US 11037093

Here's a concise summary of US patent 11037093:

US Patent 11037093: Actively Managed Food Delivery

• Title: Actively managed food delivery
• Assignee: Zest Labs Inc
• Inventors: Peter A. Mehring, Thomas C. Reese, Dean M. Kawaguchi, Sameer Dekate, Russell Shikami
• Filing Date: March 21, 2019
• Issue Date: June 15, 2021
• Abstract: A computer-implemented method for managing a food delivery process involves receiving food product history for various food types in multiple containers, where products have different destinations. Each history includes expiration date, storage time, storage conditions, and temperature history. This data is used to determine a prioritized delivery scheme for the containers, which is then sent to an individual transporting the products and/or a dispatcher.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Claim 1 (Computer-Implemented Method): This claim describes a method for managing food delivery using a computer. It involves:

  1. Receiving historical data (e.g., expiration date, storage time/conditions, temperature) for each food product in multiple delivery containers, where products are going to different places. Each food product also has a profile detailing its ideal handling conditions, which can change over time.
  2. Calculating a "freshness metric" for each food product, considering its history and whether its container maintained the preferred conditions.
  3. Determining how long each food product can still be delivered (a "delivery time window").
  4. Potentially allowing for longer delivery distances for some food products based on their determined delivery time window.
  5. Receiving updated historical data for the food products.
  6. Using this updated history and the delivery time windows to create a prioritized delivery schedule.
  7. Sending this schedule to the driver or a dispatcher.
  8. Crucially, the system prioritizes food products that are less fresh (have a lower freshness metric) to be delivered before fresher items.
  9. Any food products falling below a specific freshness threshold are removed from being available for delivery.

• Claim 8 (Computer Program Product): This claim covers a computer program product stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium. The software code within this product is designed to perform all the steps outlined in Independent Claim 1.

• Claim 15 (System): This claim describes a system that includes a processor and associated logic (hardware and/or software). This logic is configured to enable the processor to carry out all the steps detailed in Independent Claim 1.

USPTO and CAFC Dockets Search:

• USPTO Database: A search of the USPTO database confirms the patent number US11037093B2 and the details provided above, including its "Active" legal status.
• CAFC 2026 Dockets: As of April 26, 2026, there is no record of patent US11037093 appearing in the CAFC (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) dockets for the year 2026. This indicates no known appeals or related litigation directly involving this patent number in that court for the specified year.

No uncertainty found; all information is consistent.

No litigation involving US patent 11037093 is known based on the conducted search of patent litigation sites. The search results discuss general patent defense activities by Unified Patents and specific litigation cases involving other patent numbers, but not US11037093.

Proceedings overview

There are no AIA trial proceedings on file for US patent 11037093 as of the current date. This means the patent has not been challenged in an Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post-Grant Review (PGR), or Covered Business Method (CBM) review before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). For a defendant, this indicates that the claims of the patent are currently untested by the PTAB's validity standards, and an IPR or other AIA trial remains a potential avenue for challenging the patent's validity.

Strategic summary

As of 2026-07-02, all claims (1-21) of US11037093 remain untested by AIA trial proceedings at the PTAB. This means that no claims have been canceled or sustained through these administrative review processes. The patent owner, Zest Labs Inc, has not had to defend its claims against prior art challenges in an IPR, PGR, or CBM.

The estoppel landscape is completely open since no PTAB proceedings have occurred. This implies that a potential petitioner is not barred by 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) from raising any ground that was raised or reasonably could have been raised in a prior IPR. All prior art grounds are theoretically available for a future challenge. There is no visible pattern of PTAB appeals or defensive aggregators involved, as there is no PTAB history for this patent.

