{"id":3214,"date":"2026-10-08T17:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-10-08T09:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/?p=3214"},"modified":"2026-10-08T17:00:00","modified_gmt":"2026-10-08T09:00:00","slug":"lot-coding-traceability-recall","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/supplier-verification\/lot-coding-traceability-recall\/","title":{"rendered":"How to Design Lot Coding and Batch Traceability for Faster Import Recalls"},"content":{"rendered":"

How to Design Lot Coding and Batch Traceability for Faster Import Recalls<\/h1>\n

A factory can print a date on a carton and still leave you unable to answer the first recall question: which units are affected? If the factory code, shipping documents, warehouse records, and sales orders do not connect, the business may have to investigate a much larger universe than the actual issue requires. Lot coding traceability recall<\/strong> design begins with that uncomfortable question.<\/p>\n

Lot coding traceability recall is a record-linking process that assigns or records a usable lot identity and connects it to product, production, shipment, inventory, and distribution data. It is not a magic barcode, a recall decision, or a substitute for product-specific legal duties. A useful system lets the business distinguish affected units from unaffected units using records it can actually retrieve.<\/p>\n

For lot coding traceability recall, the code is only the doorway.<\/p>\n

Table of contents<\/h2>\n
    \n
  1. Why do lot coding traceability recall systems fail when a problem appears?<\/a><\/li>\n
  2. What recall question should shape the code design?<\/a><\/li>\n
  3. Which data fields can a lot code represent or link?<\/a><\/li>\n
  4. How should supplier and importer codes be connected?<\/a><\/li>\n
  5. Where should lot information appear on products and packaging?<\/a><\/li>\n
  6. Which records should follow goods from factory to customer?<\/a><\/li>\n
  7. How can a traceability drill test recall readiness?<\/a><\/li>\n
  8. Which changes can break lot coding traceability recall?<\/a><\/li>\n
  9. What are the limits of a lot-code system?<\/a><\/li>\n
  10. Frequently asked questions<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Why do lot coding traceability recall systems fail when a problem appears?<\/h2>\n

    Most systems do not fail because the code has too few characters. They fail because the code cannot be decoded, the underlying record does not exist, or each party records a different identifier without a crosswalk. The factory might know the production line. The importer might know the container. The warehouse might know the pallet. The retailer might know the SKU. None of those facts help enough if no record links them.<\/p>\n

    Para lot coding traceability recall<\/strong>, start with a product returned from the market, a test finding, a proveedor<\/a> alert, or a complaint. Can you identify the production lot? Can you identify the factory, source component, shipment, warehouse location, distributor, and customer orders that touched it? Can you tell which stock is unaffected? If the answer requires someone\u2019s memory, the system is not ready.<\/p>\n

    CPSC’s tracking-label guidance<\/a> gives a concrete, children\u2019s-product example. It says permanent and distinguishing marks on the product and packaging, to the extent practicable, must make identifying information ascertainable, including manufacturer, importer, or private-labeler identity; production location and date; manufacturing-process information such as a batch or run number; and information that helps identify the specific source. [1] CPSC also says that coding is permissible if consumers know whom to contacto<\/a> to interpret the code. [1]<\/p>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, that source has a defined U.S. children\u2019s-product scope. The operating lesson is broader: a code has value<\/a> only when a responsible person can link it to a controlled record.<\/p>\n

    What recall question should shape the code design?<\/h2>\n

    Lot coding traceability recall works best when it is designed backward from a retrieval exercise. Write the preguntas<\/a> that a real incident would force you to answer. A product-risk issue may begin with one unit, one batch of a component, one production date, one factory line, one container, or one customer complaint. Your records should help locate the affected population without guessing.<\/p>\n

    Do not start by asking \u201cWhat is the industry-standard code?\u201d There is no single format that suits every product, system, market, and supply chain. FDA\u2019s food traceability guidance uses a traceability lot code as a descriptor, often alphanumeric, that uniquely identifies a traceability lot within the code source\u2019s records. It does not prescribe a single code format. [2] That is a food-specific rule, but it illustrates a useful operational point: the code and the linked records work as a pair.<\/p>\n

