Google LLC

Prosecution History analysis

Examiner Search analysis

Invalidity Framework analysis

Petition

Petition Analysis

## 1. Case Identification
- Case #: [IPR2025-01177](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177)
- Patent #: [11,244,675](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/patent/11244675)
- Filed: July 14, 2025
- Petitioner(s): [Google LLC](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/party/google-llc)
- Patent Owner(s): [SoundClear Technologies, LLC](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/party/soundclear-technologies-llc)
- Challenged Claims: 1-7

## 2. Patent Overview
- Title: Output-Content Control Device, Method, and Program
- Brief Description: The [’675 patent](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1001) discloses an "output-content control device" that generates responses to a user's spoken input. The system is configured to analyze the voice input, classify it based on characteristics such as whether it is a whisper, and generate a tailored output sentence that can be modified for privacy based on that classification.

## 3. Grounds for Unpatentability

#### Ground 1: Obviousness of Claims 1-7 over Raitio in view of Fahlman
  - **Prior Art Relied Upon:** [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006) (Application # 2017/0358301) and [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007) (Patent 5,960,080).
  - **Core Argument for this Ground:**
    - **Prior Art Mapping:** Petitioner argued that [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006), which discloses a digital assistant that detects whispered speech and provides a whispered response for privacy, teaches nearly all limitations of the challenged claims. [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006)’s system acquires a user's voice, determines user intent via natural language processing, and generates an appropriate response. Petitioner contended that [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006)’s "whispered speech determination module" performs voice classification (a first voice being a whisper, a second being non-whisper) and that its use of a "far-field acoustic model" to detect speech at an extended distance inherently teaches calculating a distance to classify the voice. [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006), however, does not explicitly teach replacing words in the output for privacy. To supply this limitation, Petitioner relied on [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007), which teaches a method for sanitizing a message by replacing sensitive information (e.g., names, dates) with generic "standard tokens." The combination of [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006)'s privacy-aware response system with [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007)'s word-replacement sanitization allegedly renders the claims obvious. The dependent claims were argued to be obvious as they recite further known techniques in voice processing, such as using information "type" (e.g., person, place) to guide word replacement, which [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007) also discloses.
    - **Motivation to Combine:** A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would combine [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006) and [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007) to solve a known problem. [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006) addresses user privacy by whispering a response. [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007) addresses privacy by sanitizing content. A POSITA would have recognized that combining [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007)'s word replacement with [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006)'s system would further enhance user privacy by making the content of the response difficult for others to understand, which aligns with [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006)'s stated goals.
    - **Expectation of Success:** A POSITA would have had a reasonable expectation of success in implementing [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007)'s word-replacement algorithm into [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006)'s system. Both references describe computer-implemented methods, and integrating [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007)’s subroutine for identifying and replacing sensitive terms into [Raitio](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1006)'s dialogue generation process would have been a routine task involving known programming techniques.

#### Ground 2: Obviousness of Claims 1-7 over Ocampo in view of Fahlman
  - **Prior Art Relied Upon:** [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005) (Application # 2018/0122361) and [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007) (Patent 5,960,080).
  - **Core Argument for this Ground:**
    - **Prior Art Mapping:** This ground presented an alternative obviousness combination, with [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005) serving as the primary reference. Petitioner argued that [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005) discloses a user device (e.g., a personal digital assistant) that classifies a user's voice input based on "voice features" to determine if the user is whispering and modifies the audio output accordingly for privacy. [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005)'s system includes proximity, voice, and mood classifiers that collectively function as a "voice classifying unit" to determine a user's distance and classify the voice as a whisper (first voice) or non-whisper (second voice). [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005) also teaches an "application determiner" that analyzes the user's command to discern intent and an "audio signal generator" that creates the spoken response. Similar to Ground 1, Petitioner asserted that while [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005) teaches modifying a response for privacy (e.g., by lowering the volume), it does not explicitly disclose replacing words. [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007) was again relied upon to teach this specific limitation of sanitizing a message by replacing sensitive words with tokens. The combination was argued to render independent claims 1, 6, and 7 obvious, with the dependent claims falling for similar reasons as in Ground 1.
    - **Motivation to Combine:** The motivation to combine [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005) and [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007) was argued to be the same as for the first ground. [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005) recognizes the need for discrete outputs to avoid user embarrassment or inconveniencing others. A POSITA would have been motivated to incorporate [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007)’s word sanitization technique into [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005)'s system to provide an additional layer of privacy, directly addressing the same problem [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005) seeks to solve.
    - **Expectation of Success:** The expectation of success was also based on similar reasoning. [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005) describes a system implemented in software and hardware. Integrating [Fahlman](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1007)'s well-defined algorithm for word replacement into [Ocampo](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2025-01177/doc/1005)'s audio template selector (the output-content generating unit) would have been a straightforward application of known programming skills for a POSITA.

## 4. Relief Requested
- Petitioner requests the institution of an inter partes review and the cancellation of claims 1-7 of Patent [11,244,675](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/patent/11244675) as unpatentable.

Google targets voice assistant privacy patent: Raitio & Fahlman prior art cited for claims 1-7 as obvious over whisper detection & word replacement.