Obviousness

The provided patent, US12008509B2, details "Prior art keywords" (product, computer, delivery, food, food product) and a "Prior art date" of 2015-03-30. However, it does not present a dedicated "Prior Art section" listing specific patent documents or publications for analysis.

However, the patent text does explicitly incorporate by reference U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173, filed August 29, 2013, to Mehring et al. This document describes an "illustrative management system" and predates the priority date of US12008509B2, making it a relevant piece of prior art for an obviousness analysis.

Prior Art Reference for Obviousness Analysis:

1. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173 to Mehring et al. (filed August 29, 2013): This application discloses an "illustrative management system" which, by its nature, would encompass systems and methods for monitoring and managing products, likely including perishable goods, within a supply chain. The present patent states that "Features from an illustrative management system disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/014,173... may be used in various embodiments disclosed herein," indicating its foundational relevance.

General Knowledge (Implicit Prior Art) as of March 30, 2015:

Based on the "Prior art keywords" and the "Background" section of US12008509B2, a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) in the field of product delivery and logistics would have possessed the following general knowledge:

• Product Condition Monitoring: It was known to monitor conditions (e.g., temperature, humidity) of perishable "food products" in "product containers" during "delivery." However, the "Background" section notes that "those shipping products are currently unable to utilize product data collected during the shipping process until after the product has been delivered."
• Computerized Logistics: "Computer" systems were widely used for managing logistics, tracking shipments, and analyzing data in "delivery" processes.
• Real-time Data Transmission: Wireless communication technologies (e.g., Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, cellular) and mobile devices were prevalent for transmitting data in real-time.
• Environmental Control Units: Transport containers, particularly for food, often included "environmental control units" such as heaters or refrigeration units to maintain desired conditions.
• Communication with Drivers/Recipients: Drivers could be communicated with via mobile devices, and recipients could be notified about deliveries.

Problem Addressed by US12008509B2:

The patent explicitly states the problem it aims to solve: "those shipping products are currently unable to utilize product data collected during the shipping process until after the product has been delivered. Therefore, those shipping products may not realize that a shipment of perishable products has surpassed a product tolerance until after it has been delivered." The core innovation presented is the "actively managed food delivery" through real-time utilization of sensor data and proactive intervention during transit.

---

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

A PHOSITA, reviewing the existing "illustrative management system" (Mehring et al.) and recognizing the identified problem of delayed data utilization in perishable food delivery, would have been motivated to combine known technologies to achieve real-time active management. The motivation would stem from the desire to improve food quality, safety, and operational efficiency by preventing spoilage or compromise during transit, rather than merely identifying it after delivery.

Combination of Mehring et al. (US 14/014,173) and General Knowledge:

The essential steps and elements claimed in US12008509B2 would have been obvious to a PHOSITA by combining the "illustrative management system" of Mehring et al. with the general knowledge of real-time communication, sensor technology, and automated control systems as of the 2015 priority date.

Analysis of Independent Claims:

Claim 1:
This claim describes a computer-implemented method for managing product delivery with real-time monitoring and two-tiered corrective actions.

• Obtaining ideal delivery conditions (changing over time in a profile): Mehring et al.'s management system would naturally involve defining "ideal delivery conditions" for products. The concept that these conditions might "change over time" (e.g., a prepared hot meal needing to stay above a certain temperature for a diminishing period) and be specified in a "profile" is a basic principle in perishable food handling and would be obvious to a PHOSITA to incorporate into a management system.
• Accumulating sensor data during delivery from a product container: Mehring et al. would likely involve data accumulation. The "Background" confirms "product condition monitoring" during shipping was known. It would be obvious to a PHOSITA to couple available "sensors" to "product containers" for data collection.
• Analyzing sensor data during delivery: This directly addresses the problem highlighted in the US12008509B2 background. A PHOSITA, aiming to overcome the limitation of post-delivery data utilization, would be motivated to integrate the sensor data from the containers with real-time communication technologies (e.g., wireless tags and mobile phones as described in the detailed description) to allow the "computer" system (like Mehring et al.'s management system) to "analyze" conditions during delivery. This is a straightforward application of available technology to solve a known problem.
• Sending a command for corrective action in response to deviations: Once real-time analysis identifies conditions "outside predefined ranges," sending a "command to perform a corrective action" is a logical next step in any active management system. Communicating with a driver (the "entity currently having the product") via their mobile device (general knowledge) is an obvious means of issuing such a command.
• Sending a second command to an environmental control unit upon detecting inactivity: Environmental control units (e.g., heaters in delivery bags) were known in transport. A PHOSITA would be motivated to ensure critical conditions are maintained even if human intervention fails. Implementing a "second command to an environmental control unit" (from general knowledge) as an automated fallback, triggered by "inactivity" of the human entity, is a common engineering solution for adding robustness and reliability to a system for perishable goods.
• Generating food product history, comparing to ideal conditions for performance analysis, and generating a report: Generating a "food product history" from accumulated data is a basic data logging function of any monitoring system. Using this history, combined with ideal conditions, to "analyz[e] performance of entities involved in delivery" and "generating... a report" for feedback and improvement is a standard and obvious application of data analysis in logistics and management systems (like Mehring et al.'s).