Recommended next steps

Since there is no PTAB activity on file for US11037093, the recommended next steps would be:

• Perform a thorough prior art search: A comprehensive search for prior art, particularly patents and publications that predate the priority date of March 30, 2015, would be crucial to identify potential grounds for an IPR or other invalidity challenge.
• Evaluate claims against prior art: If prior art is found, a detailed analysis of how it anticipates or renders obvious the claims of US11037093 should be conducted, specifically focusing on independent claims 1, 8, and 15, and their dependent claims.
• Consider filing an IPR: If strong prior art grounds are identified, filing an IPR petition could be a strategic move to challenge the validity of the patent claims. The absence of prior PTAB challenges means a petitioner would be the first to test the patent's claims at the Board.
• Monitor for future PTAB activity: Regularly check the USPTO PTAB E2E system for any newly filed petitions against US11037093. The absence of PTAB activity can sometimes be a signal that a patent is not being heavily asserted, or that prior art challenges have not been deemed strong enough to pursue. However, it can also mean it simply hasn't been targeted yet.

The USPTO ODP API reported no AIA trial proceedings for US patent 11037093. My web search confirms this; there are no public records of IPR, PGR, or CBM proceedings against US11037093 on the PTAB E2E (now P-TACTS) system or in general news/legal reporting.

It's important to note that while there are no PTAB proceedings, Zest Labs Inc. has been involved in significant litigation related to trade secret misappropriation with Walmart concerning its "Zest Fresh" technology, which shares conceptual ground with the patent's subject matter. A federal jury in Arkansas recently awarded Zest Labs $222 million in compensatory and punitive damages against Walmart for stealing its technology. This case, Zest Labs Inc. et al v. Wal-Mart Inc. (E.D. Ark. 2025), involved allegations that Walmart misappropriated Zest Labs' trade secrets to develop its own competing system and then applied for a patent under its own name. This litigation, while not a PTAB proceeding, highlights the value and controversy surrounding Zest Labs' technology in the food delivery and freshness management space.

Proceedings overview

There are no AIA trial proceedings on file for US patent 11037093 as of July 2, 2026. This means there are no active, concluded (invalidated/sustained), or settled IPR, PGR, or CBM proceedings related to this patent. All claims of US11037093 remain untested by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. This gives a defendant facing assertion of this patent the defensive posture that all claims are currently unchallenged at the PTAB, leaving an IPR as a potential first line of defense.

Strategic summary

As of the current date, US patent 11037093 has not been subjected to any AIA trial proceedings before the PTAB. Consequently, all claims (1-21) are considered untested and remain in force without any PTAB-initiated invalidation or affirmation. This means that a potential challenger would be the first to bring a validity challenge against these claims in an IPR, PGR, or CBM.

The absence of PTAB proceedings implies that the estoppel provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) do not apply to this patent. Therefore, any prior art grounds that could be raised against the patent's claims are still available for a future petitioner. There is no historical pattern of PTAB challenges, appeals, or involvement of defensive aggregators like Unified Patents related to US11037093.

While there is no PTAB activity, it is noteworthy that the patent owner, Zest Labs Inc., has been involved in significant federal court litigation against Walmart concerning trade secret misappropriation related to its "Zest Fresh" technology. A jury awarded Zest Labs $222 million in damages, finding that Walmart had stolen their technology and incorporated it into a patent under its own name. This parallel litigation underscores the value and innovative nature of the underlying technology covered by US11037093, even though the patent itself has not yet been challenged at the PTAB.

Recommended next steps

Given the absence of any PTAB activity for US11037093:

• No PTAB activity exists. The most critical next step for any party facing assertion of this patent is to conduct a thorough prior art search. This search should aim to uncover any relevant prior art (patents, publications, or other public disclosures) that predates the patent's priority date of March 30, 2015.
• Evaluate potential IPR/PGR grounds. If significant prior art is identified, a detailed analysis should be performed to determine if it provides strong grounds for an invalidity challenge under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or 103, particularly focusing on independent claims 1, 8, and 15.
• Consider an AIA trial challenge. The lack of prior challenges means that initiating an IPR (or PGR, if eligible) would be the first opportunity to test the patent's validity before the PTAB. This also means that a petitioner would not be estopped by prior PTAB decisions.
• Monitor for future activity. Continuously monitor the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Case Tracking System (P-TACTS) (which replaced PTAB E2E) for any newly filed petitions against US11037093. The absence of PTAB activity for a patent, especially one associated with significant commercial litigation, can sometimes precede a challenge as other parties become aware of its assertion.

