Obviousness

Obviousness Analysis (35 U.S.C. § 103)

This analysis focuses on whether the claims of US Patent 10445684B2 would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) at the time of the invention, considering the provided prior art. The key prior art identified in the previous section is U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173 to Mehring et al. (filed August 29, 2013).

Reference: U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173 (Mehring et al.)

As stated in US10445684B2, "Features from an illustrative management system disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173 filed Aug. 29, 2013 to Mehring et al., which is herein incorporated by reference, may be used in various embodiments disclosed herein." This indicates that the '173 application describes an "illustrative management system" for product monitoring and delivery management. Without the full text of the '173 application, a definitive and exhaustive obviousness analysis is challenging. However, based on the description within US10445684B2, we can infer the likely scope of the '173 application.

The core of US10445684B2's independent claims (1, 7, 12, and 14) revolves around:

• Receiving status information (conditions) from product containers.
• Determining preferred ranges for these conditions.
• Crucially, the preferred ranges change over time by a predefined amount per unit time, specified in a product profile.
• Determining if conditions are outside these ranges.
• Sending a command to an environmental control unit to adjust the conditions.
• For food products, incorporating food product history for prioritized delivery and determining if products are unsafe/undesirable.

Given that the '173 application describes an "illustrative management system" with features "used in various embodiments disclosed herein" (referring to US10445684B2), it is highly probable that the '173 application teaches at least the basic elements of:

1. Monitoring product conditions during delivery (e.g., temperature, humidity).
2. Establishing desired or "preferred" conditions for products.
3. A system for receiving and analyzing this status information.
4. Potentially, a mechanism for triggering actions based on deviations from desired conditions.

Obviousness Combination: U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173 alone or with general knowledge in the art.

Argument for Obviousness:

A strong argument for obviousness can be made even without a secondary reference, if the '173 application is sufficiently broad.

1. Receiving Status Information and Determining Preferred Ranges (Common Elements):
It is highly likely that the "illustrative management system" of the '173 application teaches receiving status information from product containers and determining preferred ranges for these conditions. This is a fundamental aspect of product monitoring and quality control during transport, particularly for perishable goods as hinted at by the problem statement in US10445684B2 (e.g., "perishable food products," "sensitive to time, temperature, humidity"). If the '173 application discloses a system that monitors conditions and aims to maintain them within specified parameters, these foundational steps would be present.

2. Dynamic Preferred Ranges (Key Differentiating Feature):
The most distinctive feature of US10445684B2's independent claims is that "the preferred ranges change over time by a predefined amount per unit time, wherein the predefined amount and the unit time are specified in a profile associated with the product."

• Motivation to Combine/Modify '173: A POSITA, reviewing the '173 application's "illustrative management system" for product delivery, would have been motivated to introduce dynamic preferred ranges. The patent itself notes that "a desired temperature range for a specific product may change over time" and gives the example of hot prepared meals whose preferred temperature range might reduce over time "to prevent the food from being overcooked" (Description,,). This is a common-sense consideration for perishable goods, especially prepared foods.
• Means of Implementation: Implementing such dynamic ranges would be straightforward for a POSITA. Product profiles, as generally known in the art for product management systems, could easily incorporate time-dependent parameters. The "predefined amount per unit time" is merely a mathematical function (e.g., a linear decay) that would be a routine design choice for a software engineer developing such a system. The '173 application already includes "an illustrative management system," and adapting it to incorporate time-varying preferred ranges for conditions based on a product profile would be a logical and predictable improvement, driven by the desire to optimize food quality and safety over extended delivery times (as described in US10445684B2's "Benefit of actively managing the environment for food delivery" section).

3. Sending Commands to an Environmental Control Unit:
If the '173 application's management system merely monitored conditions, a POSITA would be motivated to couple it with environmental control units for active adjustment. The problem statement of US10445684B2 highlights the shortcomings of prior systems where "those shipping products are currently unable to utilize product data collected during the shipping process until after the product has been delivered" and "may not realize that a shipment of perishable products has surpassed a product tolerance until after it has been delivered" (Description,). The obvious solution to this problem is real-time intervention. Environmental control units (e.g., heaters, coolers, dehumidifiers) are well-known in the art for maintaining specific conditions. Integrating the monitoring system (from '173) with these control units for automated response to out-of-range conditions would be an obvious design choice to improve product quality and prevent spoilage.

