to receiving the indication of completion from the first computer. The feedback application receives a second indication of completion from a second computer, in response to transmitting the screen update. The feedback application updates the completion gauge to indicate a completion among participants, in response to receiving the indication of completion from the second computer.