Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 1 of 42 PageID #: 1070
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`VB Assets, LLC,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`Amazon.com, Inc.; Amazon.com LLC; Amazon
`Web Service, Inc.; A2Z Development Center, Inc.
`d/b/a/ Lab126; Rawles LLC; AMZN Mobile LLC;
`AMZN Mobile 2 LLC; Amazon.com Service, Inc.
`f/k/a Amazon Fulfillment Services, Inc.; and
`Amazon Digital Services LLC,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`Case No. 1:19-cv-01410-MN
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`Of Counsel:
`
`J. David Hadden (CSB No. 176148)
`Email: dhadden@fenwick.com
`Saina S. Shamilov (CSB No. 215636)
`Email: sshamilov@fenwick.com
`Ravi R. Ranganath (CSB No. 272981)
`rranganath@fenwick.com
`Vigen Salmastlian (CSB No. 276846)
`Email: vsalmastlian@fenwick.com
`Sapna Mehta (CSB No. 288238)
`Email: smehta@fenwick.com
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`Silicon Valley Center
`801 California Street
`Mountain View, CA 94041
`Telephone:
`650.988.8500
`Facsimile:
`650.938.5200
`
`September 3, 2020
`
`
`Steven J. Balick (#2114)
`Andrew C. Mayo (#5207)
`ASHBY & GEDDES
`500 Delaware Avenue, 8th Floor
`P.O. Box 1150
`Wilmington, DE 19899
`(302) 654-1888
`sbalick@ashbygeddes.com
`amayo@ashbygeddes.com
`
`Counsel for Defendants
`Amazon.com, Inc.; Amazon.com LLC;
`Amazon Web Service, Inc.; A2Z
`Development Center, Inc. d/b/a/ Lab126;
`Rawles LLC; AMZN Mobile LLC; AMZN
`Mobile 2 LLC; Amazon.com Service, Inc.
`f/k/a Amazon Fulfillment Services, Inc.; and
`Amazon Digital Services LLC.
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 2 of 42 PageID #: 1071
`
`
`
`Defendants Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon.com, LLC, Amazon Web Services, Inc., A2Z
`
`Development Center, Inc. d/b/a Lab126, Rawles LLC,1 AMZN Mobile LLC, AMZN Mobile 2
`
`LLC,2 Amazon.com Services, Inc. f/k/a Amazon Fulfillment Services, Inc., and Amazon Digital
`
`Services LLC (collectively “Amazon”)3 hereby answer the First Amended Complaint of Plaintiff
`
`VB Assets, LLC (“VoiceBox”) as follows:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations
`
`of paragraph 1 of the amended complaint and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`2.
`
`Amazon admits that VoiceBox purports to refer to U.S. Patent Nos. 8,073,681 (“the
`
`’681 patent”); 9,015,049 (“the ’049 patent”); 9,626,703 (“the ’703 patent”); 7,818,176 (“the ’176
`
`patent”); 8,886,536 (“the ’536 patent”); and 9,269,097 (“the ’097 patent”) as the “VoiceBox
`
`Patents.” Amazon admits that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued the ’681, ’049, ’703,
`
`’176, ’536, and ’097 patents. Amazon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 2 of the
`
`amended complaint, and specifically denies that the VoiceBox Patents were fundamental to the
`
`development of voice commerce technology.
`
`3.
`
`Amazon denies that it infringes any asserted claim of the VoiceBox Patents.
`
`Amazon denies that it poached engineers and scientists from VoiceBox Technologies Corporation
`
`
`1 Rawles LLC is not a properly named defendant.
`2 AMZN Mobile 2 LLC is not a properly named defendant.