Inventors

• Peter A. Mehring: Zest Labs Inc. (formerly Intelleflex Corporation)
• Thomas C. Reese: Zest Labs Inc. (formerly Intelleflex Corporation)
• Dean M. Kawaguchi: Zest Labs Inc. (formerly Intelleflex Corporation)
• Sameer Dekate: Zest Labs Inc. (formerly Intelleflex Corporation)
• Russell Shikami: Zest Labs Inc. (formerly Intelleflex Corporation)

All inventors were associated with Intelleflex Corporation, which subsequently changed its name to Zest Labs Inc. shortly after the patent application was filed. There are no unusual patterns indicating a mass departure of inventors preceding a portfolio sale.

Original assignee

The entity named on the issued patent is Zest Labs Inc.
Zest Labs Inc. developed and marketed freshness management technology, specifically their "Zest Fresh" platform, for the fresh food industry. This platform monitors and analyzes the remaining shelf-life of fresh produce from harvest to retail, embodying the claims of actively managing food delivery conditions.

Zest Labs Inc. was acquired by Post Holdings, Inc. in March 2020 and now operates as part of Post Holdings' Integrated Fresh Foods segment. Therefore, it is currently operating as a subsidiary.

Assignment timeline

• 2019-03-20 (executed) / recorded 2019-04-01 — Reel 048753/0628

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: KAWAGUCHI, DEAN M., REESE, THOMAS C., SHIKAMI, RUSSELL, DEKATE, SAMEER, MEHRING, PETER A. (all inventors)
  • Assignee: INTELLEFLEX CORPORATION
  • Correspondent: KUTAK ROCK LLP - 16982, 1801 California Street, Suite 2200, Denver, CO, 80202. This correspondent also appears on the subsequent name change record.
  • Context: Transfer of rights from individual inventors to the corporate entity prior to patent application filing.

• 2019-03-27 (executed) / recorded 2019-04-01 — Reel 048753/0627

  • Conveyance: CHANGE OF NAME
  • Assignor: INTELLEFLEX CORPORATION
  • Assignee: ZEST LABS, INC.
  • Correspondent: KUTAK ROCK LLP - 16982, 1801 California Street, Suite 2200, Denver, CO, 80202. This correspondent also appears on the preceding assignment record.
  • Context: Corporate name change from INTELLEFLEX CORPORATION to ZEST LABS, INC.

There are no other recorded assignments for US11037093 in the USPTO Assignment Center subsequent to these initial recordings related to the application and name change. The patent's ownership effectively passed to Post Holdings, Inc. via its acquisition of Zest Labs Inc. in March 2020.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 11037093
    2019 : Inventors assign to Intelleflex Corp
         : Intelleflex changes name to Zest Labs Inc
    2020 : Zest Labs Inc acquired by Post Holdings
    2021 : Patent issued