    The table below frames the design question around the type of incident. It helps a buyer decide what data must be available, rather than forcing every field into a tiny printed code.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Incident starting point<\/th>\nWhat the business should be able to find<\/th>\nRecords that should connect<\/th>\nDesign implication<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
    Customer returns one unit<\/td>\nProduct version, lot, production source, shipment, stock status, downstream orders<\/td>\nUnit or package code, sales record, warehouse record, supplier batch record<\/td>\nThe code must lead to a controlled lookup or directly identify the lot<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Supplier flags a component<\/td>\nFinished goods containing that component, locations, shipments, and customers<\/td>\nComponent lot, bill of materials, finished-good lot, production record, shipment data<\/td>\nComponent and finished-good records need a stable cross-reference<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Lab finding on a sample<\/td>\nSample origin, product configuration, production lot, stock, and prior distribution<\/td>\nChain-of-custody record, sample photo, lot, BOM, test report, inventory record<\/td>\nTest samples must retain the same identifiers used by calidad<\/a> and logistics<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Warehouse finds a packaging error<\/td>\nAffected carton, pallet, lot, marketplace and customer orders<\/td>\nCarton\/pallet record, lot record, warehouse movement, sales-order data<\/td>\nPackaging and inventory systems must preserve the lot relationship<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Authority or retailer asks acerca de<\/a> a date range<\/td>\nAll lots produced in the defined window and their distribution<\/td>\nProduction calendar, line\/shift record, lot crosswalk, shipment and sales records<\/td>\nDate and production records must be retrievable, even when not printed in full<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, define the smallest practical \u201clot\u201d for your risk. A lot can be a batch, run, production period, component combination, supplier lot, or another internally defined group. A small lot can reduce the amount of product that needs review if an issue is confined to that lot, but small lots also create more records to manage. Choose a definition the factory and importer can apply consistently.<\/p>\n

    In lot coding traceability recall, define it before shipment.<\/p>\n

    Which data fields can a lot code represent or link?<\/h2>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, a printed code does not need to carry every traceability fact. It can act as a key that links to a database, spreadsheet, invoice, bill of lading, or batch record. FDA explains that traceability code linkages can be maintained on reference documents or in the same row of an electronic record with other required data. [2] Again, that guidance is food-specific. It is still useful as a record-design principle for importers.<\/p>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, decide which fields should be visible in the code and which should sit in the linked file. Visible information can help a warehouse or customer identify an item quickly. Linked information can preserve detail without making the code long, ambiguous, or easy to misread.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Campo<\/th>\nCan it be coded or linked?<\/th>\nWhy it is useful<\/th>\nBuyer control<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
    Product or configuration reference<\/td>\nCoded or linked<\/td>\nSeparates model, version, colorway, formulation, or revision<\/td>\nTie it to the approved SKU and bill of materials<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Factory or production location<\/td>\nCoded or linked<\/td>\nHelps isolate source when several sites make similar goods<\/td>\nUse a stable internal location reference, not an informal nickname<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Production date or period<\/td>\nCoded or linked<\/td>\nSupports time-window review and stock rotation<\/td>\nDefine timezone and date format in the procedure<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Batch, run, line, or shift<\/td>\nCoded or linked<\/td>\nConnects an issue to production conditions or components<\/td>\nRecord how the supplier assigns it and whether it can repeat<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Component or material lot<\/td>\nUsually linked<\/td>\nConnects a supplier issue to finished goods<\/td>\nPreserve component-to-finished-good crosswalks<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Finished-good lot<\/td>\nCoded or linked<\/td>\nOrganizes incoming, warehouse, and outbound records<\/td>\nKeep it stable from factory release through distribution<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Shipment and carton\/pallet identifiers<\/td>\nLinked<\/td>\nShows movement, quantities, container, and warehouse locations<\/td>\nRecord association at packing and receiving, not later from memory<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Destination or customer order<\/td>\nLinked<\/td>\nSupports targeted distribution review<\/td>\nProtect commercial and personal data under applicable policies<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    A lot coding traceability recall code structure should be documented in plain language. If \u201cA24-07-L3\u201d is a factory code, state what each part means, who assigns it, where it is printed, when it changes, and how an importer obtains the underlying record. Do not depend on a single production manager to interpret it.<\/p>\n

