UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`PARUS HOLDINGS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & IPR2020-00687
`U.S. Patent No. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`
`DECLARATION OF BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO IN SUPPORT OF
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE TO INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S.
`PATENT NOS. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025
`Apple Inc. v. Parus Holdings, Inc.
`IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`Page 1 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`B.
`
`VI.
`
`PAGE
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
`I.
`QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE ..................................................... 2
`II.
`III. MATERIALS CONSIDERED ...................................................................... 10
`IV.
`PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ........................................ 13
`V.
`LEGAL STANDARDS ................................................................................. 14
`A.
`Obviousness ......................................................................................... 14
`B.
`Claim Construction.............................................................................. 16
`PRIOR ART SPEECH-BASED INFORMATION RETRIEVAL
`SYSTEMS ..................................................................................................... 16
`VII. BACKGROUND AND TECHNOLOGY FOR THE ’431 AND ’084
`PATENTS ...................................................................................................... 18
`A. Multiple Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) Systems
`Existed in the Prior Art with Strikingly Different Capabilities .......... 24
`Prior Art Interactive Voice Response Systems Suffered From
`Numerous Drawbacks ......................................................................... 28
`1.
`Typical Prior Art Systems For Accessing Web Sites
`Were Not Sufficiently Portable, Comprehensive, And
`Affordable ................................................................................. 28
`Voice Enabled Options Introduced Additional Problems
`and Drawbacks .......................................................................... 29
`Prior Art “Interactive Voice Response” Systems Suffered
`From A Lack Of Fault Tolerance, Limited Webpage
`Resources, And Generic Search Options And Results ............. 30
`The ’431 and ’084 Patent’s Solutions ................................................. 33
`C.
`VIII. ’686 IPR ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 34
`A.
`’686 Prior Art ...................................................................................... 34
`1.
`Ladd........................................................................................... 34
`2.
`Kurosawa .................................................................................. 35
`3.
`Goedken .................................................................................... 36
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`i
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 2 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`Houser ....................................................................................... 38
`4.
`Petitioner does not establish that Claim 1(c) is taught by the
`combination of Ladd, Kurosawa, and Goedken or by any other
`combination. ........................................................................................ 38
`Petitioner does not establish that Claim 1(k) is taught by the
`combination of Ladd, Kurosawa, and Goedken or by any other
`combination. ........................................................................................ 43
`Petitioner does not provide a sufficient motivation to combine
`Ladd, Kurosawa, and Goedken ........................................................... 45
`1.
`A POSITA would not combine Ladd with Kurosawa
`because it would create unacceptable latencies in a voice
`browsing system. ....................................................................... 45
`A POSITA would not combine Ladd modified by
`Kurosawa in further view of Goedken. ..................................... 51
`Petitioner relies on hindsight to cobble together the
`alleged combination .................................................................. 54
`Petitioner does not establish that Claim 5 is disclosed by the
`combination of Ladd, Kurosawa, and Goedken .................................. 56
`Petitioner does not establish that Claim 6 is disclosed by the
`combination of Ladd, Kurosawa, and Goedken .................................. 57
`The addition of Houser does not cure the shortcomings of the
`combination of Ladd, Kurosawa, and Goedken .................................. 58
`Petitioner does not provide a sufficient motivation to combine
`Houser with Ladd, Kurosawa, and Goedken ...................................... 58
`
`3.
`
`2.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`i
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 3 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`I, Benedict Occhiogrosso, hereby declare the following:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1.
`My name is Benedict Occhiogrosso. I am a citizen of the United States
`
`over 21 years of age, and the co-founder and President of DVI Communications, Inc.
`
`I make this Declaration based on facts and matters within my own knowledge and
`
`on information provided to me by others, and if called as a witness, I could and
`
`would competently testify to the matters set forth herein.
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained as a technical expert witness in this matter by
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner, Parus Holdings, Inc. (“Patent Owner” or “Parus”) to
`
`provide my independent opinions on certain issues requested by Counsel for Patent
`
`Owner relating to the Petitions for Inter Partes Review of United States Patent No.