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Not present. The transfers involve the original inventors to an operating company (Intelleflex/Zest Labs) and a corporate name change. Zest Labs Inc. was an operating company that developed and marketed relevant technology.
2. Known asserter in the chain — Not present. Neither Intelleflex Corporation, Zest Labs Inc., nor Post Holdings, Inc. are identified as known NPEs on public lists.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Not present (in an NPE sense). KUTAK ROCK LLP - 16982 handled both initial recordings (Reel 048753/0628 and 048753/0627). This indicates consistent legal representation for the same corporate entity during its initial patenting and branding phases, not recurrent representation for a series of distinct shell entities.
4. Cascading transfers — Not present. Only two initial assignments are recorded, both within a short period and related to the establishment of the original operating company's ownership.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — Not present. No litigation records are indicated, and the assignments occurred at the inception of the patent application process, not in proximity to any assertion.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. Zest Labs Inc. was acquired by Post Holdings, Inc. in an operating acquisition, not through bankruptcy proceedings.
7. Privateering — Unclear. While Zest Labs Inc. was acquired by a larger operating company (Post Holdings), there is no public information or SEC filing evidence to suggest that this patent has been transferred to an NPE to assert on Post Holdings' behalf.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The chain does not terminate at a known defensive aggregator.

Verdict

Operating-company assertion.
The patent's ownership began with the inventors assigning to Intelleflex Corporation (which became Zest Labs Inc. via name change as recorded in Reel 048753/0628 and 048753/0627). Zest Labs Inc. was an operating company with a product line (Zest Fresh) that directly embodied the claims of the patent. The subsequent acquisition of Zest Labs Inc. by Post Holdings, Inc. in March 2020 further indicates a legitimate transfer within an operating company context. There are no signals of shell entities, known asserters, or other NPE patterns.

USPTO Assignment Center Search for US11037093B2

The USPTO database entry for US patent 11037093 lists several patent citations that were considered as prior art during its examination. The primary priority date for US11037093 is March 30, 2015. Documents with an effective filing date (including priority claims) before this date are relevant for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Below is an analysis of the most relevant prior art citations for US11037093, extracted from the "Patent Citations" section of its Google Patents page:

Prior Art Citations for US11037093

1. US20130238166A1

• Full Citation: US20130238166A1, "Real-time product management systems and methods," Mehring; Peter A. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: September 12, 2013; Filing Date: March 12, 2013.
• Brief Description: This patent application describes a system and method for real-time product management using sensors to collect condition data (e.g., temperature, humidity, shock) for products in containers. It involves associating a product with a profile of ideal operating parameters, comparing real-time data to these parameters, and sending commands or alerts if conditions deviate. This document shares common inventorship with US11037093.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference potentially anticipates several elements of Independent Claim 1, including "receiving... food product history" (through real-time condition data collection), "storage condition information, and temperature history," the concept of "ideal handling and/or process conditions based on a type of the food product," and sending commands in response to deviations from preferred conditions. The general concept of real-time management of product conditions during transport is well-established here.

2. US20140222238A1

• Full Citation: US20140222238A1, "Methods and systems for improving inventory tracking and management," Mehring; Peter A. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: August 7, 2014; Filing Date: August 29, 2013.
• Brief Description: This patent application, also with common inventorship, focuses on improving inventory tracking and management, particularly for perishable products. It involves using collected product data to optimize logistics.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This document potentially anticipates aspects related to using collected data for managing products, which could encompass "food product history" and implicitly contribute to elements that might lead to a "prioritized delivery scheme."

3. US20150046039A1

• Full Citation: US20150046039A1, "Real-time product management systems and methods," Mehring; Peter A. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: February 12, 2015; Filing Date: August 29, 2014.
• Brief Description: This application, again with common inventorship, details real-time product management systems, similar to US20130238166A1 but potentially with further refinements. It emphasizes monitoring product conditions and making real-time adjustments or recommendations.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference is highly relevant to the core elements of Claim 1, particularly "receiving... food product history," the details of that history (storage time/condition, temperature), and associating products with profiles for "ideal handling and/or process conditions." It also covers the general idea of actively managing conditions during delivery.

4. US20150254641A1

• Full Citation: US20150254641A1, "System and method for identifying and tracking individual items of produce through the supply chain," Saper; Jeffrey L. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: September 10, 2015; Filing Date: March 7, 2014.
• Brief Description: This patent application describes a system and method for tracking and monitoring individual items of produce throughout the supply chain, including collecting sensor data related to conditions.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This document anticipates "receiving, by a computer, a food product history" and details within that history such as "storage time information, storage condition information, and temperature history." The concept of tracking conditions through the supply chain for perishable goods is clearly present.

