Photon Legal
IP portfolio audit
You’ve filed 259 applications with an average grant time of 41 months over the last 5 years.
We read all 2,766 patent records DHL Group owns worldwide, and the 837 still alive today. 2,704 of them sit under Deutsche Post AG, which is the name this group files under. The live patent portfolio is 585 granted patents and 252 applications still in examination, spread across 32 patent offices, and it is built on parcel lockers, sorting machinery and out-of-home delivery rather than on logistics software.
The examination record on DHL's 343 US applications runs to 756 office actions and 149 paid restarts. 181 responses were filed after the statutory 3 months, 113 applications went abandoned before grant, and 2 of those are recent enough that a revival petition is still the obvious move.
What we looked at
Contents
2,766 patent records carry the DHL Group name worldwide. 837 are still live, 585 granted and 252 in examination. 2,704 of the 2,766 were filed by Deutsche Post AG itself rather than bought in, so this is an originated portfolio almost end to end, and the sections that follow read it as one patent portfolio. The live records sit in 312 patent families across 32 offices, with the weight in Europe: 222 records at the EPO and 143 in Germany, against 197 in the United States and 133 in China.
Filings count every record by the date it was filed, granted records and design filings included. Grants count grant publications by the year they published. The 2026 column reads 1 because an application is not published until about 18 months after its priority date, so most of 2025 and all of 2026 has not surfaced yet.
DHL has built a patent portfolio around the physical end of logistics, and in that ground it is not merely competitive, it is unopposed. Parcel lockers, access control, sorting hardware and out-of-home delivery are classes where the nearest rival holds a third of what DHL holds, or nothing at all. The European position is the strongest of the four companies benchmarked here, and the filing program behind it has not missed a year.
The leaks are not at the front of the process. Filings go in every year and the European position holds. What happens afterwards is where the value goes: a third of the US applications never reach a grant, the dead estate is being mined by the people DHL competes with, and the class that describes modern logistics software is the one class where DHL is comprehensively outgunned.
UPS holds 1,119 live records to DHL's 837, FedEx 807 and AP Moller Maersk 740. The four are closer in size than in shape. UPS and FedEx are American portfolios built on logistics software; DHL's is a European portfolio built on lockers, sorting hardware and access control. In the 10 classes that carry this industry, DHL leads 5 and is comprehensively outgunned in 1.
| Company | Live patent records0 to 1,119, largest first | The patent portfolio spans |
|---|---|---|
| UPS | 1,119 | Parcel and freight network, logistics software, address and routing systems |
| DHL | 837 | Parcel lockers, sorting and conveying hardware, out-of-home delivery, the whole patent portfolio |
| FedEx | 807 | Express shipping, short-range wireless tracking, ground and freight operations |
| AP Moller Maersk AS | 740 | Container shipping, terminals, reefer and cargo-handling equipment |
Live records only, so applications still in examination count and dead records do not. DHL's 837 excludes the 1,929 records already dead.
| Class | What it covers, in plain words | DHLrecords | FedEx | UPS | Maersk |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G06Q10/08 | Logistics, warehousing, distribution and shipping; inventory and stock management | 173 | 339 | 536 | 39 |
| G07C9/00 | Individual registration on entry or exit | 65 | 37 | 20 | 0 |
| A47G29/14 | Deposit receptacles for parcels, with appliances preventing unauthorised removal | 57 | 19 | 20 | 0 |
| G07F17/12 | Apparatus comprising lockable containers | 54 | 22 | 3 | 0 |
| B65G43/08 | Conveyor control devices operated by the article being conveyed | 37 | 0 | 5 | 0 |
| H04W4/80 | Services using short-range communication, NFC or RFID | 35 | 138 | 7 | 0 |
| H04L9/32 | Means for verifying the identity or authority of a user | 29 | 6 | 4 | 5 |
| G06Q10/00 | Administration; management | 27 | 7 | 97 | 6 |
| A47G29/16 | Deposit receptacles combined with letter-boxes | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| B60P3/00 | Vehicles adapted to carry special loads or objects | 21 | 28 | 30 | 0 |
Bold marks the largest holding in each class. DHL leads 5 of the 10: entry and exit registration, parcel deposit receptacles, lockable containers, conveyor control and letter-box combinations. In 2 of those, letter-box combinations and conveyor control, no rival holds a meaningful position at all. The reverse is true in logistics management, where UPS holds 536 records to DHL's 173, and in short-range wireless, where FedEx holds 138 to DHL's 35.