    For U.S. children\u2019s products, CPSC says the information needed from tracking marks may be in code form as long as consumers know whom to contact to interpret it. [1] That is not a reason to hide basic information. It is a reason to maintain a working decode path and a customer-facing contact route when the rule applies.<\/p>\n

    How should supplier and importer codes be connected?<\/h2>\n

    In lot coding traceability recall, supplier and importer systems often use different identifiers for good reasons. A factory needs a process code. An importer needs an inventory lot. A retailer needs a product SKU and purchase order. The problem begins when each code exists alone.<\/p>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, build a crosswalk before the shipment leaves the factory. For each supplier lot, record the importer lot, product\/SKU, factory location, production date or range, line or run if used, component lots where relevant, carton or pallet references, commercial invoice, packing list, container or airway bill, and receipt location. The crosswalk should have one owner and a version history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Supplier record<\/th>\nImporter record<\/th>\nRequired connection<\/th>\nCheck at handoff<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
    Factory batch or run<\/td>\nInternal inventory lot<\/td>\nOne-to-one or one-to-many mapping stated clearly<\/td>\nCode appears correctly on product, package, and packing records where planned<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Finished-good inspection record<\/td>\nReceiving and quality record<\/td>\nSame product version and lot identity<\/td>\nSample photos and quantities match the shipment<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Component batch record<\/td>\nFinished-good lot\/BOM record<\/td>\nComponent-to-product relationship<\/td>\nA flagged component can be traced to all related finished lots<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Packing list<\/td>\nCarton and pallet receipt<\/td>\nLot quantities, carton range, pallet relationship<\/td>\nWarehouse receives the same lot breakdown reported at origin<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Bill of lading or airway bill<\/td>\nInbound shipment record<\/td>\nShipment reference and container\/transport link<\/td>\nLogistics record does not overwrite the factory lot<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Distributor shipment<\/td>\nSales-order or channel record<\/td>\nLot, quantity, destination, and dispatch date<\/td>\nDownstream movement preserves the lot relationship<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    Lot coding traceability recall needs a declared rule for mixed lots. If a pallet contains two production lots, record both. If one carton is repacked into smaller units, assign a traceable relationship rather than discarding the original code. Mixing inventory without preserving the lot relationship converts a controlled system into a best guess.<\/p>\n

    In lot coding traceability recall, the crosswalk is the memory.<\/p>\n

    Where should lot information appear on products and packaging?<\/h2>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, placement depends on product type, space, label durability, market obligations, user needs, and the risk of separation between product and package. For many ordinary imported goods, an internal and external record may be sufficient for a commercial traceability objective. For regulated product categories, permanent product and package marking rules can apply.<\/p>\n

    CPSC says that, for U.S. children\u2019s products, tracking marks must be visible and legible and permanently affixed to the product and its packaging to the extent practicable. [1] The guidance also says durable infant or toddler products can have additional product and outer-package labeling requirements. [1] Those requirements should not be copied uncritically to every product, but they show why the code medium and placement deserve pre-production review.<\/p>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, decide whether the product body, primary package, master carton, pallet, and digital records need the same identifier or connected identifiers. A paper carton label may disappear after delivery. A laser mark may be unsuitable for a flexible item. A QR code can point to records but should not become the only way an operator identifies a physical batch unless the process supports it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Location<\/th>\nWhat it can support<\/th>\nDesign question<\/th>\nVerification before shipment<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
    Product<\/td>\nUnit or finished-good identification after packaging is discarded<\/td>\nIs a durable, legible mark required or practical for this product?<\/td>\nInspect placement, readability, and product-version match<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Primary package<\/td>\nConsumer, warehouse, and retail traceability<\/td>\nWill the code remain with the product through ordinary use?<\/td>\nConfirm it matches product and carton records<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Master carton<\/td>\nReceiving, inventory, and shipment handling<\/td>\nDoes it show lot, quantity, SKU, and carton identity accurately?<\/td>\nCompare with packing list and physical contents<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Pallet<\/td>\nWarehouse movement and mixed-lot control<\/td>\nCan a handler see which cartons and lots are on the pallet?<\/td>\nConfirm labels reflect actual loading sequence<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Digital record<\/td>\nCrosswalk, batch details, source, and distribution history<\/td>\nWho can retrieve it and how long does the path stay available?<\/td>\nTest access using the printed code before release<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    In lot coding traceability recall, avoid decorative coding. If an operations team cannot scan, read, or decode the identifier during a busy receiving shift, the design has not solved the operational problem.<\/p>\n