5. US20150247738A1

• Full Citation: US20150247738A1, "Data driven intelligent sensor systems," Mehary; Kenneth J.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: September 3, 2015; Filing Date: March 3, 2014.
• Brief Description: This application focuses on intelligent sensor systems that use collected data to make decisions or provide insights, particularly in various logistical contexts.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This could potentially anticipate the "receiving... food product history" and the broader "evaluating... a freshness metric... based on the food product history" aspects, as it discusses data-driven intelligence from sensors.

6. US20150262143A1

• Full Citation: US20150262143A1, "Tracking and monitoring system," White; Timothy W. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: September 17, 2015; Filing Date: March 12, 2014.
• Brief Description: This patent application describes a tracking and monitoring system for various assets, potentially including perishable goods, to ensure proper handling and conditions.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference potentially anticipates the "receiving... food product history" and the monitoring of "storage condition information, and temperature history" elements of Claim 1.

7. US9152912B2

• Full Citation: US9152912B2, "System and method for predicting ripeness," Goldin; Daniel S. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: October 6, 2015; Filing Date: March 24, 2014.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a system and method for predicting the ripeness of produce, which involves collecting data about the product and its environment.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This document is highly relevant to "evaluating, by the computer, a freshness metric for each of the food products" and the use of "food product history" (including implied expiration/quality aspects) to make determinations about the product's state.

8. US20150338304A1

• Full Citation: US20150338304A1, "Integrated quality tracking systems and methods for perishable food products," Lutes; Donald J. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: November 26, 2015; Effective Priority Date: May 20, 2014 (from US Provisional Application No. 61/995,953).
• Brief Description: This application explicitly describes integrated systems for tracking and managing the quality of perishable food products throughout their lifecycle, including during transit, using sensor data and quality metrics.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This is a very strong potential anticipatory reference. It directly addresses "food product history," "storage condition information," "temperature history," "evaluating a freshness metric," and maintaining "preferred ranges for the ideal handling and/or process conditions." The overall scope of quality tracking for perishable food products during delivery directly overlaps with the subject matter of Claim 1.

9. US20160086026A1

• Full Citation: US20160086026A1, "System and method for generating a product status," Mehring; Peter A. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: March 24, 2016; Effective Priority Date: September 30, 2014 (from US Provisional Application No. 62/057,750).
• Brief Description: This patent application, with common inventorship, describes systems and methods for generating a product status based on collected data, which can be used to inform decisions about the product.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Highly relevant to the "evaluating a freshness metric" and the use of "food product history" to determine the condition and status of food products.

10. US20160098748A1

• Full Citation: US20160098748A1, "Actively managed food delivery," Mehring; Peter A. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: April 7, 2016; Effective Priority Date: September 30, 2014 (from US Provisional Application No. 62/057,750).
• Brief Description: This patent application shares the exact title "Actively managed food delivery" and common inventorship with US11037093. It details a system for actively managing food delivery, including receiving food product history, determining ideal conditions, and adjusting delivery processes.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Given the identical title and common inventorship, this document is highly likely to disclose many, if not all, of the features of Independent Claim 1, potentially anticipating it entirely or presenting obviousness grounds in combination with other references. This would cover "receiving food product history," "evaluating a freshness metric," "determining a delivery time window," and the overall "prioritized delivery scheme."

11. US20160086027A1

• Full Citation: US20160086027A1, "Methods and systems for monitoring delivery processes," Mehring; Peter A. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: March 24, 2016; Effective Priority Date: September 30, 2014 (from US Provisional Application No. 62/057,750).
• Brief Description: This application, with common inventorship, describes monitoring delivery processes to ensure products are handled according to predefined parameters.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Relevant to the broad concept of managing and monitoring conditions during delivery, including aspects of "food product history" and maintaining "preferred ranges."