`3 Defendants serve a single answer for the sake of administrative convenience in this case and
`refer to all defendants as “Amazon” for convenience only. They do so without waiver of, and
`explicitly preserving, all objections and arguments applicable in this case. Defendants specifically
`do not concede that in this case any individual defendant is properly named as a party to this case
`or that any individual defendant directs or control another defendant, are agents of one another, or
`are part of a purported joint enterprise with any other defendant for purposes of any joint
`infringement theory or otherwise.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 3 of 42 PageID #: 1072
`
`and/or VoiceBox Technologies, Inc. (collectively “VoiceBox Technologies”). Amazon admits
`
`that VoiceBox purports to refer to Amazon’s Alexa cloud-based voice service, Echo 1st Gen.,
`
`Echo 2nd Gen., Echo Dot 1st Gen., Echo Dot 2nd Gen., Echo Dot 3rd Gen., Echo Dot Kids
`
`Edition, Echo Show 1st Gen., Echo Show 2nd Gen., Echo Show 5, Echo Spot, Echo Plus 1st Gen.,
`
`Echo Plus 2nd Gen., Echo Auto, Echo Look, Alexa App, Music App, Shopping App, Alexa Voice
`
`Service, Amazon.com website, Amazon Tap, Amazon Dash Wand, Echo Wall Clock,
`
`AmazonBasics Microwave, Amazon SmartPlug, Amazon Fire TV Sticks, Amazon Fire TVs,
`
`Amazon Fire TV Cubes, and Amazon Fire and Fire HD tablets as “Alexa Products.” Amazon
`
`lacks information or knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations of paragraph
`
`3 of the amended complaint and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`4.
`
`Amazon denies that it infringes any asserted claim of the VoiceBox Patents.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`5.
`
`Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations
`
`of paragraph 5 of the amended complaint and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`6.
`
`Amazon admits that Amazon.com, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal
`
`place of business at 410 Terry Avenue North, Seattle, WA, 98109. Amazon further admits that
`
`Amazon.com LLC, Amazon Web Services, Inc., A2Z Development Center, Inc., Rawles LLC,
`
`AMZ Mobile LLC, AMZN Mobile 2 LLC, Amazon.com Service, Inc., and Amazon Digital
`
`Services LLC are wholly-owned subsidiaries of Amazon.com, Inc. Amazon admits that it sells
`
`and offers to sell products and services that use Alexa, Amazon’s cloud-based voice service.
`
`7.
`
`Amazon admits that Amazon.com LLC is a Delaware limited liability company
`
`with its principal place of business at 410 Terry Avenue North, Seattle, WA, 98109. Amazon
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 4 of 42 PageID #: 1073
`
`admits that Amazon.com LLC sells and offers to sell products and services that use Alexa,
`
`Amazon’s cloud-based voice service.
`
`8.
`
`Amazon admits that Amazon Web Services, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its
`
`principal place of business at 410 Terry Avenue North, Seattle, WA, 98109. Amazon admits that
`
`Amazon Web Services, Inc. provides cloud-based services that may be used in conjunction with
`
`Alexa, Amazon’s cloud-based voice service.
`
`9.
`
`Amazon admits that A2Z Development Center, Inc. d/b/a Lab 126 is a Delaware
`
`corporation with its principal place of business at 1100 Enterprise Way, Sunnyvale, CA 94089.
`
`Amazon admits that A2Z Development Center, Inc. d/b/a Lab 126 performed research and
`
`development for products that use Alexa, Amazon’s cloud-based voice service.
`
`10.
`
`Amazon admits that Rawles LLC is a Delaware limited liability company. Amazon
`
`denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 10 of the amended complaint.
`
`11.
`
`Amazon admits that AMZN Mobile LLC is a Delaware limited liability company
`
`with its principal place of business in Seattle, WA. Amazon admits that AMZN Mobile LLC
`
`develops mobile applications that use Alexa, Amazon’s cloud-based voice service.
`
`12.
`
`Amazon admits that AMZN Mobile 2 LLC is a Delaware limited liability company
`
`with its principal place of business in Seattle, WA. Amazon denies the remaining allegations of
`
`paragraph 12 of the amended complaint.
`
`13.
`
`Amazon admits that Amazon.com Services, Inc. f/k/a Amazon Fulfillment
`
`Services, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 410 Terry Ave. N.