    Which records should follow goods from factory to customer?<\/h2>\n

    Lot coding traceability recall is an end-to-end system. The factory record alone cannot identify product that has been divided among warehouses, distributors, marketplaces, or customer orders. The importer record alone cannot explain which component or production event created a problem.<\/p>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, use a structured record chain. The factory should retain the code-assignment method, product configuration, batch or run record, component source where relevant, inspection record, and packing records. The importer should retain the lot crosswalk, entry and shipping documents, receiving record, warehouse movements, quality holds, returns, and outbound lot allocation. Distributors and sales channels should preserve what their systems and agreements permit so the business can identify where affected units went.<\/p>\n

    FDA\u2019s traceability-lot-code example explains that a code may be linked with related information on a bill of lading or invoice, or in the same electronic record. [2] The example does not make a food rule applicable to non-food goods. It shows why linkages are more important than the code\u2019s appearance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Supply-chain stage<\/th>\nMinimum useful lot link<\/th>\nSupporting records<\/th>\nFailure to avoid<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
    Production<\/td>\nFinished-good lot to configuration and batch\/run<\/td>\nBOM, production record, inspection, code-assignment rule<\/td>\nFactory changes format without telling the importer<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Packing<\/td>\nLot to cartons, pallets, quantities, and package version<\/td>\nPacking list, carton map, photographs, print proof<\/td>\nMixed lots packed together without a carton-level record<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    International transport<\/td>\nLot to shipment and transport reference<\/td>\nCommercial invoice, bill of lading or airway bill, container record<\/td>\nLogistics record tracks container but drops lot detail<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Receiving<\/td>\nLot to warehouse receipt and quarantine\/release status<\/td>\nGoods-receipt note, warehouse system, inspection record<\/td>\nWarehouse relabels goods without recording the old code<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Fulfillment<\/td>\nLot to customer order, channel, or distributor shipment<\/td>\nPick record, sales order, distributor shipment file<\/td>\nOrders consume inventory without capturing lot allocation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Returns and complaints<\/td>\nReturned item to lot and original sale path where available<\/td>\nReturn authorization, photos, complaint record, purchase data<\/td>\nTeam accepts return without reading or photographing the code<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, decide who owns each interface. A contract that asks the factory to \u201cmaintain traceability\u201d is incomplete if it does not specify data fields, format, timing, access, and change notification.<\/p>\n

    How can a traceability drill test recall readiness?<\/h2>\n

    A lot coding traceability recall drill tests the system before a real emergency makes every record harder to find. Pick a completed lot, a hypothetical component issue, or a returned unit. Give the team a starting fact and ask it to trace backward to production and forward to current inventory and distribution.<\/p>\n

    CPSC\u2019s recall guidance includes a recall checklist, recall handbook, guidance on conducting a recall, initial reporting, website notification, reverse logistics, and recall effectiveness. [3] A code system supports that wider work; it does not replace it. The drill should test information retrieval and decision handoffs, not simulate legal notifications or decide whether a recall is necessary.<\/p>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, use a written drill script. State the code or incident trigger, the time of exercise, the participants, the expected data, documents reviewed, records found, inventory identified, missing links, and corrective actions. Do not publish a universal \u201crecall speed\u201d target. The useful benchmark is whether your team can produce accurate, supported records for the scope it needs to evaluate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Drill question<\/th>\nEvidence the team should find<\/th>\nGap to record if missing<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
    Which product and configuration is affected?<\/td>\nSKU, photos, version, BOM, label\/package revision<\/td>\nCode does not separate versions or the record cannot be found<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Where and when was it produced?<\/td>\nFactory, date or period, batch\/run, production file<\/td>\nSupplier cannot decode the lot or code was reused ambiguously<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Which materials or components were involved?<\/td>\nComponent lot crosswalk and supplier source record<\/td>\nComponent records are not linked to finished lots<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    What inventory remains under your control?<\/td>\nWarehouse, pallet\/carton, quantity, status, locations<\/td>\nWarehouse holds no lot-level inventory data<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    What has been distributed?<\/td>\nCustomer, channel, distributor or order-level lot allocation<\/td>\nSales data preserves SKU but not lot relationship<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Which documents support the scope?<\/td>\nPacking, shipping, inspection, test, complaint, and change records<\/td>\nFiles have inconsistent versions or inaccessible locations<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, run the drill after a real system change and periodically under the business\u2019s own risk process. The lesson from a failed drill is not \u201cthe code was wrong.\u201d It is \u201cthis link was missing.\u201d Fix the missing link.<\/p>\n

