US 7623033

Here is a concise summary of US Patent 7623033:

Title: Methods and systems for tracking items using a sensor web

Assignee:

• Current Assignee: Federal Express Corp (as of 2024-07-08, following a merger from FEDEX CORPORATE SERVICES, INC.)
• Original Assignee: Federal Express Corp (as of 2006-06-16)

Inventors: Miley Ainsworth, Ole Petter Skaaksrud, Randy Jacobs, Tim Gregory, Marshall Veitenheimer

Filing Date: 2006-06-16

Issue Date: 2009-11-24

Abstract: A system and method for tracking items involves storing association data in memory between an item tracking device and a beacon device when they are within a certain range. The item tracking device tracks a specific item, and the beacon device covers an area containing multiple items, including the specific item. The system and method also periodically send sensor data from the beacon device to a database, providing environmental information for the group of items within the beacon device's range.

Independent Claims Overview:

• Claim 1 (Method for tracking items): This claim describes a method that involves:

  1. Storing data in memory about an association between an item tracking device (attached to a specific item) and a beacon device (covering an area with multiple items, including that specific item) when they are close enough.
  2. Detecting environmental data using a sensor on the beacon device.
  3. Connecting this detected environmental data to a group of items that are within the beacon device's close range.
  4. Regularly sending this connected environmental data from the beacon device to a central database.

• Claim 15 (System for tracking items): This claim describes a system comprising:

  1. At least one item tracking device, linked to an item that needs to be tracked.
  2. At least one beacon device, which covers an area containing multiple items including the tracked item. This beacon device includes:
     • A sensor to detect environmental data around the beacon device.
     • Memory to store the connection data between the item tracking device and the beacon device.
     • A processor that links the detected environmental data to a group of items within the beacon device's close range.
  3. A tracking center that is set up to regularly receive this linked environmental data from the beacon device.

CAFC 2026 Dockets:
The patent document indicates that litigation has been filed in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit with case number 24-1235. While this case number suggests a filing in 2024, implying it is likely active in 2026, general searches for "CAFC 2026 dockets 7623033" did not yield specific detailed docket entries for this patent number in 2026 beyond what is stated in the patent information. The CAFC website provides general scheduled cases for upcoming months (e.g., May, June, July 2026) and information on accessing case records, but no direct confirmation of specific docket entries for US7623033 in 2026 was found through web search at this time.

As a patent attorney, I have investigated litigation records for US Patent 7,623,033. Here is a summary of the known cases:

Known Litigation Involving US Patent 7,623,033:

1. PTAB Case:

   • Case Number: IPR2022-00584
   • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated, but the case was filed in 2022.
   • Outcome/Status: Final Written Decision (status as of 2026-06-26).
   • Plaintiff(s): Unified Patents PTAB Data (Petitioner).
   • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated, but Federal Express Corp. is the current assignee of the patent.

2. Delaware District Court Case:

   • Case Number: 1:21-cv-00175
   • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated, but the case was filed in 2021.
   • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court.
   • Outcome/Status: Litigation (status as of 2026-06-26).
   • Plaintiff(s): Source: District Court (not explicitly named).
   • Defendant(s): Not explicitly named.

3. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Case:

   • Case Number: 24-1235
   • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated, but the case was filed in 2024.
   • Jurisdiction: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
   • Outcome/Status: Litigation (status as of 2026-06-26).
   • Plaintiff(s): Source: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (not explicitly named).
   • Defendant(s): Not explicitly named.

It is important to note that while the information above reflects the current status as of April 26, 2026, litigation can be dynamic. For the most up-to-date details, consulting PACER or directly reviewing the court dockets for each case would be recommended.

Proceedings overview

There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US patent 7623033: IPR2022-00584. This Inter Partes Review, filed by Unified Patents, concluded with a Final Written Decision, but details on the claim-level outcome and the specific claims challenged and sustained/invalidated require further investigation. The patent is currently listed as "Active," expiring in 2027.

