PTAB

IPR2014-00234

Apple Inc v. THX Ltd

Key Events

Petition

petition

Title: Sound Reproduction System
Brief Description: The ’340 patent describes a narrow-profile loudspeaker system intended for compact electronic devices. The technology centers on a specific speaker configuration where a drive unit emits sound into a sound duct, which channels the sound and turns it at a substantially right angle toward an elongate output slot. This design purports to allow for the use of larger speakers in confined installation spaces while providing improved sound reproduction and broad directional characteristics.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Sadaie (WO Publication No. 00/52958).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Sadaie discloses every element of the challenged claims. Sadaie describes a small-sized speaker system for high-quality sound that includes a drive unit on a mounting surface, a sound reflecting surface facing the drive unit, and a narrow sound duct terminating in an elongate output slot. Petitioner asserted that Sadaie’s configuration shows sound radiation being turned at a right angle and channeled directly toward the output slot, meeting all limitations of independent claims 1 and 29. Furthermore, Sadaie explicitly teaches that the interior sidewalls of its sound guiding part may comprise sound damping material (a "pressure absorbing material"), which Petitioner contended anticipates dependent claims 3, 4, 31, and 32.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Sadaie (WO Publication No. 00/52958), Robbins (Patent 2,694,462).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner contended that Sadaie discloses the core speaker structure with an elongate output slot, as required by the base claims. Claims 2 and 30 add the limitation that sound from this slot has a wide horizontal and narrow vertical dispersion angle. While Sadaie discusses wide bass reproduction, Robbins explicitly teaches that a speaker structure with an elongate output slot is characterized by these specific dispersion properties.
- Motivation to Combine: A person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would have recognized that the elongate output slot in Sadaie would inherently produce the sound dispersion characteristics taught by Robbins for such slots, especially at frequencies higher than bass.
- Expectation of Success: The combination was a matter of applying a known principle (the effect of slot shape on sound dispersion) to a known device. A POSITA would have had a high expectation of success in achieving the predictable result of wide horizontal and narrow vertical dispersion by implementing Sadaie's design.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Harris (Patent 7,010,138).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner asserted Harris, which discloses a loudspeaker for televisions or laptop computers, anticipates the core invention. Harris describes a drive unit on a mounting surface that directs sound into a slot-like duct terminating in a narrow output slot, with a reflecting surface forming one wall of the duct. Petitioner argued this structure meets all limitations of claims 1 and 29. Harris further discloses that a narrow slot aperture provides "wide directivity," anticipating claims 2 and 30. Finally, Harris explicitly teaches using the speaker system in a "personal computing device," directly anticipating claims 6 and 34.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Harris (Patent 7,010,138), Tichy (Patent 5,517,574), Virva (Patent 3,687,220).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: This ground builds on the assertion that Harris discloses the structure of claims 1 and 29. The additional limitations in claims 3, 4, 31, and 32 require the interior sidewall of the sound duct to comprise "sound damping material."
- Motivation to Combine: Petitioner argued that using sound damping material to suppress spurious resonances and standing waves within a speaker enclosure was a well-known, common practice. Both Virva and Tichy teach treating the inside surfaces of speaker enclosures with acoustically absorbing material to improve sound quality. A POSITA would combine this known technique with the Harris speaker design as a routine matter of design choice to achieve the predictable benefit of higher quality sound.
- Expectation of Success: Adding damping material was a standard solution for a known problem in acoustics, and a POSITA would have reasonably expected this modification to predictably improve the performance of the Harris speaker.
Additional Grounds: Petitioner asserted additional obviousness challenges, including combining Sadaie or Harris with references teaching dual-speaker configurations for stereo sound (Fujihara or Reams), methods to avoid interfering phase shifts (Villa or Anderson), and integration into a computer (Shin).

"interfering phase shift" (claims 5, 33): Petitioner proposed this term means "a state in which sound waves are out of phase and thus cancel out one another in whole or in part." This construction was argued to be critical for the obviousness grounds relying on Villa and Anderson, which teach designing speaker ducts with specific dimensions to prevent such destructive interference.
"sound damping material" (claims 3, 4, 31, 32): Petitioner proposed this term means "material that absorbs sound waves in an audible frequency range." This construction supported arguments that general acoustic absorbing materials taught by references like Tichy and Virva for improving sound quality would meet the claim limitation.

Petitioner requests institution of inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-7 and 29-34 of Patent 8,457,340 as unpatentable.