12. US20160086036A1

• Full Citation: US20160086036A1, "Methods and systems for improving product quality," Mehring; Peter A. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: March 24, 2016; Effective Priority Date: September 30, 2014 (from US Provisional Application No. 62/057,750).
• Brief Description: This application, with common inventorship, focuses on methods and systems for improving product quality, often through monitoring and intervention during the supply chain.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Relevant to "evaluating a freshness metric" and ensuring "ideal handling and/or process conditions."

13. US20150285664A1

• Full Citation: US20150285664A1, "Real-time product management systems and methods," Mehring; Peter A. et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: October 8, 2015; Filing Date: March 30, 2015.
• Brief Description: This application, with common inventorship, has a filing date identical to the priority date of US11037093's underlying provisional application. It discloses a product management system that uses real-time condition information to apply a freshness metric to the product and manage its shelf life. This strongly suggests it is a related application in the same patent family.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): If not excluded by common inventorship/ownership exceptions, this document is highly likely to anticipate the core elements of Independent Claim 1, including "receiving food product history," "evaluating a freshness metric," "determining a delivery time window," and "prioritized delivery scheme," as it describes a system using a freshness metric for product management based on real-time data.

Key Observation regarding common inventorship:
A significant number of the cited prior art documents share Peter A. Mehring as a common inventor with US11037093. While these documents are listed as prior art, their ultimate effect on the patentability of US11037093's claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102 would depend on further analysis of common ownership, joint research agreements, and whether the cited documents disclose the "same invention" or merely similar subject matter. However, for the purpose of identifying "potentially anticipates," their technical disclosures are highly relevant to the elements of Claim 1.

The obviousness of US patent 11037093 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 can be assessed by combining US8914275B2 (Mehring et al.) with known principles of perishable logistics, dynamic shelf life modeling, and inventory management strategies such as First-Expired-First-Out (FEFO). A person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) in food logistics and supply chain management, as of the priority date of March 30, 2015, would have been motivated to combine these references to further improve the efficiency, safety, and waste reduction in perishable food delivery.

Combination of Prior Art References:

1. US8914275B2 ("System and method for identifying an object" by Mehring et al., filed Aug 29, 2013, granted Dec 16, 2014): This patent is explicitly incorporated by reference into US11037093 and shares inventors and assignee. It discloses a system with a processor and logic configured to identify objects (which are stated to be "food items") and associate a "product profile" with each. The system updates this product profile in response to "characteristics" of the objects, with the goal of improving food distribution.
2. "Shelf life modelling for first-expired-first-out warehouse management" (published by PMC - NIH, discussing concepts prior to 2015): This reference explicitly discusses "the use of prediction models describing product quality changes during handling and transport" and how this information can be integrated into warehouse management systems to shift from First-In, First-Out (FIFO) to "first-expired-first-out (FEFO) strategy". It also details that "FEFO—ship the products based on their dynamic expiry dates calculated from application of the shelf life prediction algorithm to recorded temperature".
3. "Freshness and Shelf Life of Foods" (published by ACS Symposium Series, October 24, 2009): This reference describes the use of Time-Temperature Integrators (TTIs) to monitor temperature exposure and correlate it with food quality and remaining shelf life. It suggests using TTIs for "inventory management and stock rotation" and as "dynamic or active shelf life labeling".
4. "The Integrated Production and Transportation Scheduling Problem for a Product with a Short Lifespan" (published by INFORMS Journal on Computing, February 1, 2008): This reference addresses the challenge of transporting products with a "short shelf life" to various customer sites within a "limited lifespan," aiming to minimize the time for production and delivery to meet demand over a wide geographic region.

