Invalidity dossier

US 7505929

Method, system and computer product for auction of deliverable prepared food via the internet

Current assignee: CHARLES D ANGERT

Added 9/23/2026, 8:19:54 PM

At a glanceNo PTAB challengesNo litigation on file

Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash

Patent summary

Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.

✓ Generated

Patent Overview — US 7,505,929 B2

Title: Method, system and computer product for auction of deliverable prepared food via the internet

Patent number / application: US 7,505,929 B2; application US 10/857,831; early publication US 2006/0010037 A1.

Inventors: Charles D. Angert and Andrew Mitchell Harris.

Assignee: Originally listed as "Individual"; later assignments recorded to Charles D. Angert and to Harris, Mr Andrew M / Angert, Mr Charles D. Google's current assignee listing is "CHARLES D ANGERT" and "HARRIS MR ANDREW M."

Key dates: Priority and filing date 2004-06-01; publication of application 2006-01-12; patent granted/publication 2009-03-17. Status shown as "Expired – Fee Related," with adjusted expiration 2026-09-23.

Purpose: The invention "relates generally to food delivery systems, and more specifically, to a method and system for auctioning and/or scheduling delivery of prepared food remotely over a network." The text notes prepared food is generally not auctioned because it is "perishable and location-specific."

Plain-language scope: A customer interface lists prepared food items deliverable within a short time interval, with estimated delivery times based on the customer's locale. A customer selects an item via a sales and/or auction control; delivery is scheduled unless the method is an auction and the customer is not the initial high bidder. The system can periodically display estimated arrival time and a map showing a delivery vehicle's progress, using GPS or another location-finding system. Food may be prepared at a fixed location or en-route, with order information sent to the vehicle. Delivery may be interrupted for "re-auction," allowing another user to usurp a sale; auctions may remain open until delivery or shelf-life expiration. Bid increments may reflect the burden of re-routing. Multiple orders on one vehicle may be auctioned for queue position, and prices may be adjusted by delivery time. Business methods include franchising tracking, information, server equipment, and delivery vehicles possibly serving multiple vendors, with advertising on vehicles.

Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US7505929/en

What the excerpt does not establish: It does not provide full claims, the detailed description, drawings, prosecution history, claim interpretation, or the complete list of cited prior art. Claims quoted in this summary come only from the classification "Definitions" excerpt, which may compress or paraphrase claim language and should be verified against the full patent.

Generated 10/1/2026, 9:41:28 PM

Cases on file (0)

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 7505929. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.

No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.

Litigation summary

Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Proceedings on file (0)

All PTAB activity →

AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.

No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.

PTAB challenges

AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Assignment history

Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Prior art

Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Obviousness

Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Extensions

Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Derivative works

Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.