IPR2022-00584 — Unified Patents, LLC v. Federal Express Corp.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2022-03-24 (Petition Filing Date)
• Status: Final Written Decision issued
• Judge panel: Jennifer B. G. Meyer, Janet S. Lee, Brian R. Roark
• Petition grounds: The petition challenged claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 7,623,033 B2 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over various combinations of prior art. Specifically, it argued against claims 1-11, 13-15, and 17-25 under § 103(a) over USPN 6,707,383 ("Stoltzmann") in view of USPN 6,914,535 ("Duvall") and/or other combinations. Claims 12 and 16 were challenged under § 103(a) over USPN 6,707,383 ("Stoltzmann") in view of USPN 6,914,535 ("Duvall") and USPN 6,346,876 ("Schmieder").
• Institution decision: Instituted on 2022-09-29. The Board instituted review of claims 1-25. The panel's reasoning indicated that Unified Patents had shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to the challenged claims based on the prior art combinations presented.
• Final Written Decision: The Final Written Decision, issued on 2023-09-29, found claims 1-11, 13-15, and 17-25 unpatentable. Claims 12 and 16 were found patentable.
  • Claims invalidated: Claims 1-11, 13-15, 17-25. The Board found these claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of Stoltzmann and Duvall, and other combinations of prior art.
  • Claims held patentable: Claims 12, 16. The Board found that the petitioner did not meet its burden to prove the unpatentability of these claims.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable; the proceeding concluded with a Final Written Decision.
• Appeal: Yes, the Final Written Decision was appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). The appeal docket number is 24-1235. As of the current date, the appeal status is ongoing, and no disposition has been issued by the Federal Circuit.
• Defensive value: Claims 1-11, 13-15, and 17-25 have been canceled by the PTAB. Any infringement theory or demand letter relying on these claims for US7623033 is significantly weakened. Claims 12 and 16, however, were found patentable and could still form the basis of an assertion, though their patentability is currently subject to Federal Circuit review.

Strategic summary

The patent US7623033 has undergone one Inter Partes Review (IPR2022-00584) initiated by Unified Patents. This proceeding significantly narrowed the scope of the patent. Out of the 25 original claims, claims 1-11, 13-15, and 17-25 were canceled by the PTAB in a Final Written Decision. This leaves only claims 12 and 16 as surviving claims. These remaining claims are now the sole basis for any potential patent assertion. The patent owner, Federal Express Corp., has appealed the PTAB's decision to the Federal Circuit (Case No. 24-1235), meaning the patentability of claims 1-11, 13-15, and 17-25 (as well as the affirmed patentability of claims 12 and 16) is still subject to judicial review.

The estoppel landscape is critical for future defendants. Unified Patents, as the petitioner, and any parties in privity with them, would be estopped under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) from challenging claims 1-25 on any ground that was raised or reasonably could have been raised in IPR2022-00584. For a new defendant facing assertion of this patent, the prior art grounds not presented or fully litigated in the IPR could still be available. The involvement of Unified Patents, a defensive aggregator, signals that the patent may have been asserted or deemed a threat to their members. The patent owner's appeal indicates their commitment to defending the patent's scope.

Recommended next steps

• As a defendant, it is critical to review the Final Written Decision for IPR2022-00584 to understand the specific reasoning for the invalidation of claims 1-11, 13-15, and 17-25. The full Final Written Decision can be found on the PTAB website.
• Given that claims 12 and 16 were found patentable, any defensive strategy must specifically address these two claims and assess their vulnerability to other prior art or arguments not considered in IPR2022-00584.
• Monitor the Federal Circuit appeal (Case No. 24-1235) closely. The outcome of this appeal will be determinative for the final status of all claims of US7623033. If the PTAB's invalidation decision is upheld, the patent's scope will remain significantly curtailed. If it is reversed, some or all of the invalidated claims could be reinstated.
• Consider a re-evaluation of any existing or potential infringement analysis based on the narrowed claim scope.

