Language selection

Search

Patent 2812923 Summary

Third-party information liability

Some of the information on this Web page has been provided by external sources. The Government of Canada is not responsible for the accuracy, reliability or currency of the information supplied by external sources. Users wishing to rely upon this information should consult directly with the source of the information. Content provided by external sources is not subject to official languages, privacy and accessibility requirements.

Claims and Abstract availability

Any discrepancies in the text and image of the Claims and Abstract are due to differing posting times. Text of the Claims and Abstract are posted:

  • At the time the application is open to public inspection;
  • At the time of issue of the patent (grant).
(12) Patent: (11) CA 2812923
(54) English Title: REVERSE AUDIT SYSTEM
(54) French Title: SYSTEME D'AUDIT INVERSE
Status: Granted
Bibliographic Data
(51) International Patent Classification (IPC):
  • G06Q 10/02 (2012.01)
  • G06Q 50/14 (2012.01)
  • G06Q 10/10 (2012.01)
(72) Inventors :
  • WISER, DANIEL ALLEN (United States of America)
  • RUCKER, SHAWN GLENN (United States of America)
(73) Owners :
  • LANYON, INC. (United States of America)
(71) Applicants :
  • LANYON, INC. (United States of America)
(74) Agent: KIRBY EADES GALE BAKER
(74) Associate agent:
(45) Issued: 2018-03-20
(86) PCT Filing Date: 2010-10-19
(87) Open to Public Inspection: 2012-04-26
Examination requested: 2015-10-16
Availability of licence: N/A
(25) Language of filing: English

Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT): Yes
(86) PCT Filing Number: PCT/US2010/053154
(87) International Publication Number: WO2012/054018
(85) National Entry: 2013-03-27

(30) Application Priority Data: None

Abstracts

English Abstract

Embodiments of the present invention provide a system, method, and computer program product for reverse audits based on server access of databases. In one embodiment, a data provider is determined, and a data request based on the data provider is sent to a server, wherein the data request promotes an entry of the data request to access a database. A data response is received from the server, wherein the data response corresponds to the data request. A message is output based on whether the data response includes specific data.


French Abstract

Les modes de réalisation de la présente invention concernent un système, un procédé et un produit de programme informatique pour audits inversés, basés sur des accès à des bases de données par des serveurs. L'un des modes de réalisation consiste à déterminer un fournisseur de données et à envoyer à un serveur une demande de données basée sur le fournisseur de données, la demande de données présentant une entrée de la demande de données pour accéder à une base de données. Le serveur envoie une réponse de données correspondant à la demande de données. Un message indiquant si la réponse de données comprend des données spécifiques est émis.
Claims

Note: Claims are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.


Claims:
1. A system for data audits, the system comprising:
a processor;
a memory;
a user interface; and
an audit component stored in the memory, wherein said audit component is
executed
by said processor to:
a) determine a rate provider;
b) send a rate request regarding at least one customer to a rate database
through
a server, wherein said server is part of a global distribution system and
wherein said rate
request promotes an entry of said rate request to access said rate database,
and wherein said
rate request is based on said rate provider;
c) receive a rate response from said server, wherein said rate response
corresponds to said rate request;
d) compare said rate provider to an approval database comprising approved
rate
providers approved by said customer to determine if said rate provider
corresponds to one of
said approved rate providers identified in said approval database, wherein
said approval
database is remote from said server;
e) determine an approval status of said rate provider based upon whether
said
rate provider corresponds to one of said approved rate providers, wherein said
rate provider
is at least one of said approved rate providers and an unapproved rate
provider; and
f) generate a message in response to said determination of said approval
status
of said rate provider based on said approval status and whether said rate
response comprises
specific data indicating that said rate provider is one of said approved rate
providers, said
message being available for presentation to said user interface.
2. The system of claim 1 wherein determining said rate provider is based on
determining whether said rate provider is within a specified distance from a
geographic
location.
16

3. The system of claim 2 wherein at least one of said specified distance
and said
geographic location is selectable by a user.
4. The system of claim 2 wherein said geographic location is selected based
on one of a
plurality of geographic locations associated with a customer, a plurality of
geographic
locations associated with an event location, and a plurality of geographic
locations
associated with at least one previous rate request.
5. The system of claim 1 wherein determining said rate provider comprises
prompting a
user to identify said rate provider.
6. The system of claim 1, wherein determining said data provider comprises:
a) providing a user with a data form; and
b) parsing said rate provider from said data form to determine a status
associated with said rate provider.
7. The system of claim 6, further comprising storing at least one of said
rate provider
and said status in said approval database.
8. The system of claim 6, wherein said data form comprises a request for
proposal
form.
9. The system of claim 1 wherein said rate provider comprises a plurality
of rate
providers, said data request comprises a plurality of rate requests, and said
rate response
comprises a plurality of rate responses.
10. The system of claim 1 wherein said rate database comprises a plurality
of rate
databases.
11. The system of claim 1 wherein said rate request comprises code that
emulates a
manual entry of a web service request when executed by said server.
17