`
`Seattle, WA 98109. Amazon admits that Amazon.com Services, Inc. f/k/a Amazon Fulfillment
`
`Services, Inc. provides services for the sale or offer for sale of products that use Alexa, Amazon’s
`
`cloud-based voice service.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 5 of 42 PageID #: 1074
`
`14.
`
`Amazon admits that Amazon Digital Services LLC is a Delaware limited liability
`
`company with its principal place of business at 410 Terry Ave. N, Seattle, WA 98109. Amazon
`
`further admits that Amazon Digital Services LLC sells and offers to sell products and services
`
`that use Alexa, Amazon’s cloud-based voice services.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`15.
`
`Amazon admits that VoiceBox purports to allege an action under the patent laws of
`
`the United States and that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to
`
`28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`16.
`
`Amazon admits for purposes of this case only that this Court has personal
`
`jurisdiction over Amazon. Amazon admits that each defendant is incorporated under the laws of
`
`the State of Delaware, and that it sells or offers to sell products and/or services to customers in
`
`this judicial district. Amazon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 16 of the amended
`
`complaint.
`
`17.
`
`Amazon admits that each defendant is incorporated under the laws of the State of
`
`Delaware and that venue is thus proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Amazon denies the remaining
`
`allegations of paragraph 17 of the amended complaint.
`
`A.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`VoiceBox Technologies [Purportedly] Invents Groundbreaking Voice
`Technology4
`
`18.
`
`Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations
`
`of paragraph 18 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`
`4 To the extent VoiceBox intends the headings or subheadings in its amended complaint to
`constitute allegations, Amazon explicitly denies them. The headings in Amazon’s answer
`reference VoiceBox’s complaint and are not responses to them.
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 6 of 42 PageID #: 1075
`
`19.
`
`Amazon admits that VoiceBox purports to reference a television news clip that
`
`Voicebox
`
`Technologies
`
`Corporation
`
`posted
`
`on
`
`YouTube
`
`at
`
`https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDcRyPnvWhw. Amazon lacks knowledge or information
`
`sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 19 of the amended complaint,
`
`and on that basis, denies them.
`
`20.
`
`Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations
`
`of paragraph 20 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`21.
`
`Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations
`
`of paragraph 21 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`22.
`
`Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations
`
`of paragraph 22 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`23.
`
`Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations
`
`of paragraph 23 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`24.
`
`Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations
`
`of paragraph 24 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`B.
`
`25.
`
`Amazon [Allegedly] Takes VoiceBox’s Technology5
`
`Amazon admits that VoiceBox Technologies contacted Amazon in 2011 because
`
`VoiceBox Technologies was interested in a business relationship. Amazon further admits that it
`
`requested that VoiceBox Technologies provide slides to facilitate a telephone call on October 7,
`
`2011 regarding VoiceBox Technologies’ proposal. Amazon admits that VoiceBox Technologies
`
`provided slides that claimed “patented Contextual Speech Technology,” but denies that the slides
`
`
`5 To the extent VoiceBox intends the headings or subheadings in its complaint to constitute
`allegations, Amazon explicitly denies them. The headings in Amazon’s answer reference
`VoiceBox’s complaint and are not responses to them.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 7 of 42 PageID #: 1076
`
`“described” the purported technology. Amazon admits that VoiceBox purports to copy excerpted
`
`screenshots from the presentation as Figure 5. Amazon denies the remaining allegations of
`
`paragraph 25 of the amended complaint, and denies that the alleged communications are relevant
`
`to the assertions in this case.
`
`26.
`
`Amazon admits that it invited VoiceBox Technologies to a meeting at Amazon on
`
`October 19, 2011, but denies that it was “so impressed” by the technology VoiceBox
`
`Technologies presented on October 7, 2011. Amazon admits that Nick Komorous initially
`
`proposed attendance by engineers and product/business development members of Amazon’s
`
`digital team as an appropriate audience given VoiceBox’s request to discuss its purported personal
`
`digital assistant and purported conversational voice technology. Amazon admits that Nick
`
`Komorous, Ian Freed, who was then Vice President, Amazon Devices, Greg Hart, Al Lindsay,
`
`Frederic Deramat, and John Thimsen attended the October 19, 2011 meeting. Amazon lacks
`
`knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 26
`
`of the amended complaint and, on that basis, denies them. Amazon denies that the alleged
`
`communications are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`27.