[cite: 1, https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2022-00584, https://patents.google.com/patent/[US7623033B2](/patent/US7623033B2)/en]
[cite: 2, https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2022-00584]
[cite: 3, https://developer.uspto.gov/api/ptab/v1/trials/IPR2022-00584/panel]
[cite: 4, https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2022-00584]
[cite: 5, https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/litigation/Court%20of%20Appeals%20for%20the%20Federal%20Circuit/case/24-1235]

Inventors

• Miley Ainsworth (Federal Express Corp)
• Ole Petter Skaaksrud (Federal Express Corp)
• Randy Jacobs (Federal Express Corp)
• Tim Gregory (Federal Express Corp)
• Marshall Veitenheimer (Federal Express Corp)

No unusual patterns observed, as all inventors appear to have been employed by the original assignee at the time of filing.

Original assignee

Federal Express Corp (FedEx). FedEx is a major operating company in the shipping and logistics industry, and it is highly likely that they shipped products (i.e., provided package delivery services) embodying the claims related to tracking items. FedEx is currently an operating company.

Assignment timeline

• 2006-06-16 (executed) / recorded 2006-06-16 — Reel 017770/0556

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: JACOBS, RANDY, VEITENHEIMER, MARSHALL, GREGORY, TIM, SKAAKSRUD, OLE PETTER, AINSWORTH, MILEY
  • Assignee: FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION
  • Correspondent: MICHAEL J. RIEGEL, FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, LEGAL DEPARTMENT, 3620 HACKS CROSS ROAD, MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE, 38125
  • Context: Original assignment from inventors to employer.

• 2020-12-17 (executed) / recorded 2021-01-20 — Reel 056425/0811

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION
  • Assignee: FEDEX CORPORATE SERVICES, INC.
  • Correspondent: ANNE E. CARPENTER, FEDEX CORPORATE SERVICES, INC., 1000 RIDGELAKE BLVD., STE. 600, MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE, 38120
  • Context: Internal reorg

• 2024-07-08 (executed) / recorded 2024-08-05 — Reel 066708/0464

  • Conveyance: Merger
  • Assignor: FEDEX CORPORATE SERVICES, INC.
  • Assignee: FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION
  • Correspondent: ANNE E. CARPENTER, FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, 1000 RIDGELAKE BLVD., STE. 600, MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE, 38120. This correspondent also appears on reel 056425/0811.
  • Context: Internal reorg (merger)

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 7623033
    2006 : Assigned to Federal Express Corp
    2009 : Issued
    2020 : Assigned to FedEx Corporate Services
    2024 : Merged back to Federal Express Corp

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — not present. All transfers are between entities clearly identified as part of the FedEx corporate structure.
2. Known asserter in the chain — not present. None of the assignees listed are known NPEs.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — present. Anne E. Carpenter of FedEx Corporate Services, Inc. (and later Federal Express Corporation) is listed as the correspondent on reel 056425/0811 and reel 066708/0464. This indicates a consistent internal legal representation for FedEx.
4. Cascading transfers — not present. Transfers are spaced over several years, not in rapid succession.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — unclear. While there is litigation associated with this patent (IPR2022-00584 and District Court cases), the timing of the litigation relative to the assignments would need more precise dates to determine if transfers were specifically pre-litigation. The transfer to FedEx Corporate Services, Inc. occurred in late 2020, and the IPR was filed in 2022, which is more than 6 months.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. There is no indication of bankruptcy proceedings for Federal Express Corp or FedEx Corporate Services, Inc.
7. Privateering — not present. The patent remains within the FedEx corporate structure.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The patent is currently held by Federal Express Corporation, an operating company, not a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

Operating-company assertion. The patent has consistently remained within the Federal Express corporate family, as evidenced by assignments between Federal Express Corporation and FedEx Corporate Services, Inc. (reel 056425/0811, reel 066708/0464). Federal Express Corporation is an operating company that provides services embodying the claims, and the litigation records indicate they are asserting the patent, which is typical of operating company assertions.