12. The system of claim 11 wherein said code comprises extensible markup
language
(XML) code.
13. The system of claim 1 wherein said rate response comprises a
description of at least
one of a product, a service, a travel package, a hotel reservation, a rental
car reservation, an
airline reservation, a train reservation, a bus reservation, and a cruise
reservation.
14. The system of claim 1 wherein said global distribution system is
associated with at
least one of products, services, travel services, hospitality services,
shipping services,
trucking services, parcel delivery services, healthcare providers, and energy
providers.
15. The system of claim 1 wherein said rate database comprises at least one
rate database
accessed directly by said server.
16. The system of claim 1 wherein said rate database comprises at least one
remote rate
database accessed indirectly by said server.
17. The system of claim 1 wherein said rate database is associated with a
computer
reservation system that is associated with at least one of travel packages,
hotel reservations,
rental car reservations, airline reservations, train reservations, bus
reservations, and cruise
reservations.
18. The system of claim 1 wherein said audit component is further executed
by said
processor to enable a system user to schedule said audit component to execute
on a
scheduled basis.
18


19. A method for data audits, the method comprising:
a) determining a rate provider;
b) sending a rate request regarding at least one customer to a rate
database
through a server, wherein said server is part of a global distribution system
and wherein said
rate request promotes an entry of said rate request to access said rate
database, and wherein
said rate request is based on said rate provider;
c) receiving a rate response from said server, wherein said rate response
corresponds to said rate request;
d) compare said customer to an approval database comprising at least one
approval customer that has approved said rate provider to determine if said
customer
corresponds to one of said approval customers identified in said approval
database, wherein
said approval database is remote from said server;
e) determining an approval status for said customer based upon whether said

customer corresponds to one of said approving customers, wherein said customer
is at least
one of said approving customers and a non-approving customer that has not
approved said
rate provider; and
f) generating a message in response to said determination of said
approval
status of said customer based on said approval status and whether said rate
response
comprises specific data indicating that said rate provider is approved by said
at least one
customer and initiating an update to correct said rate database when said
specific data
indicates said customer approves said rate provider and said customer does not
correspond
to said approving customer.
20. The method of claim 19 wherein determining said rate provider is based
on
determining whether said rate provider is within a specified distance from a
geographic
location.
21. The method of claim 19 wherein said geographic location is selected
based on one of
a plurality of geographic locations associated with a customer, a plurality of
geographic
locations associated with an event location, and a plurality of geographic
locations
associated with at least one previous rate request.

19


22. The method of claim 19 wherein said rate request comprises an
identifier associated
with a system user, and wherein said rate response is based on said
identifier.
23. The method of claim 22 wherein said identifier enables said rate
response to
comprise information associated with at least one of products, services,
travel packages,
hotel reservations, rental car reservations, airline reservations, train
reservations, bus
reservations, and cruise reservations.
24. The method of claim 19 wherein said rate request comprises access
information
associated with a system user, and wherein said server responds to said rate
request based on
said access information.
25. The method of claim 24 wherein said access information enables said
server to
respond to said rate request with information associated with at least one of
products,
services, travel packages, hotel reservations, rental car reservations,
airline reservations,
train reservations, bus reservations, and cruise reservations.
26. The method of claim 19 wherein said rate request comprises a request
associated
with a plurality of dates.
27. The method of claim 26 wherein said plurality of dates are associated
with a plurality
of months.
28. A computer program product for rate audits, the computer program
product
comprising:
a computer readable storage medium storing computer executable program code
that,
when executed by a processor, causes said computer executable program code to
perform a
method comprising:
a) determining a plurality of rate providers;