    Which changes can break lot coding traceability recall?<\/h2>\n

    Lot coding traceability recall can break when a supplier adds a second factory, changes an ERP, changes code format, replaces a component source, begins repacking, adds a warehouse, moves to a new fulfillment provider, merges lots, or actualizaciones<\/a> label artwork. A new format that looks cleaner can erase the ability to decode historical stock.<\/p>\n

    For lot coding traceability recall, create a transition plan before implementation. Assign old and new code formats, eficaz<\/a> date, affected product lots, crosswalk owner, system-change owner, warehouse instruction, supplier instruction, label approval, and drill date. Preserve the capability to interpret both formats for the period needed by the business and applicable rules.<\/p>\n

    Ask one practical question for every change: can a person starting with an old product still identify the related records after the change? If not, the lot coding traceability recall transition plan is unfinished.<\/p>\n

    What are the limits of a lot-code system?<\/h2>\n

    A lot coding traceability recall system improves the ability to find records and contain an identified scope. It does not establish whether a product is defective, decide whether a recall is required, replace legal reporting, correct unsafe product design, or guarantee that customer data exists for every unit.<\/p>\n

    The CPSC tracking-label rule is specifically for children\u2019s products. [1] FDA\u2019s traceability-lot-code material is specifically about the covered food traceability framework. [2] Use them as examples of disciplined traceability, not universal rules for all imports.<\/p>\n

    If an actual safety event, regulator contact, or potential recall occurs, preserve records and seek qualified product-safety and legal advice for the specific product, market, and facts. Do not alter, destroy, or backdate records to make a lot history easier to explain.<\/p>\n

    A lot coding traceability recall system should tell the truth.<\/p>\n

    Frequently asked questions<\/h2>\n

    What is lot coding traceability recall?<\/h3>\n

    Lot coding traceability recall is a system for identifying a product lot and linking it to production, component, shipment, inventory, and distribution records. It helps a business investigate which units may be affected without treating every SKU as one undifferentiated group.<\/p>\n

    Does every imported product need a lot code on the product itself?<\/h3>\n

    No universal rule applies to every product. Product type, destination, label durability, market obligations, and traceability risk determine placement. U.S. children\u2019s products have specific CPSC tracking-label rules. [1]<\/p>\n

    What should a lot code include?<\/h3>\n

    A lot code can encode or link to product configuration, factory, production date or period, batch or run, and related records. Choose a structure that your supplier and importer systems can decode consistently rather than copying a formula from another product.<\/p>\n

    Can a barcode or QR code replace a printed lot number?<\/h3>\n

    It can support retrieval if the physical and digital process is controlled, but a code scan does not replace the need to identify the lot and keep linked records. Confirm any product-specific marking requirements before choosing the medium.<\/p>\n

    Can the factory and importer use different lot numbers?<\/h3>\n

    Yes, if a stable crosswalk links the supplier lot to the importer lot, finished goods, components, shipment, warehouse, and outbound records. Without that crosswalk, two codes create two disconnected histories.<\/p>\n

    What does CPSC require for children\u2019s-product tracking labels?<\/h3>\n

    CPSC says the required identifying information must be ascertainable from permanent, distinguishing marks on the product and packaging to the extent practicable. It includes manufacturer\/importer\/private-labeler identity, production location and date, process detail such as batch or run number, and source-identifying information. [1]<\/p>\n

