Invalidity dossier
US 5287266
Intelligent shopping cart system having cart position determining capability
Current assignee: Klever Marketing Inc
Added 9/24/2026, 1:31:42 AM
Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash
Patent summary
Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.
Patent Overview: US5287266A
Title: Intelligent shopping cart system having cart position determining capability
Patent number: US5287266A
Application number: US08/045,826
Inventor(s): John Malec; Joseph P. Moser
Original assignee: VideOcart Inc.
Current assignee (as listed): Klever Marketing Inc
Priority date: 1987-09-21
Filing date: 1993-04-12
Publication/grant date: 1994-02-15
Legal status: Expired – Lifetime (anticipated expiration 2011-02-15)
Purpose and plain-language scope
The patent describes an "intelligent shopping cart system" that can determine cart position. The supplied excerpt is essentially bibliographic and procedural metadata: it identifies the patent, parties, key dates, classification/status fields, and litigation/assignment entries. Recurring prior-art keywords in the excerpt—block, trigger, message, cart, data—hint at a system in which cart location is tracked and messages are triggered or delivered based on position, but the excerpt provides no claim language, abstract, or detailed description to confirm the mechanism.
What the excerpt does establish
- The patent issued from application US08/045,826 and was granted on 1994-02-15.
- VideOcart Inc. was the original assignee; Klever Marketing Inc is listed as current assignee.
- The patent's legal status is expired.
- The source page links related litigation in Utah District Court (case 1:07-cv-00135) and assignment records.
What the excerpt does not establish
- No claims, specification, drawings, or embodiments are included, so the actual claimed scope cannot be verified.
- The exact technical operation of "cart position determining capability" is not described.
- The excerpt does not establish validity, enforceability, inventorship correctness, or the merits of any litigation.
- Assignments and litigation are noted only as source metadata; no conclusions are drawn here.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US5287266](/patent/US5287266)/en
(Excerpt only; consult the source for full text.)
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:31:21 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5287266. 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.
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.
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.
Prior art
Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.
Obviousness
Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Extensions
Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.
Derivative works
Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.