b) sending a rate request for at least one customer to a rate database
through a
server, wherein said server is part of a global distribution system and
wherein said rate
request promotes an entry of said rate request to access said rate database,
and wherein said
rate request is based on said plurality of rate providers;
c) receiving a rate response from said server, wherein said rate response
corresponds to said rate request;
d) comparing said plurality of rate providers to an approval database
comprising
approved rate providers approved by said customer to determine for each of
said plurality of
rate providers if said rate provider corresponds to one of said approved rate
providers
identified in said approval database, wherein said approval database is remote
from said
server;
e) determining an approval status for each of said plurality of rate
providers
based upon whether said rate provider corresponds to one of said approved rate
providers,
wherein each of said plurality of rate providers is at least one of said
approved rate providers
and an unapproved rate provider; and
f) generate a message in response to said determination of said approval
status
of each of said plurality of rate providers based on said approval status of
each of said
plurality of rate providers and whether said rate response comprises a rate
indicating that
said rate provider is one of said approved rate providers, said message being
available for
presentation to a computer user interface.
29. The computer program product of claim 28 wherein determining said
plurality of
rate providers is based on determining whether said plurality of rate
providers is within a
specified distance from a geographic location.
30. The computer program product of claim 29 wherein said geographic
location is
selected based on one of a plurality of geographic locations associated with a
customer, a
plurality of geographic locations associated with an event location, and a
plurality of
geographic locations associated with at least one previous rate request.

21


31. The computer program product of claim 28 wherein determining said
plurality of
rate providers comprises prompting a user to identify said plurality of rate
providers.
32. The computer program product of claim 28 wherein said rate request is
initiated on
behalf of at least one of said customer and one of said plurality of rate
providers.
33. The computer program product of claim 28 wherein outputting said
message
comprises initiating an update to said rate database.
34. The computer program product of claim 28 wherein said method further
comprises
storing said rate response as historical data in a database.
35. The computer program product of claim 28 wherein said method further
comprises:
a) sending said rate request to a plurality of servers that comprise said
server;
and
b) receiving said rate response from said plurality of servers.
36. The computer program product of claim 35 wherein outputting said
message
comprises outputting a report based on receiving said rate response from a
combination of
said plurality of servers.
37. The computer program product of claim 35 wherein said method further
comprises
enabling a user to customize said report.
38. The computer program product of claim 35 wherein said method further
comprises
storing said report as historical data in a database for comparison to
subsequent reports.
39. The computer program product of claim 35 wherein said method further
comprises
comparing said report with historical data in a database.

22


40. The computer program product of claim 28 wherein said method further
comprises
enabling a user to customize said message.
41. The computer program product of claim 28 wherein outputting said
message
comprises sending corrective data to said server based on said rate and at
least one of said
plurality of rate providers.

23

Description

Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.


CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
REVERSE AUDIT SYSTEM
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
[0001] The present invention generally relates to validation of data which
has been
entered into an information system and relates to product and service
providers. More
particularly, the invention relates to a system, method, and computer program
product for
confirming that data providers have entered data approved by specific
customers into a
database accessed by a distribution system, thereby reducing occurrences of
databases
including unapproved data and databases lacking approved data.
BACKGROUND
[0002] There are a number of inventory management and distribution systems,
or
global distribution systems, which have been generally adopted by the various
product
and service industries as standards for providing rate negotiation and/or
distribution
services to participating customers. For example, in the travel industry there
have been a
limited number of primary computer-based global distribution systems, such as,
Sabre,
Apollo-Galileo, Amadeus, and Worldspan. While variations exist between the
major
global distribution systems used within the travel industry, the underlying
concept is
generally the same in that a global distribution system provides travel
agents, corporate
travel clients, and in some cases, individual customers, with direct access to
travel service
provider rates and booking tools. The travel and lodging industry has long
relied on
travel agents (also known as brokers) to direct customers to their services.
The Internet
has changed the travel industry by providing a direct channel between the
travel service
providers and the customer. However, travel agents are still utilized in large
part by
1
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
corporate travelers and those preferring the services of a professional travel
agent to
ensure that their vacation or business travel is planned thoroughly and that
they are
receiving the lowest possible rates.
[0003] In general, a global distribution system (or a related system) in
the travel
industry provides brokers with information to help negotiate discounts on
behalf of their
customers and with travel service providers with whom they would like to
conduct
business. A global distribution system provides a travel service provider a
means to
attract repeat business from clients in return for a discounted rate. When a
rate is
negotiated, it may be the responsibility of the travel service provider to
enter the rate data
into the global distribution system and/or a computer reservation system.
[0004] Due to human error, possible computer errors, and various other
reasons, rate
data is often not entered correctly or is not properly recorded in a database
accessed by a
global distribution system. As a result, a database may include inaccurate or
unapproved
data.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0005] A potential solution to ensure that rate data has been entered and
recorded
correctly involves the use of "screen-scraping," in which a rate request is
sent to a global
distribution system in the form of a data screen request that specifies the
location (such as
the column and the row) in which the rate is expected to be displayed via the
global
distribution system's data screen. However, if a data screen that displays a
rate is
modified (such as a change in the row or column where the rate is located), a
screen-
scraping request may not correctly return the rate. Additionally, some global
distribution
systems may access data from remote databases, such as remote databases
maintained by
2
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
computer reservation systems, but the data in the global distribution system
may lag
behind updates made to data in remote databases. Consequently, screen-scraping
may
not be able to audit rates correctly, and customers may not receive rate data
that is
updated in remote databases but not updated in a global distribution system.
Furthermore, a data provider may load its database with data that implies
approval by a
specific customer even if the specific customer has not approved the data. For
example,
if a corporation negotiates with three New York hotels to offer discounted
hotel rates to
the corporation's employees, the corporation may approve the rate offered by
the first
two hotels but disapprove of the rate offered by the third hotel based on
perceptions that
the third hotel's rates are higher than justified by the quality of the
hotel's
accommodations or any other reason. However, the third hotel may load its
database
with the unapproved rate linked to an identifier for the corporation, such
that rate requests
for the corporation's employees may result in accepting the unapproved hotel
rates based
on the erroneous belief that the employees' corporation approved the hotel
rates.
Therefore, it is an object of the present invention to provide a system, a
method, and a
computer program product for facilitating a more accurate and comprehensive
computerized scan of a global distribution system database in order to flag
unapproved,
suspicious, incorrect, and/or missing rate data.
[0006] It is an object of the present invention to improve the reliability
of data stored
by global distribution systems and/or corresponding databases.
[0007] It is an object of the present invention to overcome potential
problems
associated with the need for reverse audits of data in a global distribution
system.
3
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
[0008] It is a further object of the present invention to generate messages
and reports
based on reverse audits in a manner which will result in a reduction in
unapproved data
stored in databases accessed by global distribution systems.
[0009] It is a further object of the present invention to identify certain
product and
service providers who repeatedly load unapproved data or fail to load approved
data.
[0010] It is a further object of the present invention to identify and
correct errors in
stored data so that corporations may reduce instances of misleading
associations.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0011] Figure 1 is a block diagram depicting an embodiment of the system of
the
present invention.
[0012] Figure 2 is a flowchart depicting an embodiment of the process of
the present
invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0013] With reference to Fig. 1, a block diagram depicts the system 100 of
the
present invention. Although examples in the pending disclosure refer to rates
related to
travel products and services, the present invention may also be applied to
distribution
systems related to other types of products and services. At a basic level, the
system 100
may include one server, one database, one audit component, and one user
interface. The
depicted system includes a first server 102, a second server 104, a first
database 106, a
second database 108, a third database 110, and a fourth database 112. Although
Fig. 1
depicts two servers 102 ¨ 104 and four databases 106 ¨ 112, the system 100 may
include
any number of servers 102 ¨ 104 and any number of databases 106 ¨ 112. Each of
the
servers 102 ¨ 104 may be a global distribution system associated with products
and/or
4
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
services. Each of the databases 106 ¨ 112 may be a remote database for a
computer
reservation system indirectly accessed by the servers 102 ¨ 104, wherein each
computer
reservation system is associated with products and/or services. Each of the
databases 106
¨ 112 may also be a local database accessed directly by one of the servers 102
¨ 104,
such as a global distribution system database. Each of the databases 106 ¨ 112
may
communicate exclusively with one of the servers 102 ¨ 104. For example, the
databases
106 ¨ 108 may communicate only with the first server 102 while the databases
110 ¨ 112
may communicate only with the second server 104. Alternatively, some of the
databases
106¨ 112 may communicate with more than one of the servers 102 ¨ 104. For
example,
the second database 108 may communicate with both of the servers 102 ¨ 104.
The
system 100 may include switches (not depicted in Fig. 1) which convert
communications
in a server format from the servers 102 ¨ 104 into communications in a
database format
for the databases 106 ¨ 112 and convert communications in a database format
from the
databases 106 ¨ 112 into communications in a server format for the servers 102
¨ 104.
[0014] The system 100 also includes an audit component 114, a user
interface 116,
and a fifth database 118. The system 100 may execute the audit component to
conduct
reverse audits of data via the servers 102 ¨ 104 and the databases 106 ¨ 112,
output
results of such a reverse audit via the user interface 116, and store results
of such a
reverse audit in the fifth database 118.
[0015] With reference to Fig, 2, a flowchart is depicted of the process 200
of the
present invention. The process 200 may be implemented by the system 100, a
method of
the present invention, or a computer program product of the present invention.
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
[0016] In box 202, a data provider is determined. For example, the audit
component
114 may identify two New York hotels as data providers. In some embodiments,
the
audit component 114 may prompt a user of the system 100 to determine the data
provider. For example, the audit component 114 may prompt the user to enter
identifiers
for each New York hotel which the user desires to audit. The user may identify
hotels
which offer rates approved by a corporation, and/ or may identify hotels that
are not
approved by the corporation. For instance, a user may want to reverse audit an