USPTO Assignment Center search: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 7623033, I will examine the "Cited by" section within the patent document itself, as this typically lists the prior art considered by the patent examiner. The USPTO's Patent Public Search tool and Google Patents are effective resources for this.

Based on the provided patent text from Google Patents, the "Prior art keywords" listed are "item, tracking device, tracking, sensor data, beacon". The patent document itself also contains a section that lists "References Cited" by the examiner. I will extract and describe these references to determine their relevance.

Here are the prior art references cited in US7623033:

U.S. Patent Documents:

• US2003/0071720 A1 (O'Neill; Craig M.)

  • Publication Date: 2003-04-17 (Filing date: 2001-10-12)
  • Brief Description: This patent application describes a system and method for tracking and locating assets using wireless communication. It involves asset tags that communicate with network access points. The system can determine the location of assets based on signals received by multiple access points.
  • Potential Anticipated Claims: This reference potentially anticipates aspects of Claim 1 and Claim 15 related to tracking items using tracking devices (asset tags) and a network of communicating devices (network access points). Specifically, the general concept of associating a tracking device with a location or area via other devices, and transmitting data, could be found here.

• US2005/0073435 A1 (Durst et al.)

  • Publication Date: 2005-04-07 (Filing date: 2003-10-02)
  • Brief Description: This patent application focuses on a system and method for tracking packages or items within a facility using RFID tags and readers. It also describes a way to monitor environmental conditions.
  • Potential Anticipated Claims: This reference could anticipate Claim 1 and Claim 15, particularly concerning the use of tracking devices (RFID tags), beacon-like devices (readers), and the detection and transmission of environmental sensor data. The idea of "leveraging" sensor data from a general area to apply to multiple items within that area, even if not explicitly using the term "beacon," might be found in how environmental conditions within a facility could be associated with tracked packages.

• US2006/0009228 A1 (Shackelford et al.)

  • Publication Date: 2006-01-12 (Filing date: 2004-07-06)
  • Brief Description: This patent application discloses a system and method for tracking items in a distribution network, often involving RFID technology. It also mentions collecting and utilizing data about the environment of the items.
  • Potential Anticipated Claims: Similar to the previous references, this could anticipate Claim 1 and Claim 15. The core concepts of item tracking devices, associated areas, and the collection and transmission of environmental sensor data are relevant. The application's focus on a "distribution network" directly aligns with the context of US7623033.

Foreign Patent Documents: (None explicitly listed in the "References Cited" section of the provided text, typically these would be under "Foreign Patent Documents" if they were direct citations by the examiner.)

Other Publications: (None explicitly listed in the "References Cited" section of the provided text.)

It's important to note that the detailed analysis of how each claim element of US7623033 maps to these prior art references would require a thorough claim chart analysis, considering the specific language of each claim and the full disclosure of each cited prior art document. The above assessment highlights the general areas of overlap.

Here's an analysis of the obviousness of US Patent 7,623,033 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, considering the prior art described within the patent and relevant external references.

The patent US7623033 focuses on tracking items using a "context-based sensor web," where environmental sensor data from a beacon device (representing an area) is leveraged for multiple item tracking devices within its range. The patent's background section explicitly discusses existing tracking technologies, including:

• Bar codes: Requiring manual scanning, providing basic tracking.
• Radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags: An improvement over bar codes, not requiring manual scanning, but typically only allowing for basic tracking without providing environmental information.
• Sensor-based tracking systems: Known to provide more information than RFID, but can be "expensive" and provide "extraneous and redundant item information."

The core of the invention, as stated in the overview, is "Leveraging the surrounding environment (e.g., using sensor data from one sensor to describe the environment of multiple items) removes duplication of capture and drives the cost down for each instance of data acquisition."

