Paper No. __
`Filed: July 6, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`LG ELECTRONICS INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`JAWBONE INNOVATIONS, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2023-01155
`U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF CLAIMS 1-28 OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,326,611
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR .......................................................................... 1
`A. Grounds for Standing ............................................................................ 1
`B.
`Challenge and Relief Requested ........................................................... 1
`C.
`Priority Date .......................................................................................... 2
`1.
`Dynamic Drinkware Analysis ..................................................... 3
`BACKGROUND ............................................................................................. 4
`A.
`The ’611 Patent ..................................................................................... 4
`B.
`Prosecution History ............................................................................... 6
`C.
`Level of Ordinary Skill ......................................................................... 6
`D.
`Claim Construction ............................................................................... 6
`III. GROUND 1: AVENDANO AND VISSER (CLAIMS 1-7, 25-28) ............... 7
`A. Avendano Overview .............................................................................. 7
`B. Visser Overview .................................................................................. 12
`C.
`Combination of Avendano and Visser ................................................ 15
`D.
`Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 22
`E.
`Claim 2 ................................................................................................ 35
`F.
`Claims 3 and 4 ..................................................................................... 36
`G.
`Claims 5 and 6 ..................................................................................... 37
`H.
`Claim 7 ................................................................................................ 38
`I.
`Claim 25 .............................................................................................. 40
`J.
`Claim 26 .............................................................................................. 41
`K.
`Claims 27 and 28 ................................................................................. 41
`
`i
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`IV. GROUND 2: AVENDANO, VISSER, AND BISGAARD (CLAIMS
`8-16, 23, 24) ................................................................................................... 43
`A.
`Bisgaard Overview .............................................................................. 43
`B.
`Combination of Avendano, Visser, and Bisgaard ............................... 44
`C.
`Claim 8 ................................................................................................ 47
`D.
`Claim 9 ................................................................................................ 49
`E.
`Claim 10 .............................................................................................. 50
`F.
`Claim 11 .............................................................................................. 51
`G.
`Claim 12 .............................................................................................. 52
`H.
`Claim 13 .............................................................................................. 52
`I.
`Claim 14 .............................................................................................. 53
`J.
`Claim 15 .............................................................................................. 53
`K.
`Claim 16 .............................................................................................. 54
`L.
`Claim 23 .............................................................................................. 54
`M. Claim 24 .............................................................................................. 57
`V. GROUND 3: AVENDANO, VISSER, BISGAARD, AND HOU
`(CLAIMS 17-19) ........................................................................................... 58
`A. Hou Overview ..................................................................................... 58
`B.
`Combination of Avendano, Visser, Bisgaard, and Hou ...................... 61
`C.
`Claim 17 .............................................................................................. 66
`D.
`Claims 18 and 19 ................................................................................. 69
`VI. GROUND 4: AVENDANO, VISSER, BISGAARD, HOU, AND
`FREQUENCY ART (BYRNE, BURNETT, AND/OR BERGLUND)
`(CLAIMS 20-22) ........................................................................................... 71
`A.
`Byrne Overview .................................................................................. 71
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`VII.
`
`B.
`
`B.
`C.
`D.
`
`Burnett Overview ................................................................................ 73
`Berglund Overview ............................................................................. 73
`Combination of Avendano, Visser, Bisgaard, Hou, and
`Frequency Art (Byrne, Burnett, and/or Berglund) .............................. 75
`Claim 20 .............................................................................................. 77
`E.
`Claims 21 and 22 ................................................................................. 81
`F.
`INSTITUTION IS APPROPRIATE HERE .................................................. 91
`Co-Pending Litigation Does Not Warrant Discretionary Denial
`A.
`Under § 314(A) (Fintiv) ...................................................................... 91
`1.
`Factor 1: Potential Stay ............................................................. 91
`2.
`Factor 2: Proximity of Trial to FWD ........................................ 92
`3.
`Factor 3: Investment in Parallel Proceeding ............................. 93
`4.
