Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`Paper No. 37
`Date: September 9, 2021
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`PARUS HOLDINGS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before DAVID C. MCKONE, STACEY G. WHITE,
`and SHELDON M. MCGEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MCGEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Final Written Decision
`Determining No Challenged Claims Unpatentable
`35 U.S.C. § 318(a)
`Denying Patent Owner’s Motion to Exclude
`37 C.F.R. § 42.64
`
`
`571-272-7822
`
`Paper No. 37
`Date: September 9, 2021
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`PARUS HOLDINGS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before DAVID C. MCKONE, STACEY G. WHITE,
`and SHELDON M. MCGEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MCGEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Final Written Decision
`Determining No Challenged Claims Unpatentable
`35 U.S.C. § 318(a)
`Denying Patent Owner’s Motion to Exclude
`37 C.F.R. § 42.64
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`I.
`Apple Inc. (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition requesting an inter partes
`review of claims 1–7, 10, and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 9,451,084 B2 (Ex. 1030,
`“the ’084 patent”). Paper 1 (“Pet.”). Parus Holdings, Inc., (“Patent Owner”)
`filed a Preliminary Response to the Petition. Paper 6. We authorized
`Petitioner to file a Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response (Paper 7),
`and Patent Owner filed a Sur-reply (Paper 8). After considering these filings
`by both parties, we instituted an inter partes review of claims 1–7, 10, and
`14 of the ’084 patent on all grounds of unpatentability alleged in the
`Petition. Paper 9 (“Institution Decision” or “Dec.”).
`After institution of trial, Patent Owner filed a Patent Owner Response.
`Paper 15 (“PO Resp.”). Petitioner filed a Reply. Paper 19 (“Reply”).
`Patent Owner filed a Sur-reply (Paper 21 (“Sur-reply”)), as well as
`Objections to Evidence (Paper 20 (“PO Obj. Evid.”)). Patent Owner filed a
`Motion to Exclude certain evidence submitted by Petitioner (Paper 29
`(“Mot. Excl.”)), to which Petitioner filed an Opposition (Paper 30 (“Opp.
`Mot. Excl.”)). Patent Owner filed a Reply to Petitioner’s Opposition to its
`Motion to Exclude (styled a “Sur-reply”). Paper 32 (“Reply Mot. Excl.”).
`An oral hearing was held on June 22, 2021, and a transcript of the
`hearing is included in the record. Paper 36 (“Tr.”).
`We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6. This Final Written
`Decision is issued pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a). For the reasons that
`follow, we determine Petitioner has not established by a preponderance of
`the evidence that claims 1, 7–10, and 14 of the ’084 patent are unpatentable.
`We also deny Patent Owner’s Motion to Exclude.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`Related Proceedings
`A.
`The parties identify the following district court proceeding as related
`to the ’084 patent: Parus Holdings Inc. v. Apple, Inc., No. 6:19-cv-00432
`(W.D. Tex.) (“the Texas case”); Parus Holdings Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.,
`No. 6:19-cv-00454 (W.D. Tex.); Parus Holdings Inc. v. Samsung
`Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 6:19-cv-00438 (W.D. Tex.); Parus Holdings Inc.
`v. Google LLC, No. 6:19-cv-00433 (W.D. Tex.); and Parus Holdings Inc. v.
`LG Electronics, Inc., No. 6:19-cv-00437 (W.D. Tex.). Pet. 68; Paper 5, 1.
`The parties also identify U.S. Patent No. 6,721,705 and U.S. Patent
`No. 7,076,431 as related to the ’084 patent, and further identify that U.S.
`Patent No. 7,076,431 has been asserted in the district court proceedings
`listed supra, and is the subject of IPR2020-00686. Pet. 68; Paper 5, 1.
`
`The ’084 Patent (Ex. 1030)
`B.