Germany is a DHL-only office: 60 records against 1 from Maersk and none from UPS or FedEx. At the EPO, DHL holds more than the other 3 combined. The picture inverts in North America, where UPS holds 451 US and 123 Canadian records to DHL's 96 and 5. Counts here cover the 10 classes above, not the whole live patent portfolio, so they are smaller than the totals in the first table.
DHL is third of the four on speed to a US grant, 7 months behind FedEx and 3 behind UPS. On a patent portfolio of this size that is most of a year of enforceable term given away on every granted US patent. Photon's ~11-month pace would start protection about 30 months earlier again, on every filing.
An office action is the examiner's written rejection, and it carries a 3-month statutory clock. Across DHL's 343 US applications the examiner mailed 756 of them. 489 were answered inside the period and 181 on a paid extension. But 113 of the applications never reached a grant at all: 102 of them stopped at an office action that was never answered. A third of everything DHL filed in the United States was carried through examination and then dropped.
Every US application in the portfolio, by where it ended up.
169 reached a grant and are live. 113 were abandoned during examination. 25 were granted and then expired because a maintenance fee was not paid. 33 are still in examination today. 3 applications filed in 1986, 1989 and 1990 have no electronic file wrapper at the USPTO and cannot be read either way. Source: USPTO Open Data Portal application bundles, 343 DHL US applications, pulled 17 September 2026.
All 756 office actions mailed on DHL's 343 US applications, by outcome.
The statutory period is 3 calendar months from the mail date, with the due date rolled forward off weekends and federal holidays before lateness is tested. Of the 181 late responses, 110 needed 1 extra month, 44 needed 2, 26 needed 3 and 1 needed 5.
The examination record of all 343 DHL US applications, priced at flat rates.
Share of the 756 office actions across the 343 US applications, by how the examination ran.
471 of the 756 office actions were non-final and 285 were final. 199 of the 343 applications reached a final rejection, 108 were restarted with at least 1 RCE, 27 were restarted twice or more. 37 applications carry appeal activity on the record and 41 notices of appeal were filed. 37 applications were allowed without a single office action. The statutory ground argued in each rejection, whether §101, §102 or §103, is not carried in the USPTO event record and is not claimed here.
Each of these was carried through examination and then stopped. On 102 an office action was never answered. 10 were abandoned after an appeal decision; on 1 the application was allowed and the issue fee was not paid. Whether each was a decision is not visible in the record.
| Application | What it covered | Office actions | RCEs | Modelled cost | How it ended |
|---|
$2,422,160 of modelled spend sits in these 113 files. That is the whole cost of carrying a file to the point it stopped — prior art search, drafting, the USPTO filing fee, every office action response and every RCE — priced at the same standard rates the section 11 invoices are built on, not the response fees alone. The 2 highlighted went abandoned on 27 March 2026 and 17 March 2025, and no revival petition appears on the USPTO record as at 17 September 2026. A petition to revive an unintentionally abandoned application under 37 CFR 1.137(a) carries no deadline of its own. Verify current status on Patent Center before acting.
Of the 2,766 records DHL Group put on the register, 1,929 are now dead: 973 expired at the end of term, 375 withdrawn before grant, 332 lost to an unpaid maintenance fee and 247 refused. 670 of them are cited by other companies, 4,828 times in total, across 2,359 distinct patent families. The citers are not bystanders. They are warehouse robotics firms, locker manufacturers, the US Postal Service and United Parcel Service.
Filed August 2007 on singulation, the step that takes a heap of parcels and turns it into a single ordered stream, and withdrawn before grant. Berkshire Grey cites it 118 times across its two filing entities, and Solystic 13 more. Berkshire Grey sells robotic singulation and identification cells to parcel carriers. Knapp, Beumer and Windmoeller & Hoelscher are also on the ring. This is the exact machinery DHL Supply Chain buys today.
The electronic parcel postbox, filed in the United States in 2008 and withdrawn before grant. United Parcel Service cites it 56 times across two entities. InPost, IER and Quadient cite it as well. Packstation is the product DHL is best known for in Europe, and the US application covering how it operates was allowed to lapse.
A kiosk that takes back used electronic devices, filed 2005 and withdrawn. ecoATM cites it 71 times. ecoATM operates several thousand device-buyback kiosks in the United States. The same DHL family was also filed at the EPO, in Japan and as a PCT application, and the Japanese and PCT members expired; ecoATM cites those 61 and 62 times more.