unapproved hotel that is rumored to be offering a rate in the corporation's
name even
though the corporation did not approve the rate.
[0017] In some embodiments, the audit component 114 provides a user with a
data
form, such as a request for proposal form, and parses the data provider and
the status of
the data provider from the data form. The status may indicate that a data
provider's rates
are approved by a specific customer or unapproved by the specific customer. In
this
manner, the audit component 114 may facilitate rate negotiations between, for
example, a
corporation and a hotel, and extract the data provider and the data provider's
status from
a completed data form. The data providers may include a data provider approved
by a
specific customer and/or a data provider unapproved by the specific customer.
For
example, the requests for proposal may be parsed to identify two New York
hotels whose
rates are approved by the corporation and one New York hotel whose rates the
corporation did not approve.
[0018] In some embodiments, the audit component 114 may determine a data
provider based on whether the data provider is within a specified distance
from a
geographic location. For example, the audit component 114 may identify each
New York
6
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
hotel within five miles of a specified New York airport. The specified
distance and/or the
geographic location may be selectable by a user. For example, a user of the
system 100
may input parameters via the user interface 116 to identify each Chicago hotel
within ten
miles of a selected Chicago airport. Determining multiple data providers may
be based
on whether the data providers are within a specified distance from a
geographic location
that is based on geographic locations associated with a customer or an event.
For
example, a hotel that is hosting a conference may not offer a corporate
discount for a
corporation's employees. The audit component 114 may prompt a representative
of the
corporation to identify the conference-hosting hotel as a central geographic
location. In
response, the audit component 114 may select hotels that are within five miles
of the
conference-hosting hotel's central geographic location. In
another example, a
corporation may have three corporate offices in New York. The audit component
114
may prompt a representative of the corporation to identify all of the hotels
that are within
fifty miles of the geographic center of the three corporate offices. The
identified hotels
may include hotels that are optimal for hosting corporate visitors who visit
any of the
three corporate offices. As one skilled in the art will recognize, the audit
component 114
may determine a data provider in a number of ways including, but not limited
to, user
determination, parsing forms, identifying providers within a specific
geographic area,
and/or any other method for determining a data provider.
100191 The
audit component 114 may also store the data provider and the status of
the data provider in the fifth database 118, which may be a data provider
database, and/or
in any of the other databases 106 ¨ 112. For example, the audit component 114
may
store a list of the two approved New York hotels and the one unapproved New
York
7
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
hotel. Determining multiple data providers may be based on whether the data
providers
are within a specified distance from a geographic location that is based on
geographic
locations associated with at least one previous rate request. For example, the
fifth
database 118 may store a list of 250 New York hotels and their associated data
responses
based on a corporate representative's 50 previous requests. The audit
component 114
may determine the geographic center of the 250 New York hotels' geographic
locations,
and prompt the corporate representative with an option to select the 250 New
York
hotels, which are each within 75 miles of the determined geographic center.
The
corporate representative may appreciate such an option because the associated
expenses
for sending a single data request for the 250 hotels may be significantly less
expensive
than the associated expenses for sending 50 data requests for the 250 hotels.
Although
the pending application may generally refer to the first database 106 and the
third
database 110, in some examples the first database 106 may be referred to as a
remote
database 106 and the third database 110 may be referred to as a local database
110.
[0020] In box 204, a data request is sent to a server, wherein the data
request
promotes entry of the data request to access a database. For example, the
audit
component 114 sends a rate request for the three New York hotels during
January to the
first server 102, wherein the rate request includes extensible markup language
(XML)
code that emulates a manual entry of a web service request of the rate request
when
executed by the first server 102. Although the pending application may use a
request for
a rate as an example, the present invention may request and receive other
types of data
other than rates. As used herein, a rate may include a price, a cost, a fare,
a fee, or a
similar value. A rate may be a historic rate, an increasing rate, a decreasing
rate, an
8
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
algorithmic rate, a discounted rate, a negotiated rate, a promotional rate, a
seasonal rate,
and/or a rate based on certain indices. For example, a New York hotel may
offer a
discounted rate to a corporation's employees based upon the number of
employees that
have requested a room and/or the reservation frequency associated with the
employees.
Although the pending application may use a corporation and its employees as an