`
`7,076,431 (the “’431 patent”) and United States Patent No. 9,451,084 (the “’084
`
`patent”). I am being compensated at an hourly rate of $475. My compensation in
`
`this matter is not based on the substance of my opinions or on the outcome of this
`
`matter.
`
`3.
`
`I am providing this Declaration for both the ’431 and ’084 Patents given
`
`the patents have substantially the same specification. Counsel has also informed me
`
`that both the ’431 and ’084 Patents claim the same priority date—specifically,
`
`February 4, 2000—due to both patents claiming priority to the same priority
`
`document. Many of the claimed limitations of the ’084 Patent are substantially
`
`1
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 4 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`similar to the ’431 Patent and vice-versa. Many of my citations to the patents are
`
`made with respect to the ’431 Patent for ease of reference. However, because the
`
`specifications of the ’431 and ’084 Patents are substantially similar, any citation to
`
`the specification of the ’431 Patent applies equally to the ’084 Patent, unless
`
`otherwise indicated.
`
`4.
`
`I have been informed by counsel that the claims being challenged in the
`
`accompanying Petition for the ’431 Patent is Claims 1-7, 9-10, 13-14, 18-21, and
`
`25-30 (“the Challenged Claims of the ’431 Patent”); and of the ’084 Patent is Claims
`
`1-7, 10, and 14 (“the Challenged Claims of the ’084 Patent”).
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
`5.
`I offer the following summary description of my background and
`
`experience, which I believe qualifies me to opine as one skilled in the art of the
`
`relevant technology. I attach my CV as Exhibit A to this Declaration, which is
`
`current as of this date to the best of my knowledge.
`
`6.
`
`I hold a Bachelor of Science Degree in Electrical Engineering as well
`
`as a Master of Science Degree in Electrical Engineering, both from the Polytechnic
`
`Institute of Brooklyn (now part of New York University).
`
`7.
`
`I have authored or co-authored nearly three dozen articles in peer-
`
`reviewed journals, conference proceedings, texts, industry trade publications, and
`
`monographs. These publications span a range of topics including: Integrated Voice–
`
`2
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 5 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`Data Communications/Switching, Integrated Packet-Circuit Switching, Voice
`
`Digitization, Packet Voice, Indoor Wireless distribution, Disaster Recovery and
`
`Business Continuity, Data Center Engineering, Switching Processor Architecture,
`
`Telephone and Voice Mail Systems, PBX & LAN switching premises-based systems
`
`and related technologies and Internet of Things (IoT).
`
`8.
`
`I have more than 40 years of telecommunications and information
`
`technology experience. I am the co-founder and President of DVI Communications
`
`Inc., a telecommunications, information technology, and business consulting firm.
`
`Since establishing DVI in 1979, I have planned, designed, implemented, and
`
`managed large-scale projects involving wired and wireless communications
`
`systems, which included transmission of voice and data. Prior to founding DVI and
`
`for several years thereafter, I held a Department of Defense security clearance and
`
`worked on several classified programs within the defense industry, where I
`
`supported the development of several pioneering technologies that have served as
`
`the prototypes for many telecommunications and IT systems later utilized in
`
`commercial practice.
`
`9.
`
`Throughout the course of my professional career, I have worked and
`
`consulted extensively in the fields of information processing, including transaction
`
`processing systems design and development (including centralized and distributed,
`
`encompassing both fault-tolerant and real-time processing), various hardware and
`
`3
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 6 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`software platforms (including enterprise client/server incorporating different OS &
`
`DBMS), systems integration, and telecommunications. These telecommunications
`
`systems include wide area and local area networking technology, data, voice, and
`
`video switching systems, and both wired transmission (such as cable and fiber optic)
`
`and wireless transmission (such as UHF/VHF, Microwave, satellite, cellular, and
`
`Wi-Fi, for private networks, Intranets, and the Internet).
`
`10. My technical expertise encompasses several disciplines, such as
`
`transaction processing systems design for various industries and applications, IT
`
`platform engineering, data center, and telecommunications network design. In
`
`addition, I have extensive experience with numerous interfaces and protocols, real-
`
`time synchronization as well as selected applications systems in various industries.