We read the claim text of the live granted records against what DHL ships today, across 9 product areas. Every one of them carries patents, and every one of them also carries features with no claim behind them. The pattern is consistent and it matches what section 04 shows: the machinery is protected and the software is not. Lockers, conveyors, sorting cells and sensor-monitored containers are claimed. MyDHL+, the Fulfillment Network onboarding layer, the multimodal freight optimizer, GoGreen Plus configuration and the cold-chain risk analytics are not.
Unified MyDHL+ workflow combining import/export booking, pickup scheduling, commercial invoice generation, address book, shipment history, and tracking
3 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Electronic commercial invoice submission coupled to customs clearance workflow; Shipment-history analytics and preference-based service recommendation during booking. Against that, 5 are covered: Image-based address correction and forwarding instruction handling; Digitally controlled franking, postage indicia, value-label authentication, and counterfeit/reuse detection; Shipment label generation, barcode handling, and automated label verification; Pickup, collection, and delivery trip optimization; Recipient notification and shipment-status communications.
Retailer-facing API integration for automated parcel creation, returns initiation, and service selection
3 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Recipient self-service returns journey combining merchant instructions, ServicePoint search, label creation, and drop-off confirmation; Checkout delivery-promise optimizer using recipient location and DHL network capacity. Against that, 4 are covered: Recipient-selected delivery or pickup positions; Energy-efficient delivery route planning and vehicle-to-cabinet handoff; Unmanned or autonomous transport devices for shipment delivery; Package mailbox operations, data exchange, and user notifications.
Access Point / ServicePoint recommendation engine based on convenience, opening hours, and pickup/drop-off suitability
3 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Dynamic out-of-home location availability prediction for checkout and missed-delivery redirection; Merchant-side APIs for cross-border OOH delivery and returns. Against that, 4 are covered: Access-controlled parcel lockers, lockbox reservation, and compartment assignment; Authentication and authorization for opening lockers or receiving compartments; Electromechanical locks, sealing systems, doors, and cabinet hardware; Parcel postbox or Packstation data exchange with central logistics systems.
DHL Fulfillment Network onboarding architecture with agnostic frontend/backend integrations
3 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Omnichannel fulfillment decisioning across sites, warehouses, and store channels; Returns grading and recommerce workflows for fulfillment centers. Against that, 5 are covered: Robotic warehouse stock checking with mast-mounted scanners; Unloading packages from containers to conveyors, including tipping and singulation; Telescopic conveyors, movable guide rails, and loading/unloading aids; Container, packaging, folding, pallet, and cargo storage structures; Automated sorting, stream conversion, and parcel registration using image or sensor data.
Vendor-neutral plug-and-play robotics integration layer
3 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Warehouse orchestration software harmonizing robots, WMS, conveyors, and manual work cells; AI-based balancing of labor, robots, and automation across receiving, dispatch, storage, picking, and packing. Against that, 4 are covered: Autonomous indoor robots and AGVs in logistics facilities; Conveyor control, adaptive roller conveyors, and object separation/singulation; Computer-vision or image-based shipment recognition; Automatic examination of value labels and machine-readable logistics markings.
Multimodal freight optimizer selecting air, ocean, road, and rail based on speed, cost, capacity, and decarbonization preferences
3 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Digital freight quoting and booking workflow integrating Incoterms, surcharges, documents, and tracking; LCL/FCL scenario planner for multi-shoring and China Plus X supply-chain design. Against that, 4 are covered: Secured and monitored cargo containers with conductive sensor surfaces, RFID, and position association; Multi-deck or adjustable cargo containers for load utilization; Vehicle positioning, dock alignment, and loading/unloading control; Dynamic route planning and fleet logistics for road freight.
LifeTrack-style cold-chain risk analytics forecasting excursion risk and recommending intervention
3 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Healthcare logistics control tower across pharma, medical devices, clinical trials, vaccines, and cell/gene therapy; Temperature-controlled capacity planning across pharma airfreight lanes and healthcare sites. Against that, 4 are covered: Package condition monitoring using multiple sensors and selective data transmission; RFID and position-based tracking for items in vehicles; Thermally insulated transport containers and carts; Secured monitored containers for high-value or condition-sensitive cargo.
Customer-selectable GoGreen Plus configuration applying SAF or other sustainable fuels to shipment-emissions reduction
3 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Verified emission-reduction accounting and certificate workflow; Flat-rate default emissions-reduction allocation model for eligible forwarding shipments. Against that, 4 are covered: Central load control and charging coordination for electric vehicle fleets; Intermediate storage and grid interaction for battery units; Energy-efficient shipment delivery and route/resource optimization; Hybrid and alternative vehicle architectures.