`
`Amazon admits that on October 21, 2011, Nick Komorous sent an email in which
`
`he agreed to VoiceBox Technologies’ offer to conduct a deeper dive at VoiceBox Technologies’
`
`office, and proposed that the meeting occur sometime the following week. Amazon admits that
`
`VoiceBox Technologies hosted a meeting on October 26, 2011 at VoiceBox Technologies’ office.
`
`Amazon admits that Marcello Typrin, Frederic Deramat, Sean Fitz, and Nick Komorous attended
`
`the October 26, 2011 meeting. Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or
`
`deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 27 of the amended complaint and, on that basis,
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 8 of 42 PageID #: 1077
`
`denies them. Amazon denies that the alleged communications are relevant to the assertions in
`
`this case.
`
`28.
`
`Amazon admits that Nick Komorous responded to VoiceBox Technologies’
`
`proposed agenda for the meeting with questions about the limitations of VoiceBox Technologies’
`
`purported offering. Amazon admits that Nick Komorous mentioned Amazon’s engineering
`
`culture and asked if VoiceBox Technologies would have engineering and speech representation
`
`at the meeting. Amazon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 28 of the amended
`
`complaint, and denies that the alleged communications are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`29.
`
`Amazon admits that the October 26, 2011 meeting at VoiceBox Technologies’
`
`office went from approximately 10am until 12pm, and that some attendees stayed until around
`
`2:30pm. Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining
`
`allegations of paragraph 29 of the amended complaint and, on that basis, denies them. Amazon
`
`denies that the alleged interactions are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`30.
`
`Amazon admits that VoiceBox Technologies provided a slide deck to Amazon.
`
`Amazon admits that VoiceBox purports to include as Figure 6 an excerpt from the slide deck.
`
`Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations of
`
`paragraph 30 of the amended complaint and, on that basis, denies them. Amazon denies that the
`
`alleged interactions are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`31.
`
`Amazon admits that the slide deck VoiceBox Technologies provided to Amazon
`
`included slides to discuss VoiceBox Technologies’ proposed business arrangements with
`
`Amazon. Amazon admits that VoiceBox purports to include as Figure 7 an excerpt from the slide
`
`deck. Amazon denies that the alleged interactions are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 9 of 42 PageID #: 1078
`
`32.
`
`Amazon admits that the employees who attended the October 2011 meetings have
`
`held various positions at Amazon, including some leadership positions. Amazon admits that Ian
`
`Freed’s LinkedIn profile states that he worked as a Director, Tech. Assistant to the CEO in 2005-
`
`2006, and later became Vice President, Amazon Devices in 2010. Amazon admits that Greg
`
`Hart’s LinkedIn profile states he was a Technical Advisor to the CEO in 2009-2011. Amazon
`
`admits that Al Lindsay’s LinkedIn profile states he was Vice President, Alexa Engine Software
`
`from 2011-2019. Amazon admits that Frederic Deramat’s LinkedIn profile states that he has held
`
`the role of Vice President and Distinguished Engineer, Amazon Alexa since 2011. Amazon
`
`admits that John Thimsen’s LinkedIn profile states he was a Director of Engineering, Amazon
`
`Echo in 2011-2015. Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the
`
`remaining allegations of paragraph 32 of the amended complaint and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`Amazon denies that the positions held by the Amazon personnel identified in paragraph 32 of the
`
`amended complaint are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`33.