`
`These include financial services (including call centers, trading floors, supporting
`
`consumer, commercial and investment banking), health information systems
`
`(including patient information, clinical and laboratory systems), transportation and
`
`energy utilities (including dispatch, customer service, and trouble reporting),
`
`military aerospace (including Command and Control, position tracking and fusion
`
`centers), and telecommunications switching and operational support systems (order
`
`entry, billing, trouble reporting). Many of these solutions have included Interactive
`
`Voice Response (IVR) systems. I have also provided operational and strategic
`
`planning consultation for client IT enterprise-level systems. Over the course of my
`
`4
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 7 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`career, I developed hardware and software, and I have also managed engineering
`
`development teams engaged in product development.
`
`11.
`
`I have extensive expertise in voice-data-video switching, and
`
`transmission systems deployed in networks, including both circuit switching and
`
`packet switching using wireline and wireless distribution methods (including Land
`
`Mobile radio, Satellite, microwave, cellular, and Wi-Fi). In addition, I have
`
`developed various applications systems including voicemail, e-mail, unified
`
`messaging, and audio/video recording for a variety of facility types including call-
`
`contact centers, data centers, trading floors, and mission-critical communications
`
`centers. I have detailed knowledge of Internet Protocol (IP) technology in general,
`
`and also Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP). I have extensive expertise in voice
`
`digitization, buffering, relay and delay techniques, as well as digital signal
`
`processing of voice signals. At present, my primary responsibilities encompass
`
`strategic planning and systems design of client IT Infrastructures and program
`
`management for major projects undertaken by DVI.
`
`12.
`
`I have also developed
`
`technical expertise with
`
`regard
`
`to
`
`telecommunication applications utilizing speech recognition, including call center
`
`and interactive voice response applications, like the kind described in the Asserted
`
`Patents. I have supported numerous enterprise and institutional clients in the design
`
`of their call centers. My experience in this field includes the use of both speaker-
`
`5
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 8 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`independent and speaker-dependent speech recognition algorithms in different
`
`applications utilizing isolated speech recognition and continuous speech recognition.
`
`13.
`
`I have worked on behalf of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority
`
`(MTA) on relay services and assistive technologies. For example, I worked on voice
`
`processing for captioning of live meeting proceedings, which are then made
`
`available for the deaf and hard of hearing. For the MTA, I implemented a system for
`
`captioning live meetings’ proceedings for the deaf and hard of hearing in compliance
`
`with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The project included logistics,
`
`audio routing, voice processing, video display and captioning to generate a
`
`transcription of a speaker’s voice at a public meeting, and display of the resulting
`
`transcription on television monitors in the boardroom as well as over institutional
`
`broadcast channels and Internet feeds. In-line corrections would be generated and
`
`displayed by the transcriptionist during the proceedings. I have also worked on
`
`captioning or transcription of previously recorded information for compliance and
`
`record-keeping purposes.
`
`14.
`
`For example, with telecommunication services and associated devices
`
`for the switching and transmission of voice and data over POTS lines, digital
`
`transmission facilities (such as T1, E1 and ISDN PRI and BRI), cellular voice and
`
`data and other wireless–based technologies (Line of Sight Microwave, Land Mobile
`
`Radio, Satellite) and IP- and VoIP-based communications, I have deployed various
`
`6
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 9 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`types of switching and routing systems (supporting numerous voice and data
`
`communications networks) at major institutional clients such as Citicorp NY, City
`
`University of New York, Bear Stearns, Societe Generale, RPCI, and Bertelsmann.
`
`For these projects, among other things, I had to understand the technical
`
`implications, shortcomings, and advantages of deploying different types of
`
`switching systems interconnecting voice and data channels, and the manner in which
`
`various communication protocols transmit voice and data and would use available
`
`bandwidth on different transmission facilities. The transmission facilities included
`
`both terrestrial (wired and wireless) as well as satellite-based communications. I also
`
`had to understand the compatibility issues with various end-user devices and central
`
`network components, both at my client’s locale as well as with the telephone
`
`provider/network provider’s switching systems. This encompassed both signaling
`
`and switching protocols and interfaces to support compatibility and interoperability.