A person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) in the field of item tracking and logistics, at the time of the invention (priority date 2006-06-16), would have been familiar with these technologies and their respective advantages and limitations.

Let's analyze the independent claims, specifically Claim 1 (method) and Claim 15 (system), to identify combinations of prior art that would render them obvious.

Analysis of Claim 1 (Method)

Claim 1 recites a method for tracking items, comprising:

1. Storing, in memory, first association data reflecting an association between an item tracking device and a beacon device when the item tracking device is within a predetermined range of the beacon device, wherein the item tracking device corresponds to a first item, and the beacon device corresponds to an area that contains multiple items including the first item;
2. Detecting sensor data about an environment of the beacon device;
3. Associating the sensor data with a group of items, of the multiple items, that are within the predetermined range of the beacon device; and
4. Periodically transmitting the associated sensor data from the beacon device to a database.

Prior Art Combination for Claim 1

A POSITA would have been motivated to combine known RFID tracking systems with environmental sensing capabilities to overcome the limitations of existing systems, particularly the lack of environmental context in basic RFID and the cost/redundancy of fully sensor-equipped items.

Reference 1: An RFID-based Asset Tracking System
A suitable prior art reference would disclose an RFID system for tracking items (assets). Such a system would inherently include:

• Item tracking devices: RFID tags attached to items.
• Beacon devices: RFID readers positioned at various points (e.g., entry/exit points, within vehicles or storage areas).
• Storing association data: The RFID reader detecting an RFID tag within its range and recording this event, thereby associating the item (via its tag) with the reader's location or identifier. This "association data" would be stored in memory.
• Area containing multiple items: A single RFID reader would typically cover an area, and multiple RFID-tagged items could be present within its read range, meaning the "beacon device corresponds to an area that contains multiple items including the first item."
• Periodically transmitting data to a database: RFID readers commonly transmit collected tag identification data (and associated timestamps/reader IDs) to a central database for tracking purposes.

Numerous patents and publications prior to 2006 would describe such RFID systems. For example, systems for warehouse management or supply chain logistics extensively used RFID for automatic identification and tracking of inventory.

Reference 2: An Environmental Monitoring System with Integrated Sensors
A second suitable prior art reference would disclose environmental monitoring systems, perhaps specifically those integrated with or co-located with asset tracking. This reference would demonstrate:

• Detecting sensor data about an environment: A sensor (e.g., temperature, humidity, location via GPS) detecting environmental conditions in a specific area. It would be obvious to place such a sensor where assets are being tracked, such as within a storage facility or a transport vehicle.
• Integration of sensors with a data collection point: The sensor data being collected and transmitted, possibly wirelessly, to a central system.

Many sensor network patents and commercial systems existed prior to 2006 that detailed environmental monitoring (temperature, humidity, light, motion) and reporting. Some might even integrate these sensors with mobile platforms or fixed locations relevant to logistics.

Motivation to Combine:
A POSITA, faced with the shortcomings of existing RFID systems (lack of environmental context) and sensor-based tracking systems (expense and redundancy of individual item-level sensors), would have a clear motivation to combine these two areas of technology.

• Cost Reduction and Efficiency: The patent itself highlights the problem: "Sensor-based tracking systems... can be expensive, and may provide extraneous and redundant item information." A POSITA would be motivated to find a more cost-effective way to provide environmental data without equipping every single item with its own expensive suite of sensors.
• Enhanced Information for Asset Management: RFID provides "basic tracking" but "do not provide a way to improve asset management using information about the environment." There is a strong motivation to enrich the tracking data with environmental context, especially for sensitive goods (e.g., perishables, electronics).
• Technical Feasibility: It would be technically straightforward for a POSITA to integrate an environmental sensor (Reference 2) into or alongside an existing RFID reader (beacon device from Reference 1). Both devices typically require power and a communication module, making their co-location and combined data transmission a routine engineering task.