`Factor 4: Overlapping Issues .................................................... 93
`5.
`Factor 5: Parties in Parallel Proceedings .................................. 94
`6.
`Factor 6: Other Circumstances .................................................. 94
`The Existence of Previously Filed IPR Petitions Does Not
`Warrant Discretionary Denial (General Plastic) ................................ 94
`C. Discretionary Denial Under § 325(d) Is Also Not Appropriate .......... 96
`VIII. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R § 42.8(a)(1) ......................... 96
`A.
`Real Party-In-Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) .......................... 96
`B.
`Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ................................... 96
`C.
`Lead And Back-Up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ............... 98
`D.
`Service Information ............................................................................. 98
`E.
`Payment of Fees Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.103 ............................... 98
`
`iii
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Cases:
`Amazon.com, Inc. v. Jawbone Innovations, LLC,
`IPR2023-00286, Paper 10 (P.T.A.B. June 7, 2023) ...................................... 91
`Amazon.com, Inc. v. Jawbone Innovations, LLC,
`IPR2023-00286, Paper 11 (P.T.A.B. June 7, 2023) ...................................... 94
`
`Page(s):
`
`Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc.,
`IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020) .................................. 91, 94
`
`Cal. Inst. of Tech. v. Broadcom Ltd.,
`25 F.4th 976 (Fed. Cir. 2022) ........................................................................ 93
`
`Central Security Group v. Ubiquitous Connectivity, LP,
`IPR2019-01609, Paper 11 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 26, 2020) .................................... 95
`
`ClearValue, Inc. v. Pearl River Polymers, Inc.,
`668 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ..................................................................... 81
`
`E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. Synvina C.V.,
`904 F.3d 996 (Fed. Cir. 2018) ....................................................................... 81
`
`GAF Materials LLC v. Kirsch Research and Dev., LLC,
`IPR2021-00192, Paper 14 (PTAB May 25, 2021) ........................................ 91
`
`General Plastic Indus. Co. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha,
`IPR2016-01357, Paper 19 (PTAB Sept. 6, 2017) ......................................... 95
`
`Global Tel*Link Corp. v. HLFIP Holding, Inc.,
`IPR2021-00444, Paper 14 (PTAB Jul. 22, 2021) .......................................... 92
`
`NetNut Ltd. v. Bright Data Ltd.,
`IPR2021-00465, Paper 11 (PTAB Aug. 12, 2021) ........................................ 95
`
`Samsung Elecs. Am. Inc. v. Snik LLC,
`IPR2020-01428, Paper 10 (PTAB Mar. 9, 2021) .......................................... 93
`
`Sand Revolution II, LLC v. Cont’l Intermodal Grp.-Trucking LLC,
`IPR2019-01393, Paper 24 (PTAB June 16, 2020) ........................................ 94
`
`iv
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`Skechers U.S.A., Inc. v. Nike, Inc.,
`IPR2021-00160, Paper 10 (PTAB May 19, 2021) ........................................ 93
`
`Toshiba Am. Info. Sys., Inc. v. Walletex Microelecs. Ltd.,
`IPR2018-01538, Paper 11 (PTAB Mar. 5, 2019) .......................................... 96
`Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Samsung Elecs. Am., Inc.,
`No. 2:19-cv-00259-JRG-RSP, 2020 WL 1433960
`(E.D. Tex. Mar. 24, 2020) ............................................................................. 92
`
`Well-man, Inc. v. Eastman Chem. Co.,
`642 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2011) ....................................................................... 6
`
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. §101 ...................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §102 ...................................................................................................... 2
`35 U.S.C. §103 ...................................................................................................... 1
`35 U.S.C. §112 ...................................................................................................... 6
`35 U.S.C. §325(d) ............................................................................................... 96
`37 C.F.R. § 42 ..............................................................................................passim
`
`v
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`EXHIBITS
`Ex. 1001 U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611 to Petit et al. (“the ’611 patent”)
`Ex. 1002
`Excerpts from the Prosecution History of the ’611 patent (“the
`Prosecution History”)
`Ex. 1003 Declaration of Dr. Thomas Kenny
`Ex. 1004 Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Thomas Kenny
`Ex. 1005 U.S. Patent No. 8,194,880 B2 (“Avendano”)
`Ex. 1006 U.S. Patent No. 7,464,029 B2 (“Visser”)
`Ex. 1007 RESERVED
`Ex. 1008 U.S. Patent No. 7,155,019 B2 (“Hou”)
`Ex. 1009 Byrne, D, et al, “An international comparison of long-term average
`speech spectra,” 1994 Oct; J. Acoust. Soc. Am.; 96(4): 2108-2120
`(“Byrne”).