`
`15. With respect to speech recognition technology, I have worked on
`
`numerous projects that incorporated speech recognition technology in interactive
`
`voice response, dictation, and messaging systems. For example, some of my clients
`
`used speech recognition software to convert voice messages into text that could be
`
`sent to the recipient via email or a text message (so-called unified messaging
`
`systems). For numerous clients, I deployed speech recognition technology into
`
`Interactive Voice Response (IVR) systems, improving the user experience as well
`
`7
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 10 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`as (in many instances) expediting the process flow for various real-time
`
`inquiry/response and transaction processing applications. For another of my clients,
`
`I worked on refining speech recognition protocols to be used in their
`
`telecommunications system for directory assistance. Other applications included use
`
`of speech recognition for medical transcription as well as record-keeping and
`
`compliance purposes. I have used, applied, and deployed multiple speaker-
`
`dependent and speaker-independent solutions.
`
`16.
`
`I also have extensive experience related to the digitization of voice. For
`
`many of my projects related to call routing and switching, calls can come into the
`
`systems as digital communications or as analog POTS calls. I have frequently
`
`designed and implemented systems that can detect the digital or analog nature of the
`
`incoming voice and when analog, utilize an appropriate sample rate and codec to
`
`convert the analog voice into digital transmission. Under the same umbrella, I have
`
`designed and implemented voice messaging systems that digitally record an analog
`
`voice message in order to record or perform other digital processing on the voice
`
`signal as described above. For example, for DARPA (Defense Advanced Research
`
`Projects Agency), I performed comparisons among various voice digitization
`
`algorithms’ performance in the presence of noise and jamming. As another example,
`
`for both DARPA and Defense Communications Agency (DCA), I conducted studies
`
`comparing circuit, packet and hybrid or integrated (circuit/packet) switching systems
`
`8
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 11 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`of voice and data traffic comparing them relative to cost, expandability, complexity,
`
`performance and
`
`reliability/survivability. As part of
`
`typical
`
`reliability
`
`considerations, I would deploy manual and automatic recovery processes which
`
`provided fault-tolerant and resilient voice and data networking offering graceful
`
`degradation in the presence of errors or failures. Techniques employed encompassed
`
`error detection/retransmission, vigilant monitoring of correct operation coupled with
`
`switchover to backup, bypass and/or rerouting around failed switching and
`
`transmission facilities and reconnection.
`
`17. As previously outlined, I have supported the deployment of several
`
`systems for generating transcriptions of previously recorded and real-time audio. For
`
`example, to support a medical dictation application, I deployed a system that used
`
`speech recognition to generate transcripts, both manual correction and auto text
`
`correction, of medical terms that were used, to correct the medical practitioner’s
`
`dictation. For ADA-compliant broadcast of textual messages for the deaf and hard
`
`of hearing public at MTA meetings, I designed, selected, and deployed remote text
`
`captioning of meetings with remote in-line manual correction of errors in real-time.
`
`I also assessed captioning service accuracy and latency with the goal of improving
`
`service levels.
`
`9
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 12 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`
`III. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`18.
`In forming the opinions set forth herein, I have considered and relied
`
`upon my education, knowledge in the relevant field, and my experience. I have also
`
`reviewed and considered the materials cited herein, including the following
`
`materials:
`
`Description
`
`Apple Inc.’s IPR Petition
`U.S. Patent No. 7,076,431 (“the ’431 Patent”)
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 7,076,431 (“File History for
`’431 Patent”)
`Declaration of Dr. Loren Terveen, PhD (including Appendices
`A and B) (“Dec.”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,269,336 to Ladd (“Ladd”)
`Japanese Patent Application No. JP H9-311869 to Kurosawa
`(“Kurosawa”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,393,423 to Goedken (“Goedken”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,913,214 to Madnick (“Madnick”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,774,859 to Houser (“Houser”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,203,646 to Bennett (“Bennett”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,650,998 to Rutledge et al. (“Rutledge”)
`MURAX: A Robust Linguistic Approach for Question
`Answering Using an Online Encyclopedia SIGIR ’93, July
`1993 Kupiec, Julian (“MURAX”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,606,611 to Khan (“Khan”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,428,941 to Ho et al. (“Ho”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,427,165 to Anderson (“Anderson”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,460,060 to Maddalozzo, Jr. et al.