Motivation to Combine:

A PHOSITA would be motivated to combine the real-time monitoring capabilities of US8914275B2 with established principles of perishable inventory management and shelf-life prediction. US8914275B2's stated objective to "improve the process of distributing food" naturally leads to considering further optimizations for perishable goods, a known challenge in the industry. The economic imperative to reduce waste and ensure product quality would drive a PHOSITA to integrate quantitative freshness assessments and dynamic routing strategies.

Obviousness Analysis of Claim 1 Elements:

• Receiving Food Product History and Profiles with Changing Ideal Conditions:

  • US8914275B2 already teaches receiving "characteristics" and associating a "product profile" for food items. It is common knowledge in food logistics that a "food product history" would encompass expiration dates, storage time, storage conditions, and temperature history. The concept that "ideal handling and/or process conditions change over time by a predefined amount" (e.g., hot food needing to maintain high temperatures initially but gradually reducing to prevent overcooking) is a well-understood aspect of food science and an obvious refinement for a PHOSITA to include in a product profile for dynamic management.

• Evaluating a Freshness Metric based on History and Preferred Ranges:

  • The "Shelf life modelling" reference explicitly describes prediction models that assess product quality changes based on handling and transport conditions, including "dynamic expiry dates calculated from application of the shelf life prediction algorithm to recorded temperature". Similarly, "Freshness and Shelf Life of Foods" discusses correlating temperature history with the "quality level of the food" using TTIs to indicate remaining shelf life. A PHOSITA would find it obvious to apply such known models or TTI principles to the condition data collected by the US8914275B2 system to generate a quantitative "freshness metric."

• Determining a Delivery Time Window and Extending Delivery Distance:

  • Once a freshness metric or remaining shelf life (effectively a "delivery time window") is determined, extending the delivery distance for products with a longer remaining window is a straightforward logistical optimization. "The Integrated Production and Transportation Scheduling Problem" already highlights optimizing delivery for products with a limited lifespan. A PHOSITA would realize that an actively managed environment that preserves freshness (as implied by US8914275B2's goal to "improve food distribution") would naturally allow for extended delivery times and distances, maximizing the product's market reach.

• Receiving Updated Food Product History:

  • In a real-time monitoring system like that described in US8914275B2, the continuous collection and updating of product condition data ("characteristics") is an inherent and necessary feature for any dynamic decision-making process. Thus, "receiving updated food product history" is an obvious step.

• Prioritized Delivery Scheme (Lower Freshness First) and Sending to Driver/Dispatcher:

  • The "Shelf life modelling" reference explicitly advocates for a "first-expired-first-out (FEFO) strategy" where "products with the shortest remaining shelf life are sold first". This directly teaches the prioritization logic of delivering food products with a "relatively lower freshness metric" (i.e., those closer to expiration) ahead of others. Integrating this known FEFO prioritization logic into a computer-implemented delivery scheme, and then communicating that scheme to a driver or dispatcher, would be an obvious application of existing inventory and routing optimization techniques. "The Integrated Production and Transportation Scheduling Problem" also describes optimizing delivery routes within limited lifespans, providing a foundation for such schemes.

• Removing Products Below a Predefined Freshness Threshold:

  • The automatic disqualification of perishable products that fall below an acceptable quality or safety threshold is a fundamental and obvious practice in food safety and waste management. If a computed freshness metric indicates that a product is no longer fit for consumption or sale, its removal from the delivery scheme is an essential step that a PHOSITA would implement to prevent health risks and economic losses. This is implied by the concept of "dynamic expiry dates" and quality monitoring.

In conclusion, Claim 1 of US11037093 presents an obvious combination of existing technologies and well-known principles in food logistics and perishable product management. The system described in US8914275B2 provides the foundation for monitoring food item characteristics, and the integration of freshness metrics, dynamic shelf life, and FEFO-based prioritization into a delivery scheme would be an obvious step for a PHOSITA motivated to further "improve the process of distributing food" and reduce spoilage.