`
`Amazon admits that VoiceBox Technologies emailed Nick Komorous on October
`
`28, 2011 requesting a follow-up conversation and that Mr. Komorous replied that Amazon was
`
`“still discussing internally how contextual speech / cybermind 2012 could play a part in our
`
`future.” Amazon admits that it did not agree to a business relationship with VoiceBox
`
`Technologies due to the limited capabilities of VoiceBox Technologies’ technology. Amazon
`
`denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 33 of the amended complaint, and specifically
`
`denies that Amazon used VoiceBox Technologies’ technology or was required or under any
`
`obligation to notify or ask permission from VoiceBox Technologies to continue developing
`
`Amazon’s own technology. Amazon denies that the alleged interactions are relevant to the
`
`assertions in this case.
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 10 of 42 PageID #: 1079
`
`34.
`
`Amazon admits that it launched Alexa, Amazon’s cloud-based voice service, and
`
`Echo, a smart speaker featuring the Alexa service, in 2014. Amazon denies the remaining
`
`allegations of paragraph 34 of the amended complaint.
`
`35.
`
`Amazon admits that it hired Philippe Di Cristo, who was formerly a Chief Scientist
`
`at VoiceBox Technologies, in 2016 after Mr. Di Cristo reached out to Amazon following layoffs
`
`at VoiceBox Technologies. Amazon denies that Exhibit A to the amended complaint includes a
`
`copy of Philippe Di Cristo’s LinkedIn profile. Amazon denies that it used VoiceBox
`
`Technologies’ purported technology. Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit
`
`or deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 35 of the amended complaint, and on that basis,
`
`denies them. Amazon denies that the allegations are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`36.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 36 of the amended complaint and
`
`denies that the allegations are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`37.
`
`Amazon admits there was an event planned for January 10, 2017 at Seastar
`
`restaurant. Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining
`
`allegations of paragraph 37 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them. Amazon
`
`denies that the event is relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`38.
`
`Amazon admits that Philippe Di Cristo was initially listed as a speaker for the
`
`January 10, 2017 event. Amazon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 38 of the
`
`amended complaint, and denies that the event is relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`39.
`
`Amazon admits that Mike Kennewick, CEO of VoiceBox Technologies, sent a
`
`correspondence to Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, on January 17, 2017 proposing that Amazon
`
`acquire VoiceBox Technologies. Amazon admits that Mr. Kennewick’s correspondence claimed
`
`that VoiceBox Technologies had a portfolio of technology and intellectual property. Amazon
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 11 of 42 PageID #: 1080
`
`denies that Exhibit B to the amended complaint is a copy of that correspondence. Amazon denies
`
`the remaining allegations of paragraph 39 of the amended complaint, and denies that the
`
`correspondence is relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`40.
`
`Amazon admits that Douglas Booms, then Vice President of Worldwide Corporate
`
`Development, sent an email to Mike Kennewick at VoiceBox Technologies on January 20, 2017.
`
`Amazon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 40 of the amended complaint. Amazon
`
`denies that the communications are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`41.
`
`Amazon admits that Amazon employees met with VoiceBox Technologies on
`
`February 2, 2017. Amazon denies that VoiceBox Technologies provided a detailed technical
`
`presentation, including information about patents and pending applications. Amazon lacks
`
`knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 41
`
`of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them. Amazon denies that the alleged
`
`communications are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`42.
`
` Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations
`
`of paragraph 42 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them. Amazon denies that
`
`the alleged communications are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`43.
`
`Amazon admits that Amazon employees met with VoiceBox Technologies in
`
`March of 2017. Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the
`
`remaining allegations of paragraph 43 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`Amazon denies that the alleged communications are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`44.
`
` Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 44 of the amended complaint, and
`
`denies that the alleged communications are relevant to the assertions in this case.
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 12 of 42 PageID #: 1081
`
`OVERVIEW OF VOICEBOX’S PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`The ’681 and ’049 Patents
`
`45.
`
`Amazon admits that U.S. Patent No 8,073,681 (“the ’681 patent”) lists “System and
`
`Method for a Cooperative Conversational Voice User Interface” as the title, December 6, 2011 as
`
`the issue date, and Larry Baldwin, Tom Freeman, Michael Tjalve, Blane Ebersold, and Chris
`
`Weider as the inventors on the face of the patent. Amazon denies that Exhibit C to the amended
`
`complaint is a copy of the ’681 patent.