`(“Maddalozzo”)
`
`Exhibit No.
`IPR2020-00686
`Paper No. 1
`Exhibit 1001
`
`Exhibit 1002
`
`Exhibit 1003
`
`Exhibit 1004
`
`Exhibit 1005
`
`Exhibit 1006
`Exhibit 1007
`Exhibit 1008
`Exhibit 1009
`Exhibit 1010
`
`Exhibit 1011
`
`Exhibit 1012
`Exhibit 1013
`Exhibit 1014
`Exhibit 1015
`
`10
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 13 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`
`Description
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,642,502 to Driscoll (“Driscoll”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,850,442 to Muftic (“Muftic”)
`U.S. Patent No. 5,956,716 to Kenner et al. (“Kenner”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,131,085 to Rossides (“Rossides”)
`Just Say No: How Are Visual Searches Terminated When
`There Is No Target Present? Cognitive Psychology, 1996
`Chun et al. (“Chun”)
`PCT Application WO 98/03923 to Kraftsow et al.
`(“Kraftsow”)
`US Patent No. 6,397,212 to Biffar (“Biffar”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,587,466 to Battacharya et al.
`(“Battacharya”)
`Web Hunting: Design of a Simple Intelligent Web Search
`Agent Crossroads, June 1999 Youngblood (“Youngblood”)
`Collective Intelligence and Its Implementation on the Web
`Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory,
`October 1999 Heylighen, Francis (“Heylighen”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,704,722 to Wang Baldonado (“Wang
`Baldonado”)
`University of Sheffield TREC-8 Q&A System Computer
`Science, June 1999 Humphries et al. (“Humphries”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,149,359 to Omoigui (“Omigui”)
`CV of Dr. Loren Terveen
`U.S. Patent No. 9,451,084 (“the ’084 Patent”)
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 9,451,084 (“File History for
`’084 Patent”)
`Parus Holdings Inc. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 6_19-cv-00432
`(W.D. Tex. Jan. 17, 2020), Doc. No. 85 (Scheduling Order)
`Board’s Email Authorizing the Reply
`Apple’s Motion to Transfer from Texas to California
`W.D.Tex. General Order Canceling Trials
`
`11
`
`Exhibit No.
`IPR2020-00686
`Exhibit 1016
`Exhibit 1017
`Exhibit 1018
`Exhibit 1019
`
`Exhibit 1020
`
`Exhibit 1021
`
`Exhibit 1022
`Exhibit 1023
`
`Exhibit 1024
`
`Exhibit 1025
`
`Exhibit 1026
`
`Exhibit 1027
`
`Exhibit 1028
`Exhibit 1029
`Exhibit 1030
`
`Exhibit 1031
`
`Exhibit 1032
`
`Exhibit 1033
`Exhibit 1034
`Exhibit 1035
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 14 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`
`Description
`
`MV3 Partners Docket Canceling and Rescheduling Trial
`Trial Delay Statistics
`Docket Report for Parus Litigation of Challenged Patents
`Order Denying Motion to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review,
`C.A. No. 6:18-cv-00207-ADA
`Exhibit A3 Ladd Claim Chart 7076431
`Exhibit C Obviousness Claim Chart 7076431 (Corrected)
`Ex D3 Ladd Claim Chart 9541084 (Corrected)
`Ex F Obviousness Claim Chart 9451084
`Standing Order Regarding Scheduled Hearings in Civil Cases,
`6:19-cv-00432-ADA
`Claim Construction Order, 1:20-cv-00351-ADA
`Claim Construction Order, 6:19-cv-00532-ADA
`Claim Construction Order, 6:18-cv-00308-ADA
`U.S. Patent No. 6,157,705 (Perrone)
`“instruction set” excerpt from 1997 Novell’s Dictionary of
`Networking
`Defendants’ Opening Claim Construction Brief, 6:19-cv-
`00432-ADA
`Excerpt of Case Docket Sheet, 6-19-cv-00278-ADA
`Excerpt of Case Docket Sheet, 6-19-cv-00514-ADA
`Excerpt of Case Docket Sheet, 6-19-cv-00515-ADA
`Excerpt of Case Docket Sheet, 7-18-cv-00147-ADA
`Markman Hearing Transcript, 6:19-CV-00432-ADA
`10/2/2020 Email to Court
`Excerpt of Case Docket Sheet, 6:18-cv-00308-ADA
`5/30/2019 Order Denying Stay, C.A. No. 6:18-cv-00207
`6/23/2020 Order Denying Stay, C.A. No. 6:19-cv-00514
`6/23/2020 Order Denying Stay, C.A. No. 6:19-cv-00515
`7/22/2020 Order Denying Stay, C.A. No. 7:18-cv-00147
`
`Exhibit No.