4. Food Product History, Prioritized Delivery, and Unsafe Product Commands (Claim 14 Specific):
For Claim 14, the additional elements related to food product history, prioritized delivery, and commands for unsafe products.

• Motivation: If the '173 application deals with "product monitoring," especially for "perishable products," a POSITA would naturally consider factors like "ingredient freshness, an expiration date, preparation time, preparation conditions, storage time and/or condition, hand-off to delivery time" (Description,) to enhance the management system. These are all common aspects of food supply chain management.
• Prioritized Delivery: Prioritizing delivery based on freshness or time since preparation is a logical extension to maximize product availability and minimize waste, a clear business motivation. The patent itself states, "it is preferred to deliver food that is fresh and within quality parameters, but with the longest time since preparation first... This may result because food which is prepared later will last longer, desirably providing a longer window of opportunity to sell and/or deliver" (Description,). This rationale would be obvious to anyone managing food logistics.
• Unsafe Product Commands: Determining if food is "unsafe and/or undesirable" (e.g., rotten, expired, rancid, infested) and issuing a command to "not deliver" is a critical food safety protocol. Integrating this into an "actively managed food delivery" system is a natural and necessary feature, not an inventive step, driven by public health concerns and avoiding liability.

Conclusion on Obviousness:

Based on the strong self-referential nature of US10445684B2 to the '173 application, and the generally predictable nature of the improvements for perishable goods, it is highly probable that all independent claims of US10445684B2 would be rendered obvious by U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173, alone or in combination with the general knowledge of a person having ordinary skill in the art regarding environmental controls, product profiles, and food safety/logistics.

To make a definitive determination, access to the full text of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173 is essential. Without it, this analysis relies on the reasonable inferences drawn from its description within US10445684B2. However, the stated incorporation by reference suggests a close relationship and likely overlap in the inventive concepts.## Obviousness Analysis (35 U.S.C. § 103)

This analysis addresses the obviousness of US Patent 10445684B2 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, considering the identified prior art. The most relevant prior art explicitly mentioned and incorporated by reference in US10445684B2 is U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173 to Mehring et al., filed on August 29, 2013.

Primary Reference: U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173 (Mehring et al.)

US10445684B2 states that "Features from an illustrative management system disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173 filed Aug. 29, 2013 to Mehring et al., which is herein incorporated by reference, may be used in various embodiments disclosed herein." This implies that the '173 application describes a foundational "illustrative management system" for monitoring and managing product delivery, particularly for items sensitive to environmental conditions. Without the full text of the '173 application, the precise scope cannot be fully determined, but reasonable inferences can be drawn based on the explicit language in US10445684B2.

The independent claims (1, 7, 12, and 14) of US10445684B2 generally cover:

• Receiving status information (conditions) from product containers.
• Determining preferred ranges for these conditions, with the crucial aspect that these ranges change over time as specified in a product profile.
• Determining if received conditions are outside these ranges.
• Sending a command to an environmental control unit to adjust the conditions.
• For food products (Claim 14), receiving food product history, using it to determine a prioritized delivery scheme (where longer-prepared food is prioritized), evaluating for unsafe/undesirable products, and commanding against delivery of such products.

Given that the '173 application's features are "used in various embodiments disclosed herein" in US10445684B2, a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would reasonably expect the '173 application to teach at least the core aspects of:

• Monitoring conditions within product containers during transit.
• Defining or establishing desired conditions for the products.
• A system for receiving and analyzing this condition data.
• Potentially, taking some form of action or generating alerts when conditions deviate from the desired state.

Obviousness Analysis of Claims 1, 7, and 12 (Core Management System)

A POSITA, examining the '173 application's "illustrative management system" in light of common knowledge in logistics and perishable goods management, would find the elements of claims 1, 7, and 12 to be obvious.

1. Receiving Status Information and Determining Preferred Ranges:
These foundational steps are inherent to any "management system" aimed at monitoring product conditions during delivery, as implied by the '173 application's description. The problem addressed by US10445684B2, where "those shipping products are currently unable to utilize product data collected during the shipping process until after the product has been delivered," directly points to the need for real-time monitoring and comparison against desired parameters.

