Automated Product Return System Using Device Identification

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for processing product returns are often tedious, time-consuming, and error-prone, requiring significant human involvement.

Innovation Solution

A computing system that uses device identifier data to identify customer accounts, analyze transaction data, and determine if a product is eligible for return, facilitating the return process by prompting users to position products in a predetermined area and verifying their location using sensor data.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional manual methods are used for processing product returns, then human involvement ensures flexibility and judgment, but the process becomes tedious, time-consuming, and error-prone

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccuracy of return processingVSAvoidtime required for return processing
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service return processing by automatically identifying customers through device identifiers, verifying product eligibility through transaction data analysis, and guiding users through the return process without human intervention. The computing system autonomously completes tasks that previously required human staff, eliminating manual data entry and verification steps.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical processes with automated computing operations. Device identifiers and transaction data are automatically processed by the computing system to determine return eligibility, substituting human judgment and manual verification with algorithmic analysis. This automation eliminates the tedious manual work while maintaining accurate return processing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Productivity

If automated systems are implemented to speed up return processing, then efficiency improves, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvespeed of return processingVSAvoidcomplexity of return management system
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The computing system performs multiple functions within a single automated platform: identifying customers through device identifiers, analyzing transaction data for eligibility verification, generating return authorization codes, and guiding the physical return process. This multi-functional approach consolidates what would otherwise require multiple separate systems into one unified solution, managing complexity while maintaining high productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses device identifiers as an intermediary to connect the customer, the product, and the return processing system. This intermediary element simplifies the automation process by providing a reliable link between the user's device and their account information, enabling seamless automated processing without requiring direct complex interactions between multiple system components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Extent of automation

If device identifier data is used to automatically identify customer accounts, then the process becomes faster and more automated, but data security and privacy concerns increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelevel of automated identificationVSAvoiddata security risks
Core Design Contradiction:
Extent of automationVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary verification by analyzing transaction data associated with the device identifier before processing the return. This advance verification ensures that the device identifier genuinely corresponds to the customer account and that the product is eligible for return, preventing unauthorized access or fraudulent returns. The automated identification is thus secured through pre-validation steps.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from transaction data analysis to verify the legitimacy of device identifier-based customer identification. By cross-referencing the device identifier with historical transaction records, the system receives feedback that confirms whether the identification is valid, adding a security layer that prevents misuse of device identifiers while maintaining automated processing speed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS11037146B2Managing product returns associated with a user device
Publication Date: 2021.06.15 WALMART APOLLO LLC
  • US11037146B2 patent drawing
  • US11037146B2 patent drawing
  • US11037146B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Examples of the disclosure provide systems and methods for managing product returns. A computing system receives, from a user device, a request for returning a product, compares device identifier data associated with the user device with registered data associated with one or more customer accounts to identify a first customer account associated with the user device, analyzes transaction data associated with the first customer account to determine whether the product is associated with the first customer account, generates an instruction to position the product in a predetermined area, and determines whether the product is positioned in the predetermined area to facilitate a return of the product. Aspects of the disclosure may improve user experience, user efficiency, and/or user interaction performance by processing a product return in an effective and efficient manner.