`IPR2020-00686
`Exhibit 1036
`Exhibit 1037
`Exhibit 1038
`Exhibit 2001
`
`Exhibit 2002
`Exhibit 2003
`Exhibit 2004
`Exhibit 2005
`Exhibit 2006
`
`Exhibit 2007
`Exhibit 2008
`Exhibit 2009
`Exhibit 2010
`Exhibit 2011
`
`Exhibit 2012
`
`Exhibit 2013
`Exhibit 2014
`Exhibit 2015
`Exhibit 2016
`Exhibit 2017
`Exhibit 2018
`Exhibit 2019
`Exhibit 2020
`Exhibit 2021
`Exhibit 2022
`Exhibit 2023
`
`12
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 15 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`
`Description
`
`December 16, 2020 Deposition Transcript of Loren Terveen,
`Ph.D.
`
`Exhibit No.
`IPR2020-00686
`
`Exhibit 2024
`
`19.
`
`This declaration is made based on information currently available to
`
`me. I intend to continue my investigation and study, which may include a review of
`
`documents and information that may yet be produced, as well as deposition
`
`testimony from depositions for which transcripts are not yet available or that may
`
`yet be taken in this proceeding. Therefore, I expressly reserve the right to expand or
`
`modify my opinions as my investigation and study continue, and to supplement my
`
`opinions in response to any additional information that becomes available to me, any
`
`matters raised by Petitioner and/or other opinions provided by Petitioner’s experts,
`
`or in light of any relevant orders from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board or other
`
`authoritative body.
`
`IV. PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`20. Based on my review of the teachings of the Asserted Patents, in my
`
`opinion a person of ordinary skill within the field of the Asserted Patents, which is
`
`voice-controlled information retrieval systems, around the late 1999 to early 2000
`
`time period would have an electrical or computer engineering background and
`
`practical experience in the field. Such a person would have a Bachelor’s degree in
`
`electrical or computer engineering, or in a related field, and at least two years of
`
`13
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 16 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`work experience relating to information retrieval systems, speech recognition and
`
`interactive voice response systems, or related systems.
`
`21.
`
`I understand that Petitioners have proposed a similar, but broader level
`
`of skill in the art. See Pet. at 6. In view of either definition, I consider myself to be
`
`at least one of ordinary skill in that art at the time of the invention. As already
`
`discussed, I obtained a Master’s Degree in Electrical Engineering in 1975 and, by
`
`the time of the invention, I had been working in the relevant technology space for
`
`approximately 25 years, if not more.
`
`V.
`
`LEGAL STANDARDS
`22.
`In preparing and expressing my opinions and considering the subject
`
`matter of the ’431 patent, I am relying on certain basic legal principles that counsel
`
`have explained to me. These principles are discussed below.
`
`A.
`23.
`
`Obviousness
`I have been informed that a claim may be invalid as obvious if the
`
`subject matter described by the claim as a whole would have been obvious to a
`
`POSITA at the time the claimed invention was made. I understand that the standard
`
`for obviousness in an inter partes review proceeding is by a preponderance of the
`
`evidence.