`
`46.
`
`Amazon admits that the ’681 patent is generally directed to the abstract idea of
`
`responding to a spoken request using shared information. Amazon further admits that
`
`independent claim 25 of the ’681 patent recites “[a] system for providing a cooperative
`
`conversational voice user comprising: a voice input device configured to receive an utterance
`
`during a current conversation with a user, wherein the utterance includes one or more words that
`
`have different meanings in different contexts; and a conversational speech engine, wherein the
`
`conversational speech engine includes one or more processors configured to: accumulate short-
`
`term shared knowledge about the current conversation, wherein the short-term shared knowledge
`
`includes knowledge about the utterance received during the current conversation; accumulate
`
`long-term shared knowledge about the user, wherein the long-term shared knowledge includes
`
`knowledge about one or more past conversations with the user; identify a context associated with
`
`the utterance from the short-term shared knowledge and the long-term shared knowledge;
`
`establish an intended meaning for the utterance within the identified context to disambiguate an
`
`intent that the user had in speaking the one or more words that have the different meanings in the
`
`different contexts; and generate a grammatically or syntactically adapted response to the utterance
`
`based on the intended meaning established within the identified context.”
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 13 of 42 PageID #: 1082
`
`47.
`
`Amazon admits that the ’681 patent lists VoiceBox Technologies, Inc. as the
`
`assignee. Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining
`
`allegations of paragraph 47 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`48.
`
`Amazon admits that U.S. Patent No 9,015,049 (“the ’049 patent”) lists “System and
`
`Method for a Cooperative Conversational Voice User Interface” as the title, April 21, 2015 as its
`
`issue date, and Larry Baldwin, Tom Freeman, Michael Tjalve, Blane Ebersold, and Chris Weider
`
`as the inventors on the face of the patent. Amazon denies that Exhibit E to the amended complaint
`
`is a copy of the patent.
`
`49.
`
`Amazon admits that the ’049 patent is generally directed to the abstract idea of
`
`responding to a spoken request using shared information. Amazon further admits that
`
`independent claim 11 of the ’049 patent recites “[a] system for facilitating conversation-based
`
`responses, the system comprising: one or more physical processors programmed with one or more
`
`computer program instructions such that, when executed, the one or more computer program
`
`instructions cause the one or more physical processors to: receive a natural language utterance
`
`during a conversation between a user and the system; identify a first model that includes short-
`
`term knowledge about the conversation, wherein the short-term knowledge is based on one or
`
`more prior natural language utterances received during the conversation; identify, based on the
`
`short-term knowledge, context information for the natural language utterance; determine, based
`
`on the context information, an interpretation of the natural language utterance; and generate,
`
`based on the interpretation of the natural language utterance, a response to the natural language
`
`utterance.”
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 14 of 42 PageID #: 1083
`
`50.
`
`Amazon admits that the ’049 patent lists VoiceBox Technologies Corporation as
`
`the assignee. Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining
`
`allegations of paragraph 50 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`51.
`
`Amazon admits that the ’681 and ’049 patents refer to the existence of “Command
`
`Control” prior art. Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the
`
`allegations of paragraph 51 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`52.
`
`Amazon lacks knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations
`
`of paragraph 52 of the amended complaint, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`53.
`
`To the extent any of VoiceBox’s allegations rely on claim terms or phrases that the
`
`Court has not yet construed, Amazon can neither admit nor deny such allegations in the absence
`
`of guidance from the Court regarding proper construction for these terms, and on that basis denies
`
`the allegations. Amazon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 53 of the amended
`
`complaint.
`
`54.
`
`To the extent any of VoiceBox’s allegations rely on claim terms or phrases that the
`
`Court has not yet construed, Amazon can neither admit nor deny such allegations in the absence
`
`of guidance from the Court regarding proper construction for these terms, and on that basis denies
`
`the allegations. Amazon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 54 of the amended
`
`complaint.
`
`55.
`
`56.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 55 of the amended complaint.
