PTAB

IPR2025-01427

Apple Inc. v. MessageLoud, Inc.

Log In

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: System for Audibly Presenting Queued Messages
  • Brief Description: The ’725 patent relates to computer-implemented systems and methods that automatically detect various incoming message types, such as emails and text messages, place them into a single chronological queue, and read them aloud to a user engaged in an activity like driving, without requiring user input to initiate the process.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Petitioner asserted that all challenged claims are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103. The petition focused on two primary combinations of prior art.

Ground 1: Obviousness over Boelter and Gruber

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Boelter (Application # 2014/0303842) and Gruber (Application # 2013/0275138).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that the combination of Boelter and Gruber renders claims 1-24 obvious. Boelter was asserted to teach a system for managing in-vehicle notifications that collects various message types (e.g., text messages, emails, missed calls) and displays them in a single, time-ordered "summarized notification page" or queue. This system is designed to reduce driver distraction and can receive inputs via a touchscreen using "intuitive finger gesture[s]." However, Boelter’s primary notification method is visual. Petitioner contended that Gruber, which discloses a virtual assistant, makes it obvious to modify Boelter’s system to provide audible output. Gruber’s assistant can read lists of messages (emails, texts) aloud to a user in a hands-free context like driving. The combination allegedly meets the key limitations of the independent claims by taking Boelter's unified queue and making it audible per Gruber's teachings. Specifically, Gruber teaches announcing a sender’s identity, pausing to allow for user interruption, and then proceeding to read the message body if no command is received, which maps directly to the sequential notification process of the ’725 patent.
    • Motivation to Combine: A person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would combine Gruber's read-aloud functionality with Boelter's unified notification queue to further Boelter's own stated goal of minimizing driver distraction. Converting a visual list that requires the driver to look at a screen into an auditory, hands-free system was a known and logical step for improving in-vehicle safety and convenience. Reading Boelter's queue aloud would improve message management and reduce the cognitive load on the user.
    • Expectation of Success: Petitioner argued a POSITA would have had a high expectation of success. The component technologies—text-to-speech, virtual assistants, and gesture-based touchscreen controls—were well-known and commercially available at the time. Integrating Gruber’s software-based audio features into a system like Boelter's, which already disclosed the necessary processors and memory, would have been a routine programming modification without requiring the invention of new technology or overcoming technical hurdles.

Ground 2: Obviousness over Boelter, Gruber, and Polak

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Boelter (Application # 2014/0303842), Gruber (Application # 2013/0275138), and Polak (Application # 2015/0350400).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: This ground was presented as an alternative to Ground 1, arguing that Polak further supports the contention that the challenged claims are obvious. Petitioner asserted that Polak, which discloses methods to "enable drivers to hear text messages vocally... without touching the phone," reinforces the teachings of Gruber. Polak explicitly describes a system where upon arrival of a message, the sender’s details are automatically "sounded to the user first" without requiring any user interaction to initiate the notification. This was argued to provide an additional, explicit source for the automatic, audible announcement of sender identity, complementing the teachings of Boelter and Gruber.
    • Motivation to Combine: The motivation to include Polak’s teachings is consistent with that of combining Boelter and Gruber. Polak provides another clear example of using audio notifications to improve driver safety, a widely recognized goal in the field. A POSITA would have viewed Polak's method of automatic audible alerts as a known and desirable technique to implement in Boelter's queueing system. This combination would remove the step of requiring a user to manually select a message to hear, thereby further reducing distraction.
    • Expectation of Success: As with the primary combination, success was expected because incorporating Polak's teachings would only require simple and routine programming changes. The approach represents a known, software-based solution for message notification that is fully compatible with the hardware disclosed in Boelter and the state of the art at the time.

4. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review (IPR) and cancellation of claims 1-24 of Patent 10,110,725 as unpatentable.