`
`24.
`
`I have also been informed that a determination of obviousness involves
`
`an analysis of the scope and content of the prior art, the similarities between the
`
`14
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 17 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`claimed invention and the prior art, and the level of ordinary skill in the art. I have
`
`been informed and understand that a prior art reference should be viewed as a whole.
`
`25.
`
`I have been informed that in considering whether an invention for a
`
`claimed combination would have been obvious, I may assess whether there are
`
`apparent reasons to combine known elements in the prior art in the manner claimed
`
`in view of interrelated teachings of multiple prior art references, the effects of
`
`demands known to the design community or present in the market place, and/or the
`
`background knowledge possessed by a POSITA. I also understand that other
`
`principles may be relied on in evaluating whether a claimed invention would have
`
`been obvious.
`
`26.
`
`I have been informed that, in making a determination as to whether or
`
`not the claimed invention would have been obvious to a POSITA, one may consider
`
`certain objective indicators of non-obviousness if they are present, such as:
`
`commercial success of product(s) practicing the claimed invention; long-felt but
`
`unsolved need; teaching away; unexpected results; copying; and praise by others in
`
`the field. I understand that for such objective evidence to be relevant to the non-
`
`obviousness of a claim, however, there must be a causal relationship (called a
`
`“nexus”) between the claim and the evidence. I also understand that this nexus must
`
`be based on a novel element of the claim rather than something available in the prior
`
`art.
`
`15
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 18 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`I have also been informed and understand that when considering the
`
`27.
`
`obviousness of a patent claim, one should consider whether a reason or motivation
`
`existed for combining the elements of the references in the manner claimed, and that
`
`the prior art must create a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed
`
`subject matter.
`
`B.
`28.
`
`Claim Construction
`I understand that the first step in determining the validity of a claim is
`
`for the claim to be properly construed. I have been further advised that, in an inter
`
`partes review proceeding, the claims of a patent are typically given their ordinary
`
`and customary meaning as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art in
`
`the context of the patent disclosure (specification), unless the specification or the
`
`prosecution history of the patent provides a specific definition.
`
`29.
`
`I further understand that a patentee can be his own lexicographer, and
`
`that any special definition for a claim term must be set forth in the specification with
`
`reasonable clarity and precision.
`
`VI. PRIOR ART SPEECH-BASED INFORMATION RETRIEVAL
`SYSTEMS
`30. At the time of the ’431 Patent’s inventions, prior art speech-based
`
`information retrieval systems suffered from a number of drawbacks. In addition to
`
`providing the information requested by users, an important goal of most voice
`
`systems was to respond to these user requests in near real-time, preventing
`16
`
`Parus Exhibit 2025, Page 19 of 78
`
`

`

`Case No. IPR2020-00686 & -00687
`U.S. Patent Nos. 7,076,431 & 9,451,084
`unnecessary delays, and not introducing any additional latencies. Petitioners relied
`
`on U.S. Patent No. 7,203,646 to Bennett in their Petition to highlight a goal of 3-5
`
`seconds for a response to make it seem real-time. See Pet. at 45. I agree that 3-5
`
`seconds would be an appropriate benchmark for near real-time communications in
`
`man to machine interactions at the time of the ’431 and ’084 inventions. I will
`
`address Bennett in the following section, but I would like to note that Bennett’s goal
`
`of 3-5 seconds was in a speech-based system that stored its questions and answers
`
`in a database, instead of accessing multiple websites to retrieve information. Ex.
`
`1009, 18:10-15.
`
` Accessing websites with the transmission facilities and
`
`communications hardware available at the time of the inventions introduced
`
`potentially intolerable latencies for speech-based systems.
`
`31.
`
`Speed was one of the greatest challenges of early information retrieval
`
`systems accessing websites. Internet access speeds in the mid to late 1990s were
`
`predominantly at the dial-up speed which was typically 56 kilobits per second.
`
`Broadband access had not proliferated at that time. In fact, Dr. Tervee