2. Dynamic Preferred Ranges:
The defining feature of US10445684B2 is that "the preferred ranges change over time by a predefined amount per unit time, wherein the predefined amount and the unit time are specified in a profile associated with the product."

• Motivation: A POSITA would be motivated to implement dynamic preferred ranges based on common understanding of perishable goods. The patent itself provides an example: "hot prepared meals may initially have a preferred temperature range which is relatively high... However, the preferred temperature range may reduce over time, e.g., to prevent the food from being overcooked." This demonstrates a clear and acknowledged need in the art to adjust environmental parameters for food products over time to maintain quality and prevent degradation. It is a logical and predictable refinement for a system designed to manage perishable product delivery.
• Means: Incorporating time-dependent parameters into a "product profile" and implementing a calculation for a "predefined amount per unit time" is a routine engineering task for a POSITA in software and system design. Product profiles are standard for storing item-specific data, and calculating a decaying or evolving range based on time is a straightforward algorithmic implementation.

3. Sending a Command to an Environmental Control Unit for Adjustment:
If the '173 application disclosed monitoring, a POSITA would be motivated to integrate active control. The prior art problem highlighted in US10445684B2 is that mishandling impact is "invisible to the receiver without product condition monitoring throughout distribution." This implies a need for immediate intervention. Environmental control units (e.g., heaters, air conditioners, dehumidifiers) are well-known components for adjusting conditions in storage and transport. Combining a monitoring system (from '173) with automated control of these units to bring conditions back into range is an obvious solution to a known problem (maintaining product quality throughout delivery), yielding a predictable result (improved product condition). The patent describes mechanisms like a controller automatically turning on an AC unit or heater in response to determining conditions are not within preferred ranges. This is a direct, predictable application of existing technologies to the problem of maintaining environmental conditions.

Obviousness Analysis of Claim 14 (Comprehensive Food Delivery Method)

Claim 14 builds upon the core management system with additional steps specifically for food products. A POSITA would find these additions obvious, again in combination with the '173 application and general knowledge in food logistics and safety.

1. Receiving Food Product History:
If the '173 application teaches product monitoring, extending this to "food product history" (e.g., "ingredient freshness, an expiration date, preparation time, preparation conditions, storage time and/or condition, hand-off to delivery time, condition, relevant environmental parameter history") would be a natural and obvious enhancement. Such data is routinely collected and utilized in food supply chains for quality assurance and inventory management.

2. Prioritized Delivery Scheme Based on History (Longest Time Since Preparation First):

• Motivation: The patent itself provides the motivation: "it is preferred to deliver food that is fresh and within quality parameters, but with the longest time since preparation first, ahead of food in similar condition prepared later. This may result because food which is prepared later will last longer, desirably providing a longer window of opportunity to sell and/or deliver." This is a clear business and logistical advantage in food delivery, obvious to any professional managing food inventory and delivery routes.
• Means: Integrating food product history (from the previous step) with a delivery scheduling algorithm to prioritize older items is a straightforward application of data processing and optimization techniques common in logistics.

3. Evaluating for Unsafe/Undesirable Products and Commanding Not to Deliver:

• Motivation: Ensuring food safety and preventing the delivery of spoiled or unsafe products is paramount in the food industry, driven by regulatory compliance, public health, and brand reputation.
• Means: Using the collected status information and food product history to determine if food is "unsafe (e.g., rotten, expired, rancid, infested, etc.) and/or undesirable" is a logical use of the data. Sending a command to "not deliver" these products, and notifying relevant parties (driver, dispatcher, sales software), is a direct and obvious safety measure. This automated process is a predictable improvement over manual checks, as it "may automatically ensure quality, and that safe food is delivered."

Conclusion:

Based on the strong implication that U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173 discloses a fundamental "illustrative management system" for product delivery, and the recognized problems and known solutions in the art for perishable goods, it is highly probable that the claims of US10445684B2 would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. The key inventive step of dynamically changing preferred ranges and the subsequent logistical and safety features are logical and predictable extensions or combinations of elements that a POSITA would be motivated to implement to improve existing product delivery management systems, especially for food.

A definitive and more robust obviousness analysis would require the full text of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173. Without it, this analysis relies on the detailed description within US10445684B2 regarding the features and motivations for using the '173 application.