http://www.peertopatent.org/patent/20070271363/activity According to some embodiments, a system and a method is provided to dynamically scan a network with a first network scanner and a second network scanner and to determine a new network address, wherein the new network address is discovered by the first network scanner and not discovered by the second network scanner. en-us Computer compliance system and method We apologize for this problem. Yes, the system should allow for any qualifying prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102 to be submitted. We are going to change the prior art submission field asking for the "publication date" to something that more accurately reflects the prior art date for patents, patent applications and non-patents. For now, if you are submitting a patent or published patent application, in the publication date field put the 102(e) date, which in most cases is the "earliest US filing date" for the application. If you don't know what that means simply put the "Filing Date" of the patent or published application into the "publication date" field instead of the actual publication date. Please note, until this problem is fixed, if you believe the item is prior art its better to put in a date which allows the item to be submitted rather than not submitting the item. Thank you for bringing this problem to our attention and we will get this problem fixed ASAP. Peer-to-Patent Team. Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:00:55 -0800 http://www.peertopatent.org/patent/20070271363/discussion Computer compliance system and method The submitted prior art US 20070171842 has a publication date (July 26, 2007) after the filing date (May 19, 2006) of the '363 application. Peer-to-patent does not accept such prior art, which has been published after the filing date of applications posted on it for review. In this case, the prior art has been accepted because you have entered the filing date of the prior art in the publication date drop-down. Further, it has been submitted as a patent, and not as a patent application. However, in case the art is relevant, such art may be considered as prior art under 102(e), and should be posted on the discussion forum for the patent application. Thu, 10 Jan 2008 05:33:17 -0800 http://www.peertopatent.org/patent/20070271363/discussion Computer compliance system and method US20060070129 seems to be a relevant prior art for this case. I am not able to upload the prior art (including relevance to claims) as this website is not letting me do that. I will upload the prior art with relevant excerpts from the reference soon. Mon, 07 Jan 2008 08:49:19 -0800 http://www.peertopatent.org/patent/20070271363/discussion