    Can tracking information be in code form?<\/h3>\n

    For the CPSC children\u2019s-product requirement, the information can be coded if consumers know whom to contact to interpret it. Keep a reliable decode path and support contact when that rule applies. [1]<\/p>\n

    Does FDA require every lot code to appear on food packaging?<\/h3>\n

    No. FDA’s food traceability guidance says the rule does not require the traceability lot code to appear on food labeling or packaging, and identifies other ways linked records can be provided. The rule has food-specific scope. [2]<\/p>\n

    How do I test if my traceability system works?<\/h3>\n

    Run a controlled drill. Start with a lot code, complaint, sample, or component issue and ask the team to identify product configuration, production source, remaining inventory, distribution path, and supporting records. Document missing links and corrective actions.<\/p>\n

    What should trigger a traceability review?<\/h3>\n

    Review the system when product materials, supplier, factory, code format, manufacturing process, packaging, warehouse, ERP, fulfillment provider, sales channel, or lot-mixing process changes. Test old-to-new record links after implementation.<\/p>\n

    Does a lot-code system decide whether to conduct a recall?<\/h3>\n

    No. It provides facts for an investigation and scope assessment. Recall duties and actions depend on the product, market, facts, and applicable rules, which require qualified advice in a real event.<\/p>\n

    Referencias<\/h2>\n

    [1] U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Tracking Label Business Guidance<\/a><\/p>\n

    [2] U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Traceability Lot Code<\/a><\/p>\n

    [3] U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Recall Guidance<\/a><\/p>\n

    Related reading<\/h2>\n

    Continue with magnetic toy compliance<\/a>, supplier document verification<\/a>, customs detention release planning<\/a>, and accredited testing lab selection<\/a>.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Build lot coding traceability recall links from supplier batch records through shipment, inventory, distribution, and a practical drill.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"rank_math_internal_links_processed":["1"],"_uag_page_assets":["a:9:{s:3:\"css\";s:263:\".uag-blocks-common-selector{z-index:var(--z-index-desktop) !important}@media (max-width: 976px){.uag-blocks-common-selector{z-index:var(--z-index-tablet) !important}}@media (max-width: 767px){.uag-blocks-common-selector{z-index:var(--z-index-mobile) !important}}\n\";s:2:\"js\";s:0:\"\";s:18:\"current_block_list\";a:15:{i:0;s:11:\"core\/search\";i:1;s:10:\"core\/group\";i:2;s:12:\"core\/heading\";i:3;s:17:\"core\/latest-posts\";i:4;s:20:\"core\/latest-comments\";i:5;s:13:\"core\/archives\";i:6;s:15:\"core\/categories\";i:8;s:25:\"greenshift-blocks\/heading\";i:9;s:22:\"greenshift-blocks\/text\";i:10;s:14:\"core\/paragraph\";i:12;s:18:\"core\/legacy-widget\";i:13;s:17:\"core\/social-links\";i:15;s:16:\"core\/social-link\";i:16;s:21:\"trp\/language-switcher\";i:17;s:9:\"core\/html\";}s:8:\"uag_flag\";b:0;s:11:\"uag_version\";s:10:\"1791622807\";s:6:\"gfonts\";a:0:{}s:10:\"gfonts_url\";s:0:\"\";s:12:\"gfonts_files\";a:0:{}s:14:\"uag_faq_layout\";b:0;}"],"_uag_css_file_name":["uag-css-3214.css"]},"categories":[33],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3214","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supplier-verification"],"uagb_featured_image_src":{"full":false,"thumbnail":false,"medium":false,"medium_large":false,"large":false,"1536x1536":false,"2048x2048":false,"trp-custom-language-flag":false},"uagb_author_info":{"display_name":"admin","author_link":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/author\/admin\/"},"uagb_comment_info":0,"uagb_excerpt":"Build lot coding traceability recall links from supplier batch records through shipment, inventory, distribution, and a practical drill.","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3214","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3214"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3214\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3441,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3214\/revisions\/3441"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3214"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3214"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3214"}],"curies":[{"name":"gracias","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}