Cross-division real-time tracking portal with exception display and customer notifications
3 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Supply-chain risk analytics combining shipment events, cold-chain data, lane history, and intervention workflows; Customer portal layer integrating shipment creation, tracking, documents, analytics, and exception management. Against that, 4 are covered: Vehicle-based RFID and GPS tracking linked to transported articles; Package-level sensor monitoring with local decision logic and selective transmission; Position comparison and geofence/location validation; Mobile and networked notifications between logistics systems and users.
Read against the claims of the live granted records only, so applications still in examination are not counted as protection. 38 features across the 9 areas have a claim behind them and 27 do not. An area appearing here does not mean the feature is unprotectable, and it does not mean a competitor is free to copy it; it means no claim in the granted patent portfolio reads on it today.
Two savings sit in this portfolio and they are independent of each other. 111 granted patents earn nothing, carry no litigation or licensing signal, and cost a modelled $236,067 a year to keep. Separately, filing the next 50 patents at 1 fixed fee instead of the market rate saves $850,000. Together that is $1,086,067 a year, and $5.43M over five.
We scored all 585 granted records on forward citations, citation recency, how far the prior art sits behind the priority date, term remaining and field density. Anything under 10 years old is kept unscored, because renewal is cheap and the term ahead is long. Filter the list, tick the records you disagree with, and the totals move with you.
| Record | Title | Office | Age | Score10 is best · auto = under 10 years, kept unscored | Renewal, per yearmodelled | Our call |
|---|
276 of the 585 are under 10 years old and are kept unscored. 25 more are held regardless of score: 17 changed hands between the original and current assignee, which usually signals a licence or a transfer, 5 are litigated and 3 are opposed. That leaves 284 scored on the merits, and 111 of those fall below the prune line. Renewal fees are modelled from published statutory schedules by office and age tier. The largest single block is the EPO at $94,770 a year.
Bought the way they are bought today, 50 new US patents cost $1,750,000. At 1 fixed fee per patent the investment is $900,000, agreed before the work starts. Every office action, every examiner interview and the US lawyer fee sit inside it, so the bill does not move when examination runs long. On this portfolio that matters: 181 of the last 756 office actions needed a paid extension, and 149 needed a paid restart.
The register is large and split across 2 owners: DHL International GmbH holds 2,728 marks and Deutsche Post AG 2,286. Only 1,814 of the 5,014 are live. What the live half does not cover is the product line. MyDHL+, Saloodo!, Heavy Weight Express, GoGreen Plus, On Demand Delivery, the DHL ReTurn Network and DHL GoTrade are all in active commercial use, and none of them has a mark of its own. Meanwhile the DHL wordmark is being used by other parties on a priced Amazon listing and on a third-party product page.
The 2 owners are in very different shape. Half of DHL International GmbH's register is live, 1,388 of 2,728. Under Deutsche Post AG only 426 of 2,286 are, and 1,303 have been ended or cancelled. 1,152 marks across both have expired. In many jurisdictions an expired registration opens a window for a third party to file the same mark in the same class, and that window can be taken quickly. 314 marks carry no status in the source data and are counted separately.
| Device | Mark | Used for | Party | Where it appears | Standing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Search listing | D H L International | International courier and cargo | Reliable International | Own website, reliableintl.co.in | No filing. Name carried in site metadata |
 | DHL | Printing and converting solutions | Techno CNC | technocnc.in product page | No filing. Name and livery on a priced listing |
 | DHL | Bags and cases | Xfactory | amazon.in listing | No filing. Wordmark used as the product brand |
| Device | Mark | Classes | Where to file | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Word mark | MyDHL+ (and MyDHL) | 9, 35, 38, 39, 42 | US, EUIPO, UK, China, Japan and 10 more | DHL Express's flagship digital shipping platform, running at mydhl.express.dhl and rolled out globally. |
| Word mark | Saloodo! | 9, 35, 39, 42 | EUIPO, UK, Germany, UAE, Saudi Arabia and 8 more | DHL's digital road-freight marketplace, operating under its own brand rather than the DHL name. |
| Word mark | Heavy Weight Express / HWX | 39 | US, EUIPO, UK, China, Japan and 11 more | New global service launched 11 May 2026 for consignments up to 3,000 kg. |
| Word mark | GoGreen Plus | 35, 39 | US, EUIPO, UK, China, Japan and 10 more | Emissions-reduction portfolio launched February 2026. The existing GoGreen registration does not extend to Plus. Add class 36 if it is sold as a fee product. |
 | On Demand Delivery / ODD | 35, 39, 42 | US, EUIPO, UK, China, Japan and 11 more | Pan-Express service running at delivery.dhl.com. File the device mark and the word mark together. |
| Word mark | DHL ReTurn Network | 35, 39 | US, EUIPO, UK, Germany, Canada and 15 more | Reverse-logistics network launched by DHL Supply Chain in 2025. |
 | DHL GoTrade | 35, 36, 39 | US, EUIPO, UK, China, Japan and 11 more | Customs-clearance and trade-facilitation product. File the device mark and the word mark together. |
Clarity of budget
01
Every step is a separate bill today, and every office action a fresh one. On 1 DHL file that meant 11 office actions, 4 paid restarts and 5 paid extensions over 9 years and 3 months, about $35,000 at standard rates.