`Ex. 1010 U.S. Publication No. US 2011/0103626 A1 (“Bisgaard”)
`Ex. 1011 U.S. Provisional App. No. 60/816,244 (“the Bisgaard Provisional”)
`Ex. 1012 U.S. Publication No. US 2002/0198705 A1 (“Burnett”)
`Ex. 1013 Berglund, B, et al, “Sources and effects of low-frequency noise,” 1996
`May; J. Acoust. Soc. Am; 99(5): 2985-3002 (“Berglund”).
`Ex. 1014 Declaration of June Ann Munford
`Ex. 1015 Declaration of June Ann Munford – Appendix
`Ex. 1016 Curriculum Vitae of June Ann Munford
`
`
`Table of Exhibits, Page 1
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`LISTING OF CHALLENGED CLAIMS
`
`Claim 1
`
`[1pre]
`
`A method comprising:
`
`forming a first virtual microphone by combining a first signal of a first
`physical microphone and a second signal of a second physical
`microphone;
`
`forming a filter that describes a relationship for speech between the
`first physical microphone and the second physical microphone;
`
`forming a second virtual microphone by applying the filter to the first
`signal to generate a first intermediate signal, and summing the first
`intermediate signal and the second signal;
`
`generating an energy ratio of energies of the first virtual microphone
`and the second virtual microphone; and
`
`detecting acoustic voice activity of a speaker when the energy ratio is
`greater than a threshold value.
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein the first virtual microphone and the
`second virtual microphone are distinct virtual directional microphones.
`
`The method of claim 2, wherein the first virtual microphone and the
`second virtual microphone have approximately similar responses to
`noise.
`
`The method of claim 3, wherein the first virtual microphone and the
`second virtual microphone have approximately dissimilar responses to
`speech.
`
`[1a]
`
`[1b]
`
`[1c]
`
`[1d]
`
`[1e]
`
`Claim 2
`
`[2]
`
`Claim 3
`
`[3]
`
`Claim 4
`
`[4]
`
`Claim 5
`
`Listing of Challenged Claims, Page 1
`
`

`

`[5]
`
`Claim 6
`
`[6]
`
`Claim 7
`
`[7]
`
`Claim 8
`
`[8]
`
`Claim 9
`
`[9]
`
`Claim 10
`
`[10]
`
`Claim 11
`
`[11]
`
`Claim 12
`
`[12]
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`The method of claim 1, comprising applying a calibration to at least
`one of the first signal and the second signal.
`
`The method of claim 5, wherein the calibration compensates a second
`response of the second physical microphone so that the second
`response is equivalent to a first response of the first physical
`microphone.
`
`The method of claim 5, comprising applying a delay to the first
`intermediate signal.
`
`The method of claim 7, wherein the delay is proportional to a time
`difference between arrival of the speech at the second physical
`microphone and arrival of the speech at the first physical microphone.
`
`The method of claim 8, wherein the forming of the first virtual
`microphone comprises applying the filter to the second signal.
`
`The method of claim 9, wherein the forming of the first virtual
`microphone comprises applying the calibration to the second signal.
`
`The method of claim 10, wherein the forming of the first virtual
`microphone comprises applying the delay to the first signal.