example, the present invention may send and receive requests related to any
type of
customer, such as an affiliate of the corporation. If the audit component is
to send data
requests to both of the servers 102 ¨ 104, the audit component 114 may send
the data
requests to the servers 102 ¨ 104 consecutively (in serial) or concurrently or

simultaneously (in parallel).
100211 The data request may be based on a specific customer. For example,
the data
request may request rates from all hotels in a geographic area that list rates
for a specific
corporation. The data request may be initiated on behalf of a specific
customer and/or a
data provider. For example, the audit component 114 may conduct a reverse
audit on
behalf of a specific corporation for all hotels in a geographic area that list
rates for the
specific corporation. A corporation may be motivated to conduct a reverse
audit of the
rates its employees are offered by hotels to reduce the chance that
corporation's
employees accept offers that the corporation did not approve. The
corporation's
employees may become dissatisfied with the accommodations at the unapproved
hotel
and/or the corporation may become dissatisfied in reimbursing its employees
for hotel
rates perceived to be too expensive. In another example, the audit component
114 may
conduct a reverse audit on behalf of a specific hotel chain for all the
corporations for
which the specific hotel chain offers rates. A hotel chain may be motivated to
conduct a
9
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
reverse audit of the rates it offers to corporations to reduce the chance that
a corporation
reduces future business with the hotel chain due to the hotel chain offering
rates to the
corporation's employees that the corporation did not approve, and/or to reduce
any other
risks associated with offering rates that the corporation did not approve.
[0022] The data request may include an identifier and/or access information
associated with a system user. For example, the rate request may specify each
of the
corporate identifiers used by a corporation in negotiations to request rates
specifically
negotiated for the corporation. The audit component 114 may compile the list
of
corporate identifiers by parsing and extracting each corporate identifier from
each of the
data request forms associated with the corporation, such as <Lanyon Inc.>,
<Lanyon>,
and <Lany> for Lanyon Inc. Alternatively, identifiers may be developed or
received in
any number of methods before being employed in a data request. In another
example, the
data request may include a password for a corporation to request confidential
rates
specifically negotiated for the corporation. In yet another example, the rate
request may
specify each of the identifiers and passwords associated with a hotel chain
that owns one
of the three New York hotels if the hotel chain is requesting a reverse audit
of the rates its
hotels are offering.
[0023] The data request may specify multiple dates, and the multiple dates
may be
associated with multiple months. For example, the audit component 114 sends a
rate
request to verify whether the three New York hotels list rates for the
corporation around
January 14th. However, in addition to requesting the three New York hotels'
room rates
for the corporation on January 14th, the audit component 114 may also request
the three
New York hotels' room rates for January 13th, the day before the specified
date, for
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
January 15th, the day after the specified date, January 7th, one week before
the specified
date, and January 21st, one week after the specified date. Therefore, the
audit component
114 may assure a customer that any results of the reverse audit are more
representative of
the data specified by the three New York hotels for the corporation in January
than a
statistical anomaly. Furthermore, the audit component 114 may also request
rates for
other months than the specified month, such as requesting the rates provided
by the three
New York hotels for the corporation for February 14th and March 14th as well.
Such a
seasonal verification may enable a customer to determine whether the rates
offered for
the specified month are also representative of rates offered for similar
months. If the
audit component 114 conducts a reverse audit for multiple data providers, the
audit
component 114 may send multiple data requests to the servers 102 ¨ 104.
[0024] In box 206, a data response is received from a server, wherein the
data
response corresponds to a data request. For example, the audit component 114
receives a
rate response from the first server 102, wherein the rate response corresponds
to the rate
request and includes a rate offered by the unapproved New York hotel during
January to
the corporation. The data response may include information associated with a
product
and/or a service. For example, the rate response may specify that the rate of
$100 per
night is available to the corporation's employees for a non-smoking room with
two
double beds on January 14th. The data response may be based on the identifier
and/or the
access information associated with the user. For example, the first server 102
may
provide the rate response only available for the corporation and may provide
the rate
response as confidential information that is only accessible when the rate
request includes
the corporation's access enabling information. If the audit component 114
conducts a
11
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
reverse audit for multiple data providers, the audit component 114 may receive
multiple
data responses from the servers 102 ¨ 104.
[0025] In box 208, a message is output based on whether the data response
includes
specific data. For example, the audit component 114 outputs a message which
indicates
that the unapproved New York hotel offers a rate for the corporation's
employees in
January. In another example, the audit component 114 outputs a message which
indicates that the first approved New York hotel offers a rate for the
corporation's
employees in January. In yet another example, the audit component 114 outputs
a
message which indicates that the second approved New York hotel lacks a rate
for the
corporation's employees in January. In a further example, the audit component
114
outputs a message which indicates that the unapproved New York hotel lacks a
rate for
the corporation's employees in February. The audit component 114 may also
output a
message that indicates that the first approved New York hotel is offering a
rate, the
second approved New York hotel is not offering a rate, and the unapproved New
York
hotel is offering a rate.
[0026] The audit component 114 may output the message to a data provider,
which
may be associated with the remote database 106, and/or a specific customer.
For
example, the audit component 114 may output a message to the corporation
indicating
that the reverse audit indicates that the unapproved New York hotel offers a
rate for the
corporation's employees for January 14th. In another example, the audit
component 114
outputs a message to the unapproved New York hotel specifying that the rate
offered to
the corporation's employees for January 14th is not approved by the
corporation. In
response to receipt of such messages, the corporation and/or the hotel may
initiate
12
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
appropriate actions, such as the corporation informing their employees that
the
unapproved New York hotel is offering an unapproved rate or contacting the new
York
hotel about the unapproved rate, or the New York hotel taking corrective
measures to
remove the unapproved rate from the remote database 106.
[0027] The audit component 114 may also send the data request to the
servers 102 ¨
104, receive the data response from the servers 102 ¨ 104, and output a report
based on
receiving the data response from servers 102 ¨ 104. For example, the audit
component
114 may output a comprehensive report for the corporation based on sending and