`The ’084 patent, titled “Robust Voice Browser System and Voice
`Activated Device Controller,” issued September 20, 2016. Ex. 1030, codes
`(54), (45). The ’084 patent relates to a “robust and highly reliable system
`that allows users to browse web sites and retrieve information by using
`conversational voice commands.” Id. at 1:35–38. Systems disclosed by the
`’084 patent allow devices connected to a network to be controlled by
`conversational voice commands spoken into any voice enabled device
`interconnected with the network. Id. at 3:37–41. Systems disclosed by the
`’084 patent also allow users to access and browse web sites when the users
`do not have access to computers with Internet access, by providing users
`with a voice browsing system to browse web sites using conversational
`voice commands spoken into voice enabled devices, such as wireline or
`wireless telephones. Id. at 3:29–32, 3:52–59. The users’ spoken commands
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`are converted into data messages by a speech recognition software engine,
`and are transmitted to the user’s desired web site over the Internet. Id. at
`3:60–65. Responses sent from the web site are received and converted into
`audio messages via a speech synthesis engine or a pre-recorded audio
`concatenation application, and finally transmitted to the user’s voice enabled
`device. Id. at 3:65–4:3. The disclosed voice browsing system maintains a
`database containing a list of information sources (e.g., Internet web sites),
`with rank numbers assigned to the information sources. Id. at 3:17–20, 4:5–
`20. The ’084 patent explains that:
`the voice browser system and method uses a web site polling and
`ranking methodology that allows the system to detect changes in
`web sites and adapt to those changes in real-time. This enables
`the voice browser system of a preferred embodiment to deliver
`highly reliable information to users over any voice enabled
`device. This ranking system also enables the present invention
`to provide rapid responses to user requests. Long delays before
`receiving responses to requests are not tolerated by users of
`voice-based systems, such as telephones. When a user speaks
`into a telephone, an almost immediate response is expected. This
`expectation does not exist for non-voice communications, such
`as email transmissions or accessing a web site using a personal
`computer. In such situations, a reasonable amount of
`transmission delay is acceptable. The ranking system . . .
`implemented by a preferred embodiment of the present invention
`ensures users will always receive the fastest possible response to
`their request.
`Id. at 4:4–21. Figure 1 of the ’084 patent, reproduced below, illustrates a
`voice browsing system. Id. at 4:29–30.
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`
`
`Figure 1 illustrates a voice browsing system. Id. at 4:29–30.
`Voice browsing system 118 illustrated in Figure 1 includes media
`servers 106 (which may contain a speech recognition engine), database 100,
`web browsing servers 102, and firewalls 104 and 108. Id. at 5:10–18, 6:10–
`12, 6:20–23, 20:26–34. Voice browsing system 118 connects on one side to
`voice-enabled device 112 (e.g., a telephone) through public switched
`telephone network (“PSTN”) 106, and to individual websites 114 through
`internet 110 on the other side. Id. at 19:56–20:38.
`Specifically, a user of the voice browsing system establishes a
`connection between voice enabled device 112 and media server 106 by, e.g.,
`calling a telephone number associated with the voice browsing system.
`Id. at 19:59–62. Once the connection is established, media server 106
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`initiates an interactive voice response (IVR) application that plays audio
`messages to the user presenting a list of options, such as, “stock quotes,”
`“flight status,” “yellow pages,” “weather,” and “news.” Id. at 19:62–67.
`The user selects the desired option (e.g., “yellow pages”) by speaking the
`name of the option into the voice-enabled device 112. Id. at 20:4–18. The
`system asks the user further details of the user’s search, and the user speaks
`into telephone 112 the details of the user’s search (e.g., looking for
`“restaurants,” types of restaurants, zip codes for the restaurants). Id. Media
`server 106 uses the speech recognition engine to interpret the user’s speech
`commands; for example, media server 106 may identify keywords in the
`user’s speech. Id. at 6:60–7:2, 20:19–21. Media server 106 then uses the
`recognized keywords to search website records stored in database 100,
`retrieves an appropriate web site record from the database, and provides the
`record to the web browsing server 102. Id. at 6:65–7:2, 20:20–23.
`Information is then retrieved from the responding web site and transmitted to
`media server 106, for conversion into audio messages—performed by a
`speech synthesis software or by selecting among a database of prerecorded
`voice responses contained within database 100. Id. at 20:35–46.
`Database 100 contains sets of records for each web site accessible by
`the voice browsing system. Id. at 5:17–20. Figure 2, reproduced below,
`illustrates an example of web site record 200 in the database. Id. at 4:31–32,
`5:19–20.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`
`Figure 2 illustrates an example of a web site record in database 100. Id. at
`4:31–32, 5:19–20.
`Each web site record 200 contains rank number 202 of the web site,
`associated Uniform Resource Locator (URL) 204 for the website, and
`command 206 that enables an extraction agent to generate proper requests to
`the web site and to format data received from the web site. Id. at 5:20–25.