`
`Amazon admits that the ’681 patent is generally directed to the abstract idea of
`
`responding to a spoken request using shared information. To the extent any of VoiceBox’s
`
`allegations rely on claim terms or phrases that the Court has not yet construed, Amazon can
`
`neither admit nor deny such allegations in the absence of guidance from the Court regarding
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 15 of 42 PageID #: 1084
`
`proper construction for these terms, and on that basis denies the allegations. Amazon denies the
`
`remaining allegations of paragraph 56 of the amended complaint.
`
`57.
`
`58.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 57 of the amended complaint.
`
`Amazon admits that the examiner rejected originally filed claims of the ’681 patent
`
`as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0015256 by Kargman. Amazon
`
`further admits that VoiceBox purports to provide excerpted screenshots of Applicant’s arguments
`
`made during the prosecution of the ’681 patent.
`
`59.
`
`Amazon admits that the examiner eventually allowed the claims of the ’681 patent.
`
`Amazon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 59 of the amended complaint.
`
`60.
`
`Amazon admits that the application that resulted in the ’681 patent is the parent
`
`application of the ’049 patent. Amazon further admits that the ’049 patent is generally directed
`
`to the abstract idea of responding to a spoken request using shared information. To the extent any
`
`of VoiceBox’s allegations rely on claim terms or phrases that the Court has not yet construed,
`
`Amazon can neither admit nor deny such allegations in the absence of guidance from the Court
`
`regarding proper construction for these terms, and on that basis denies the allegations.
`
`61.
`
`62.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 61 of the amended complaint.
`
`Amazon admits that VoiceBox purports to provide an excerpted screenshot of
`
`examiner’s statements made during the prosecution of the ’049 patent. Amazon denies that the
`
`claims of the ’049 patent are directed to allowable subject-matter.
`
`63.
`
`64.
`
`65.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 63 of the amended complaint.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 64 of the amended complaint.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 65 of the amended complaint.
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 16 of 42 PageID #: 1085
`
`66.
`
`To the extent any of VoiceBox’s allegations rely on claim terms or phrases that the
`
`Court has not yet construed, Amazon can neither admit nor deny such allegations in the absence
`
`of guidance from the Court regarding proper construction for these terms, and on that basis denies
`
`the allegations. Amazon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 66 of the amended
`
`complaint.
`
`67.
`
`68.
`
`69.
`
`70.
`
`71.
`
`72.
`
`73.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 67 of the amended complaint.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 68 of the amended complaint.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 69 of the amended complaint.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 70 of the amended complaint.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 71 of the amended complaint.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 72 of the amended complaint.
`
`To the extent any of VoiceBox’s allegations rely on claim terms or phrases that the
`
`Court has not yet construed, Amazon can neither admit nor deny such allegations in the absence
`
`of guidance from the Court regarding proper construction for these terms, and on that basis denies
`
`the allegations. Amazon denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 73 of the amended
`
`complaint.
`
`74.
`
`Amazon denies the allegations of paragraph 74 of the amended complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that the ’681 and ’049 patents are directed to patent-eligible subject-matter
`
`under § 101.
`
`The ’703 Patent
`
`75.
`
`Amazon admits that U.S. Patent No. 9,626,703 (“the ’703 patent”) lists “Voice
`
`Commerce” as the title, April 18, 2017 as the issue date, and Michael R. Kennewick, Sr. as the
`
`inventor on the face of the patent. Amazon denies that Exhibit G is a copy of the ’703 patent.
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-01410-MN Document 55 Filed 09/03/20 Page 17 of 42 PageID #: 1086
`
`76.
`
`Amazon admits that independent claim 15 of the ’703 patent recites: “[a] system
`
`for providing voice commerce, the system comprising: one or more physical processors
`
`programmed with computer program instructions which, when executed, cause the one or more
`
`physical processors to: receive a user input comprising a natural language utterance; provide the
`
`natural language utterance as an input to a speech recognition engine; obtain one or more words
`
`or phrases recognized from the natural language utterance as an output of the speech recognition
`
`engine; determine a context based at least on the one or more words or phrases; ident