Claim 12:
This claim also describes a computer-implemented method focusing on real-time monitoring, two-tiered corrective actions, and ultimately, advising product rejection.

• Receiving status information (including temperature and light) during travel: Similar to Claim 1, combining Mehring et al.'s management system with real-time data transmission (e.g., via wireless tags paired with mobile phones) would enable continuous reception of "status information" including "sensor-derived conditions." The inclusion of a "light sensor" to detect if a container is open is an obvious addition for monitoring environmental integrity, especially for light-sensitive products or to prevent heat loss, and would be a straightforward engineering choice for a PHOSITA.
• Determining preferred ranges (with pre-heating/cooling in profile): Mehring et al. would involve preferred ranges. "Pre-heating and/or pre-cooling conditions" are basic best practices for preparing containers for temperature-sensitive items, readily known to a PHOSITA in food logistics. Incorporating these into a product "profile" is an obvious way to systematize preparation.
• Determining if conditions are in preferred ranges: This is a fundamental comparison operation in any monitoring system, including Mehring et al.'s.
• Sending a command for corrective action for a first predetermined amount of time: As in Claim 1, this is a logical response to deviations. The "first predetermined amount of time" is a common programmatic threshold to differentiate transient fluctuations from persistent problems.
• Sending a second command to an environmental control unit upon detecting inactivity: Identical to Claim 1, this two-tiered, human-then-automated intervention is obvious for ensuring critical condition maintenance.
• Alerting receiver not to accept delivery for a second predetermined amount of time: If conditions remain outside preferred ranges for a "second predetermined amount of time" (a more critical threshold), "alerting... a receiver... not to accept the delivery" is a known and obvious quality control measure in the perishable food industry to prevent delivery of compromised products. Integrating this into a real-time management system (Mehring et al.) provides an automated safety net.

Claim 17:
This claim largely reiterates the core aspects of Claim 1, emphasizing that the actions occur "during delivery."

• All elements of Claim 17, from obtaining ideal conditions to generating and outputting a performance report, are identical or directly correspond to elements discussed under Claim 1. The explicit repetition of "during delivery" highlights the real-time nature which, as established, is the specific problem US12008509B2 identifies in the background as an area needing improvement in the prior art. The motivation for a PHOSITA to combine Mehring et al.'s management system with real-time data and control technologies to enable these actions during delivery is precisely to address this identified shortcoming.

Conclusion on Obviousness:

In light of the foregoing, the independent claims (1, 12, and 17) of US12008509B2 would have been obvious to a PHOSITA as of the priority date of March 30, 2015. A PHOSITA, familiar with the "illustrative management system" disclosed by Mehring et al. (US 14/014,173) and the prevailing methods of product condition monitoring during delivery, would have been motivated to address the known problem of delayed data utilization. The combination of Mehring et al.'s system with widely available real-time sensor technology, wireless communication capabilities (e.g., via mobile devices), and automated environmental control units represents a straightforward application of known elements to achieve predictable results in improving perishable food delivery. The specific steps of escalating corrective actions, incorporating time-dependent thresholds, generating product histories, and producing performance reports are all logical extensions or combinations of existing technologies and management principles, consistent with the framework for obviousness set forth in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (2007).