`For each category searchable by a user, database 100 may list several web
`sites, each with a different rank number. Id. at 20:47–50. As an example,
`three different web sites may be listed as searchable under the category of
`“restaurants,” and each of those web sites will be assigned a rank number
`such as 1, 2, or 3. Id. at 20:50–53. The web site with the highest rank (i.e.,
`rank=1) will be the first web site accessed by web browsing server 102. Id.
`at 20:53–55. If the information requested by the user cannot be found at this
`first web site, web browsing server 102 will then search the second ranked
`web site and so forth down the line, until the requested information is
`retrieved or no more web sites are left to be checked. Id. at 20:55–59.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`Illustrative Claim
`C.
`Petitioner challenges claims 1–7, 10, and 14, of which sole independent
`claim 1 is illustrative. Claim 1 is reproduced below with Petitioner’s
`identification of claim elements in brackets, and the dispositive claim
`limitation in this proceeding italicized:
`1. [Preamble] A system for acquiring information from one or
`more sources maintaining a listing of web sites by receiving
`speech commands uttered by users into a voice-enabled device
`and for providing information retrieved from the web sites to
`the users in an audio form via the voice-enabled device, the
`system comprising:
`
`
`[1(a)] at least one computing device, the computing device
`operatively coupled to one or more networks;
`[1(b)] at least one speaker-independent speech-recognition
`device,
`the speaker-independent speech-recognition
`device operatively connected to the computing device and
`configured to receive the speech commands;
`[1(c)] at least one speech-synthesis device, the speech-
`synthesis device operatively connected to the computing
`device;
`[1(d)] memory operatively associated with the computing
`device with at least one instruction set for identifying the
`information to be retrieved, the instruction set being
`associated with the computing device, the instruction set
`comprising:
`a plurality of web site addresses for the listing of web sites,
`each web site address identifying a web site containing the
`information to be retrieved;
`[1(e)] at least one recognition grammar associated with the
`computing
`device,
`each
`recognition
`grammar
`corresponding to each instruction set and corresponding to
`a speech command, [1(f)]
`the speech command
`comprising an information request provided by the user,
`[1(g)] the speaker-independent speech-recognition device
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`configured to receive the speech command from the users
`via
`the voice-enabled device and
`to select
`the
`corresponding recognition grammar upon receiving the
`speech command;
`[1(h)] the computing device configured to retrieve the
`instruction set corresponding to the recognition grammar
`provided by the speaker-independent speech-recognition
`device;
`[1(i)] the computing device further configured to access at
`least one of the plurality of web sites identified by the
`instruction set to obtain the information to be retrieved,
`[1(j)] wherein the computing device is further configured
`to periodically search via the one or more networks to
`identify new web sites and to add the new web sites to the
`plurality of web sites, [1(k)] the computing device
`configured to access a first web site of the plurality of web
`sites and, if the information to be retrieved is not found at
`the first web site, the computer configured to access the
`plurality of web sites remaining in an order defined for
`accessing the listing of web sites until the information to
`be retrieved is found in at least one of the plurality of web
`sites or until the plurality of web sites have been accessed;
`[1(l)] the speech synthesis device configured to produce an
`audio message containing any retrieved information from
`the plurality of web sites, and
`the speech synthesis device further configured to transmit the
`audio message to the users via the voice-enabled device.
`Ex. 1030, 24:2–59 (limitation numbering designated by Petitioner; see
`Pet. 70–72 (“CLAIMS LISTING APPENDIX”)) (emphasis added).
`
`D. Instituted Challenges to Patentability
`
`We instituted inter partes review of claims 1–7, 10, and 14 of the ’084
`patent on the following challenges. Dec. 2, 47.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`Claims Challenged
`1–6, 10, 14
`7
`
`5, 6
`
`1–6, 10, 14
`
`7
`
`5, 6
`
`35 U.S.C. §
`103(a)1
`103(a)
`
`103(a)
`
`103(a)
`
`103(a)
`
`103(a)
`
`References
`Ladd, 2 Kurosawa,3 Goedken4
`Ladd, Kurosawa, Goedken,
`Madnick5
`Ladd, Kurosawa, Goedken,
`Houser6
`Ladd, Kurosawa, Goedken,
`Rutledge7
`Ladd, Kurosawa, Goedken,
`Rutledge, Madnick
`Ladd, Kurosawa, Goedken,
`Rutledge, Houser
`
`
`Petitioner relies on two Declarations from Loren Terveen, Ph.D.