receiving requests via the servers 102 ¨ 104 and the databases 106 ¨ 112 to
confirm
whether each hotel with which the corporation has negotiated a rate offers a
rate. The
audit component 114 may include separate components for communicating with
each of
the servers 102 ¨ 104, such as a first dedicated component for communicating
with the
first server 102 and a second dedicated component for communicating with the
second
server 104.
[0028] The report may include any information related to the expected
offering of
rates, the unexpected offering of rates, the expected absence of rates, the
unexpected
absence of rates, statistics, and or other inaccuracies identified in a
reverse audit
conducted via one or more of the servers 102 ¨ 104. Although each of the
servers 102 ¨
104 may respond with data in different formats, the audit component 114 may
provide
the report in a standardized format that does not differentiate between the
different data
formats provided by the servers 102 ¨ 104. The report may be output in the
form of a
printed report, web access to the report, graphs, real-time information, raw
data, batch
information, and/or similar types of reports. The audit component 114 may
output the
13
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
report in a format that enables a system user to modify, filter, and/or delete
data in the
report, query the data in the report, extract data from the report, and convey
the report
and/or extracted data to various user interface screens and/or webpages.
Furthermore,
access to portions of the report and/or extracted data may be available to
various users
based on corresponding security levels associated with the users, thereby
requiring the
users to enter access enabling information, such as usernames and passwords.
[0029] The audit component 114 may enable a user to customize the report
and/or the
message. For example, the audit component 114 may enable a customer to specify
the
format of data in the report, such as which data is provided, where it is
located on the
report, and how each instance of data is described. Furthermore, the audit
component
114 may enable a customer to specify how data in the reports may be formatted
for
storage.
[0030] The audit component 114 may also store the data response and/or the
report as
=
historical data in the fifth database 118, and compare any current data with
historical data
in the fifth database 118. For example, the current data may indicate that the
unapproved
New York hotel offers a rate to the corporation's employees for January, and
the
historical data may indicate that the unapproved New York hotel also offered a
rate to the
corporation's employees for December that was not approved. This information
may be
conveyed to a data provider for useful analysis or a specific customer may
review its
historical data to determine which data providers are more likely to load
unapproved data.
[0031] The audit component 114 may also send corrective data to the first
server 102.
For example, the audit component 114 may determine that the remote database
106
identifies a rate offered by the unapproved New York hotel to the
corporation's emplOyee
14
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