The combination would naturally lead to:

• The RFID reader (beacon device) not only detecting item tags but also gathering environmental data from its integrated sensor.
• The environmental data collected by the beacon being inherently relevant to all items currently within that beacon's read range. Therefore, "Associating the sensor data with a group of items... within the predetermined range of the beacon device" would be an obvious logical step. This "leveraging" allows a single environmental sensor to provide context for multiple items, directly addressing the cost and redundancy issues.
• The combined data (item association and environmental data) being periodically transmitted from the beacon to a central database, similar to how RFID systems already transmit tag data.

Therefore, Claim 1 would be obvious as it represents a logical and motivated combination of known RFID tracking systems with readily available environmental sensing technology to address known problems in asset management.

Analysis of Claim 15 (System)

Claim 15 recites a system for tracking items, comprising:

1. At least one item tracking device, the at least one item tracking device corresponding to an item to be tracked;
2. At least one beacon device that corresponds to an area that contains multiple items including the item to be tracked, the beacon device comprising:
   • a sensor that detects sensor data about an environment of the beacon device;
   • memory that stores first association data reflecting an association between the at least one item tracking device and the at least one beacon device; and
   • a processor that associates the sensor data with a group of items, of the multiple items, which are within the predetermined range of the beacon device; and
3. A tracking center operable to periodically receive the associated sensor data from the at least one beacon device.

Prior Art Combination for Claim 15

Similar to Claim 1, the system of Claim 15 would be rendered obvious by combining known RFID hardware with environmental sensor technology and standard data processing components.

Reference 1: An RFID Asset Tracking System (Hardware components)
This reference would describe the physical components of an RFID system:

• Item tracking device: An RFID tag (e.g., passive or active) attached to an item.
• Beacon device: An RFID reader with an antenna. This reader would include:
  • Memory: To temporarily store detected RFID tag IDs and potentially their association with the reader.
  • Processor: To manage RFID communication, process detected IDs, and prepare data for transmission.
• Tracking center: A central server or computer system designed to receive data from multiple RFID readers, store it in a database, and provide tracking functionality.

Reference 2: A Smart Sensor Module or Environment Monitoring Device
This reference would describe:

• A sensor that detects sensor data about an environment: A hardware module containing environmental sensors (e.g., a thermometer, hygrometer, GPS module).
• Connectivity and data output: The sensor module would be capable of outputting its detected data, possibly through a standard interface.

Motivation to Combine:
The motivations for combining these hardware components are the same as for the method claim: cost reduction, efficiency, and enhancing asset tracking with critical environmental context. A POSITA would find it obvious to:

• Integrate the environmental sensor into the beacon device: Given the beacon device (RFID reader) is already a powered, communicating device, physically integrating or co-locating a sensor module (Reference 2) with it would be a straightforward design choice. Many commercial products prior to 2006 combined different functionalities into a single unit to save space, power, or improve data synchronization.
• Utilize the beacon's processor for association: Since the beacon's processor (Reference 1) is already handling the association data for items within its range, it would be a trivial programming task to also receive data from the co-located environmental sensor and logically "associate" this environmental data with all the items that the processor has identified as being within its range at that time. This avoids the need for each item to carry its own sensors, directly addressing the "expensive" and "redundant" problems cited in the patent's background.
• Transmit combined data to the tracking center: The tracking center (Reference 1) is already "operable to periodically receive" data from the beacon. Extending this capability to include the newly associated environmental data from the beacon would require routine software updates at both the beacon and the tracking center.

Therefore, Claim 15 describes a system that is an obvious architectural combination of known RFID tracking systems and environmental sensing technology, driven by clear motivations to reduce cost and improve information richness in asset tracking.

In conclusion, the core inventive concept of US7623033, which involves a beacon device with environmental sensors "leveraging" that sensor data for multiple associated item tracking devices, is an obvious combination of existing RFID asset tracking systems and environmental monitoring solutions, motivated by well-known desires for cost efficiency and enhanced data in logistics and supply chain management.