`Exs. 1003, 1040. 8 Patent Owner relies on a Declaration from Benedict
`Occhiogrosso. Ex. 2025.
`
`
`1 The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”), Pub. L. No. 112-29, 125
`Stat. 284, 287–88 (2011), amended 35 U.S.C. § 103. Because the ’084
`patent was filed before March 16, 2013, the effective date of the relevant
`amendment, the pre-AIA version of § 103 applies.
`2 Ladd et al., US 6,269,336 B1, issued July 31, 2001 (Ex. 1004).
`3 Kurosawa, JP H09-311869, published December 2, 1997 (Ex. 1005). We
`rely on the certified translation of JP H09-311869 (Ex. 1005).
`4 Goedken, US 6,393,423 B1, issued May 21, 2002 (Ex. 1006).
`5 Madnick et al., US 5,913,214, issued June 15, 1999 (Ex. 1007).
`6 Houser et al., US 5,774,859, issued June 30, 1998 (Ex. 1008).
`7 Rutledge et al., US 6,650,998 B1, issued November 18, 2003 (Ex. 1010).
`8 Portions of Exhibit 1040 are the subject of Patent Owner’s Motion to
`Exclude Evidence, which we deny, infra. Paper 29.
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`II. ANALYSIS
`
`A. Claim Construction
`Petitioner filed its Petition on March 18, 2020. Pet. 98. Based on that
`filing date, we apply the same claim construction standard that is applied in
`civil actions under 35 U.S.C. § 282(b), which is articulated in Phillips v.
`AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc). See 83 Fed. Reg.
`51,340 (Oct. 11, 2018) (applicable to inter partes reviews filed on or after
`November 13, 2018).
`Under Phillips, claim terms are afforded “their ordinary and
`customary meaning.” 415 F.3d at 1312. “[T]he ordinary and customary
`meaning of a claim term is the meaning that the term would have to a person
`of ordinary skill in the art in question at the time of the invention.” Id. at
`1313. Only terms that are in controversy need to be construed, and then
`only to the extent necessary to resolve the controversy. Vivid Techs., Inc. v.
`Am. Sci. & Eng’g, Inc., 200 F.3d 795, 803 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
`In the Petition, Petitioner contended that we should give the claim
`terms their ordinary and customary meaning, and did not identify any claim
`term for construction. Pet. 13.
`After pre-institution briefing was completed, but before we instituted
`trial, the court in the Texas case issued a claim construction ruling,
`construing “speaker-independent speech recognition device” to mean
`“speech recognition device that recognizes spoken words without adapting
`to individual speakers or using predefined voice patterns.” Ex. 1041, 2. 9
`
`
`9 The court in the Texas case issued other constructions pertaining to the
`challenged claims, but the parties do not advance them in this proceeding
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`The parties agree that this term at least requires a “speech recognition device
`that recognizes spoken words without . . . using predefined voice patterns,”
`but disagree as to whether it should require a device that recognizes spoken
`words “without adapting to individual speakers.” PO Resp. 21 (“The proper
`construction of ‘speaker-independent speech recognition device’ is
`consistent with the construction issued by the Western District of Texas,
`though it does not include all of that court’s construction, and requires at
`least ‘speech recognition device that recognizes spoken words without using
`predefined voice patterns.’”); Reply 2 (“For purposes of this IPR, Apple
`submits the Court’s construction should be applied.”).
`The dispute regarding whether the term should preclude adapting to
`individual speakers does not impact any issue in this proceeding, and
`Petitioner has agreed to Patent Owner’s construction in this proceeding, so
`long as we do not resolve the dispute over adapting to individual speakers.
`Tr. 12:24–13:4 (“JUDGE McKONE: So you’d be happy if we essentially
`adopted Parus’s construction with a footnote or some kind of note that we’re
`not resolving the issue of adapting to individual speakers? MS. BAILEY:
`That would be fine for purposes of this IPR, Your Honor.”). We adopt the
`parties’ agreed approach. For purposes of this proceeding, “speaker-
`independent speech recognition device” means “speech recognition device
`that recognizes spoken words without using predefined voice patterns.” This
`is consistent with the ’084 patent’s statement (relied on by both parties) that
`“[t]he voice browsing system recognizes naturally spoken voice commands
`and is speaker-independent; it does not have to be trained to recognize the
`
`
`and we do not find it necessary to adopt them in order to resolve the parties’
`dispute.