02
Each firm sends its own list. Nobody’s job is the merge.
Certainty of outcome
03
We only file what we expect to win. 97% of what we file is granted, against about 55% across the industry.
04
The gap is rounds of examination, and in an hourly model every round is another bill.
How we deliver both
05
Pulse scores every disclosure before an attorney sees it. Only the ideas with a real shot go forward.
06
Logistics, lockers and access control get attorneys who have argued §101 in the 3600 art units before, where 205 of your 343 US applications sit, and who can put a technical improvement in front of an examiner.
07
1 person reads your patent. Some grant almost everything, some almost nothing. Their record is public, so we read it first.
08
Most firms send a lawyer to argue for the inventor. We bring the person who built it.
How we work
09
We don’t wait for you to send an invention.
10
We are paid when the patent is granted. If the patent is refused, you get your money back.
11
Hourly billing pays for time. A fixed fee pays for the grant.
A traditional law firm charges $35,000 for the same US patent taken from filing through to grant, billed step by step, with a fresh bill for every office action. On this portfolio's own record that is 756 office actions and 149 restarts on 343 applications.
All out-of-pocket expenses, including foreign lawyer fees and government fees, are billed separately at actuals.
Every client has clarity on investment & certainty of outcome from Day 0.
Hear it directly from the founders, CTOs and inventors whose patents we file.
Founder
“We now have 19 patents granted and 51 filed worldwide, and that simply wouldn’t have been possible without the partnership, speed, and global reach of Photon Legal. Amit Koshal and his team have been instrumental: fast, cost-effective, and deeply strategic in helping us protect breakthrough neurotechnology across continents.”
Jonathan BerentChief Executive Officer, NextSenseInventor
“Photon Legal’s unique approach to uncovering patent-worthy ideas has helped us identify innovations we previously overlooked. We look forward to continuing our partnership as we bring new ideas to help B2B revenue teams.”
Viral BajariaCo-Founder and Chief Technology Officer, 6senseFounder
“Photon Legal has been instrumental in helping us secure our IP, especially in markets like the US, Europe, and Canada, where having a strong patent portfolio can open up additional revenue streams.”
Imbesat AhmadCo-Founder and Chief Executive Officer, FiloInventor
“I had filed two patents last year also, but that process, the document review, writing, reviewing and then filing, it took around ten months. I know the pain, right? So ten months I have to chase with the attorney. And this time it was very smooth. I didn’t realize how we concluded so soon.”
Saumya GiriSenior Staff Engineer, Automation Anywhere
Set up a call with Amit Koshalamit@photonlegal.com
Total you were asked for
$35,0006 invoices
Total you would be asked for
$18,0001 invoice
Priced at the standard rates below, for a patent that draws 2 office actions and issues. This file drew 11, with 4 RCEs and 5 responses filed on a paid extension on top of the total above. The first office action was mailed on 13 July 2018 and the patent granted on 28 July 2026, 3,399 days after filing.
Total you were asked for
$35,0005 invoices
Net cost after refund
$0 (Refund)1 invoice
The same rates and the same 2 office actions. The second was a final rejection, which is the dearer step and carries the total to the same $35,000 without an issue fee ever being reached. This file actually drew 4 office actions and 1 RCE. The last was a final rejection mailed on 18 April 2025 and answered on 16 July 2025; an advisory action was mailed on 6 August 2025, nothing was filed after it, and the file went abandoned on 27 March 2026. No patent issued, so the full amount is a sunk cost today, and a petition under 37 CFR 1.137(a) could still bring this file back.
Both panels use the same standard rate card: prior-art search at $2,500, drafting at $18,800, the USPTO filing fee at $1,820, a response to an office action at $5,000, a response after final at $6,880 and the issue fee at $1,880 - $35,000 for a patent either way. It is not DHL invoice data. RCE fees and paid extensions are counted in section 05 and excluded here, so both totals are conservative.