CA 02812923 2013-03-27
WO 2012/054018
PCT/US2010/053154
for January. In this situation, the unapproved New York hotel may allow the
audit
component 114 to update the remote database 106 to delete the unapproved rate.
[0032] The audit component 114 may also enable a system user to schedule
the audit
component 114 to execute on a scheduled basis. For example, a system user may
schedule the audit component 114 to execute on the next Friday or the first
Monday of
each month.
[0033] The invention being thus described, it will be obvious that the same
may be
varied in many ways. Such variations are not to be regarded as a departure
from the spirit
and scope of the invention and all such modifications as would be obvious to
one skilled
in the art are intended to be included within the scope of the system, method,
or computer
program product described.
SUBSTITUTE SHEET (RULE 26)

Representative Drawing
A single figure which represents the drawing illustrating the invention.
Administrative Status

For a clearer understanding of the status of the application/patent presented on this page, the site Disclaimer , as well as the definitions for Patent , Administrative Status , Maintenance Fee  and Payment History  should be consulted.

Administrative Status

Title Date
Forecasted Issue Date 2018-03-20
(86) PCT Filing Date 2010-10-19
(87) PCT Publication Date 2012-04-26
(85) National Entry 2013-03-27
Examination Requested 2015-10-16
(45) Issued 2018-03-20

Abandonment History

There is no abandonment history.

Maintenance Fee

Last Payment of $263.14 was received on 2023-08-02


 Upcoming maintenance fee amounts

Description Date Amount
Next Payment if standard fee 2024-10-21 $347.00
Next Payment if small entity fee 2024-10-21 $125.00

Note : If the full payment has not been received on or before the date indicated, a further fee may be required which may be one of the following

  • the reinstatement fee;
  • the late payment fee; or
  • additional fee to reverse deemed expiry.

Patent fees are adjusted on the 1st of January every year. The amounts above are the current amounts if received by December 31 of the current year.
Please refer to the CIPO Patent Fees web page to see all current fee amounts.

Payment History

Fee Type Anniversary Year Due Date Amount Paid Paid Date
Application Fee $400.00 2013-03-27
Maintenance Fee - Application - New Act 2 2012-10-19 $100.00 2013-03-27
Maintenance Fee - Application - New Act 3 2013-10-21 $100.00 2013-10-02
Maintenance Fee - Application - New Act 4 2014-10-20 $100.00 2014-10-14
Maintenance Fee - Application - New Act 5 2015-10-19 $200.00 2015-10-05
Request for Examination $800.00 2015-10-16
Maintenance Fee - Application - New Act 6 2016-10-19 $200.00 2016-10-03
Maintenance Fee - Application - New Act 7 2017-10-19 $200.00 2017-10-05
Final Fee $300.00 2018-02-01
Maintenance Fee - Patent - New Act 8 2018-10-19 $200.00 2018-10-15
Maintenance Fee - Patent - New Act 9 2019-10-21 $200.00 2019-10-11
Maintenance Fee - Patent - New Act 10 2020-10-19 $250.00 2020-10-09
Maintenance Fee - Patent - New Act 11 2021-10-19 $255.00 2021-10-15
Maintenance Fee - Patent - New Act 12 2022-10-19 $254.49 2022-10-14
Maintenance Fee - Patent - New Act 13 2023-10-19 $263.14 2023-08-02
Owners on Record

Note: Records showing the ownership history in alphabetical order.

Current Owners on Record
LANYON, INC.
Past Owners on Record
None
Past Owners that do not appear in the "Owners on Record" listing will appear in other documentation within the application.
Documents

To view selected files, please enter reCAPTCHA code :



To view images, click a link in the Document Description column. To download the documents, select one or more checkboxes in the first column and then click the "Download Selected in PDF format (Zip Archive)" or the "Download Selected as Single PDF" button.

List of published and non-published patent-specific documents on the CPD .

If you have any difficulty accessing content, you can call the Client Service Centre at 1-866-997-1936 or send them an e-mail at CIPO Client Service Centre.


Document
Description 
Date
(yyyy-mm-dd) 
Number of pages   Size of Image (KB) 
Abstract 2013-03-27 1 54
Claims 2013-03-27 7 261
Drawings 2013-03-27 2 24
Description 2013-03-27 15 654
Representative Drawing 2013-03-27 1 7
Cover Page 2013-06-13 1 33
Claims 2013-03-28 7 249
Claims 2017-05-01 8 263
Final Fee 2018-02-01 2 44
Claims 2017-05-10 8 270
Representative Drawing 2018-02-21 1 4
Cover Page 2018-02-21 1 32
PCT 2013-03-27 24 1,143
Assignment 2013-03-27 3 80
Request for Examination 2015-10-16 1 39
Examiner Requisition 2016-11-01 6 369
Amendment 2017-05-01 20 852