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`voice patterns of each individual user. Such speech recognition systems use
`phonemes to recognize spoken words and not predefined voice patterns.”
`Ex. 1030, 4:52–56; see also PO Resp. 21–22 (citing Ex. 1030, 4:47–56);
`Reply 2–3 (citing Ex. 1030, 4:51–56). We take no position on whether the
`construction also should include “without adapting to individual speakers.”
`Based on the record before us, we do not find it necessary to provide
`express claim constructions for any other terms. See Nidec Motor Corp. v.
`Zhongshan Broad Ocean Motor Co., 868 F.3d 1013, 1017 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
`(noting that “we need only construe terms ‘that are in controversy, and only
`to the extent necessary to resolve the controversy’”) (quoting Vivid Techs.,
`Inc. v. Am. Sci. & Eng’g, Inc., 200 F.3d 795, 803 (Fed. Cir. 1999)).
`
`B. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`Petitioner asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had at
`least a Bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering,
`Computer Science, or an equivalent degree, with at least two years of
`experience in interactive voice response systems, automated information
`retrieval systems, or related technologies. Pet. 7 (citing Ex. 1003 ¶ 28).
`On the complete record, we adopt Petitioner’s definition of one of
`ordinary skill in the art for essentially three reasons. First, Patent Owner
`does not contest Petitioner’s assertion. See generally PO Resp. Also,
`neither party argues that the outcome of this case would differ based on our
`adoption of any particular definition of one of ordinary skill in the art.
`Moreover, the level of ordinary skill in the art is also reflected by the
`references themselves. See Okajima v. Bourdeau, 261 F.3d 1350, 1355
`(Fed. Cir. 2001) (“[T]he absence of specific findings on the level of skill in
`the art does not give rise to reversible error ‘where the prior art itself reflects
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`an appropriate level and a need for testimony is not shown.’”); In re GPAC
`Inc., 57 F.3d 1573, 1579 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (finding that the Board of Patent
`Appeals and Interferences did not err in concluding that the level of ordinary
`skill in the art was best determined by the references of record).
`
`C. Asserted Obviousness of Claims 1–7, 10, and 14 (Grounds 1–3)
`Petitioner asserts that claims 1–7, 10, and 14 would have been
`unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combined
`teachings of Ladd, Kurosawa, and Goedken (claims 1–6, 10, and 14); Ladd,
`Kurosawa, Goedken, and Madnick (claim 7); and Ladd, Kurosawa,
`Goedken, and Houser (claims 5 and 6). 10 Pet. 19–64. For support,
`Petitioner relies on declaration testimony from Dr. Loren Terveen (Exs.
`1003, 1040).
`
`1. Overview of Ladd
`Ladd discloses a voice browser for interactive services. Ex. 1004,
`codes (54), (57). Ladd’s system uses a markup language to provide the
`interactive services, by creating and using a markup language document, the
`markup language document having a dialog element including a plurality of
`markup language elements and a prompt element, including an
`announcement that is read to a user. Id. Ladd’s communication method
`selects the prompt element, and defines a voice communication /
`announcement in the prompt element to be read to the user. Id. Ladd’s
`system also accepts data inputted by the user. Id.
`
`
`10 A discussion of Madnick and Houser are not necessary to our disposition
`of Petitioner’s assertions.
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`With Ladd’s system, users can access information from information
`sources or content providers, using voice inputs and commands. Id. at 2:48–
`58. For example, users can access up-to-date information, such as news
`updates and traffic conditions. Id. The system also allows users to perform
`transactions, such as order flowers, place restaurant orders, obtain bank
`account balances, and receive directions to various destinations. Id.
`Ladd’s Figure 1 is illustrative and is reproduced below.
`
`
`Figure 1 is a block diagram of system 100 including network access device
`102, electronic network 104, and information source 106. Id. at 2:21–25.
`Device 102 is connected to network 104 via line 108, and information
`source 106 is connected to network 104 via line 110. Id. at 26–29. “The
`lines 108 and 110 can include, but are not limited to, a telephone line or link,
`an ISDN line, a coax[ial] line, a cable television line, a fiber optic line, a
`computer network line, a digital subscriber line, or the like.” Id. at 2:29–32.
`Alternatively, device 102 and information source 106 can wirelessly
`communicate with network 104. Id. at 2:33–35. Network 104 “can include
`an open, wide area network such as the Internet, the World Wide Web
`(WWW), and/or an on-line service,” and can also include “an intranet, an
`extranet, a local area network, a telephone network, (i.e., a public switched
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`telephone network), a cellular telephone network,” and other networks. Id.
`at 3:27–39.
`Ladd’s Figure 3, reproduced below, illustrates a system including a
`voice browser, enabling “a user to access information from any location in
`the world via a suitable communication device.” Id. at 4:62–67.
`
`
`
`Figure 3 illustrates a system 200 including a voice browser 250, enabling a
`user to access information. Id. at 4:62–67.
`System 200 includes one or more communication devices or network
`access apparatuses (e.g., 201, 202, 203, 204), an electronic network (206),
`and one or more information sources such as content providers (e.g., 208,
`209) and markup language servers. Id. at 5:12–19. A user can retrieve the
`information from the information sources using speech commands or DTMF
`(dual-tone multi-frequency signaling) tones. Id. at 5:17–19. When a user
`dials into electronic network 206, a communication node 212 answers the
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`incoming call and retrieves an appropriate announcement (i.e., a welcome
`greeting) from a database, server, or browser. Id. at 6:3–17. In response to
`audio inputs from the user, communication node 212 retrieves information
`from a destination or database of the information sources (content providers
`208 and 209 or markup language servers). Id. at 6:18–25. After
`communication node 212 retrieves the information, communication node
`provides a response to the user based upon the retrieved information. Id.
`Communication node 212 may include telephone switch 230, voice or
`audio recognition (VRU) client 232, voice recognition (VRU) server 234,
`and voice browser 250. Id. at 6:65–7:7. In response to voice inputs from the
`user or DTMF tones, voice browser 250 generates a content request (i.e., an
`electronic address) to navigate to a destination of one or more information
`sources. Id. at 11:30–34. The content request can use at least a portion of a
`URL, a URN, an IP, a page request, or an electronic email. Id. at 11:34–36.
`Voice browser 250 processes markup language that may include text,
`recorded sound samples, navigational controls, and input controls for voice
`applications. Id. at 15:60–64. The markup language enables developers of
`service or content providers to create application programs for instructing
`the voice browser to provide a desired user interactive voice service such as
`providing up-to-date news, weather, or traffic. Id. at 15:65–16:5. Content
`providers 208 and 209 send requested information to the voice browser. Id.
`at 11:60–63. The content providers include a server to operate web pages or
`documents in markup language. Id. at 11:55–58. Content providers 208 and
`209 can also include a database, scripts, and/or markup language documents
`or pages, where the scripts may include images, audio, grammars, and
`computer programs. Id. at 11:57–61.
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`2. Overview of Kurosawa
`
`Kurosawa discloses an Internet search server that obtains requested
`information from a plurality of URLs, and delivers a search report to a
`client. Ex. 1005, code (57). Figure 2 of Kurosawa, reproduced below,
`illustrates an Internet search server.
`
`
`Figure 2 is a functional block diagram of an Internet search server. Id. ¶ 20.
`
`Internet search server 10 illustrated in Figure 2 includes a URL
`database 11 having a comparison table with a plurality of keywords
`representing search condition elements, and URLs relating to the keywords.
`Id. ¶¶ 20–21. Figure 5 of Kurosawa, reproduced below, illustrates a
`keyword table 21 (of URL database 11) listing keywords used in a URL
`table 22 (of URL database 11) illustrated in Figure 6 (also reproduced
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`below). Id. ¶ 21. Kurosawa provides that “anything that is not listed in the
`keyword table 21 cannot be searched for.” Id. URL table 22 illustrated in
`Figure 6 is a comparison table of a plurality of URLs and keywords related
`thereto. Id. ¶ 21. Search server 10 regularly updates the URL table 22 in
`URL database 11 using automatic search tools, such as Internet web
`crawlers. Id. ¶ 23.
`When a client sends a search request to Internet search server 10,
`search condition element extraction unit 13 (of server 10) extracts search
`condition elements from the client’s search request, and URL search unit 14
`(of server 10) extracts keywords (included in the search condition elements)
`from keyword table 21, and selects URLs (from URL table 22) having the
`extracted keywords listed therein. Id. ¶¶ 26–28. A URL listing order
`arranging unit 15 (of server 10) determines a listing order for the selected
`URL addresses (URLs), based on priority conditions for efficient searching.
`Id. ¶ 29. Thereafter, URL listing unit 16 (of server 10) sequentially lists the
`URL addresses of the respective URLs in the determined order, and accesses
`respective webpages of the URLs. Id. ¶ 30. A URL information gathering
`unit 17 (of server 10) sequentially accumulates information from the URL
`pages, for presentation to the client. Id. ¶¶ 30–31.
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`
`
`Figure 5 illustrates a keyword table 21 in URL database 11. Id. ¶ 21.
`
`
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`Figure 6 illustrates a URL table 22 in URL database 11. Id. ¶ 21.
`
`3. Overview of Goedken
`Goedken describes a method and apparatus for facilitating information
`exchange, via a network, between an information requestor/searcher and one
`or more information custodians, which are persons that “know[] where to
`locate and/or ha[ve] custody of the information that interests the searcher.”
`Ex. 1006, code (57), 1:41–44. The searcher creates an information request
`message and sends it to the apparatus, and the apparatus determines an
`appropriate custodian and sends a request message to that custodian. Id. at
`code (57). Based on the messages, the apparatus provides a final answer
`message to the searcher, and may also record the answer message for
`subsequent retrieval. Id. For example, the apparatus may record portions of
`final answer messages developed by information custodians, in a knowledge
`database. Id. at 19:43–48. Goedken provides that its disclosed apparatus
`may be incorporated into an Internet portal. Id. at 21:40–43.
`
`4. The Parties’ Contentions Regarding Independent Claim 1
`Petitioner asserts that claim 1 would have been obvious over the
`combined disclosures Ladd, Kurosawa, and Goedken. Pet. 19–51. Relevant
`to our disposition of this proceeding, Petitioner asserts that Ladd discloses
`the claimed “speaker-independent speech-recognition device” in the form of
`“automatic speech recognition unit (ASR) 254.” Pet. 23. According to
`Petitioner, “Ladd expressly teaches the ASR unit is a ‘speaker-independent’
`‘speech recognition’ device” because “[t]he ASR unit 254 of the VRU server
`234 provides speaker independent automatic speech recognition of speech
`inputs . . . .” and such “ASR unit ‘processes the speech inputs from the user
`
`
`
`21
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`to determine whether a word or a speech matter matches any of the [stored]
`grammars. . . .’” Id. at 23–24.
`Patent Owner disputes Petitioner’s assertion regarding this claim
`element. PO Resp. 35–38. Specifically, Patent Owner asserts that,
`consistent with its proffered claim construction, “[t]he ʼ084 patent disclaims
`the use of voice patterns to recognize a spoken command, which restricts a
`system to a sharply limited vocabulary.” Id. at 36 (citing Ex. 1030, 4:55–56;
`Ex. 2025 ¶ 82). According to Patent Owner, Ladd operates in the manner
`that is disclaimed in the ʼ084 patent because “its ASR recognizes a
`predefined speech pattern.” Id. at 37 (citing Ex. 1004, 9:36–39). Patent
`Owner avers that Ladd’s “express requirement . . . that the ASR 254 relies
`on ‘recognized voice pattern[s]’ runs directly contrary to the” claim element
`at issue. Id. at 38.
`In response, Petitioner argues that “Ladd’s determination of voice
`patterns occurs at a different step in the speech recognition process than
`[Patent Owner’s] excluded voice patterns.” Reply 4. Specifically, according
`to Petitioner, speech recognition devices generally use a two-step approach
`to accomplish speech recognition:
`1) converting a “user’s spoken words into text using various voice
`recognition algorithms, including analyzing voice patterns,” and
`2) “[a]fter converting the spoken words into text, the content of the
`word, e.g., what is commanded by the word, is determined by
`comparing the text to a recognition grammar.”
`
`
`
`22
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00687
`Patent 9,451,084 B2
`
`Id. at 4–5 (citing Ex. 1039, 50:21–51:8, 51:14–52:22, 54:6–55:7, 66:5–
`67:17; Ex. 1030, 6:57–7:2). 11 According to Petitioner, “Ladd’s
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