`
`The method of claim 11, wherein the forming of the first virtual
`microphone by the combining comprises subtracting the second signal
`from the first signal.
`
`Listing of Challenged Claims, Page 2
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`Claim 13
`
`[13]
`
`The method of claim 12, wherein the filter is an adaptive filter.
`
`Claim 14
`
`[14]
`
`Claim 15
`
`[15]
`
`Claim 16
`
`[16]
`
`Claim 17
`
`[17]
`
`Claim 18
`
`[18]
`
`Claim 19
`
`[19]
`
`Claim 20
`
`The method of claim 13, comprising adapting the filter to minimize a
`second virtual microphone output when only speech is being received
`by the first physical microphone and the second physical microphone.
`
`The method of claim 13, wherein the adapting comprises applying a
`least-mean squares process.
`
`The method of claim 13, comprising generating coefficients of the filter
`during a period when only speech is being received by the first physical
`microphone and the second physical microphone.
`
`The method of claim 13, wherein the forming of the filter comprises:
`generating a first quantity by applying a calibration to the second
`signal; generating a second quantity by applying the delay to the first
`signal; forming the filter as a ratio of the first quantity to the second
`quantity.
`
`The method of claim 17, wherein the generating of the energy ratio
`comprises generating the energy ratio for a frequency band.
`
`The method of claim 17, wherein the generating of the energy ratio
`comprises generating the energy ratio for a frequency subband.
`
`Listing of Challenged Claims, Page 3
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`[20]
`
`The method of claim 19, wherein the frequency subband includes
`frequencies higher than approximately 200 Hertz (Hz).
`
`Claim 21
`
`[21]
`
`Claim 22
`
`[22]
`
`Claim 23
`
`The method of claim 19, wherein the frequency subband includes
`frequencies in a range from approximately 250 Hz to 1250 Hz.
`
`The method of claim 19, wherein the frequency subband includes
`frequencies in a range from approximately 200 Hz to 3000 Hz.
`
`[23]
`
`The method of claim 12, wherein the filter is a static filter.
`
`Claim 24
`
`[24]
`
`Claim 25
`
`[25]
`
`Claim 26
`
`[26]
`
`Claim 27
`
`[27]
`
`The method of claim 23, wherein the forming of the filter comprises:
`determining a first distance as distance between the first physical
`microphone and a mouth of the speaker; determining a second distance
`as distance between the second physical microphone and the mouth;
`and forming a ratio of the first distance to the second distance.
`
`The method of claim 1, comprising generating a vector of the energy
`ratio versus time.
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein the first and second physical
`microphones are omnidirectional microphones.
`
`The method of claim 1, comprising positioning the first physical
`microphone and the second physical microphone along an axis and
`separating the first physical microphone and the second physical
`microphone by a first distance.
`
`Listing of Challenged Claims, Page 4
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`Claim 28
`
`[28]
`
`
`
`The method of claim 27, wherein a midpoint of the axis is a second
`distance from a mouth of the speaker, wherein the mouth is located in
`a direction defined by an angle relative to the midpoint.
`
`Listing of Challenged Claims, Page 5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`Petitioner LG Electronics Inc. (“LGE” or “Petitioner”) petitions for inter
`
`partes review (“IPR”) of claims 1-28 (“Challenged Claims”) of U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,326,611 (“the ’611 patent”).
`
`I.
`
`REQUIREMENTS FOR IPR1
`A. Grounds for Standing
`Petitioner certifies that the ’611 patent is available for IPR. This petition is
`
`being filed within one year of service of the original complaint against Petitioner in
`
`the district court litigation. Petitioner is not barred or estopped from requesting this
`
`review.
`
`B.
`
`Challenge and Relief Requested
`Petitioner requests IPR on the following grounds.
`
`Ground
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`Claims
`1-7, 25-28
`8-16, 23, 24
`17-19
`20-22
`
`§103 Basis
`Avendano, Visser
`Avendano, Visser, Bisgaard
`Avendano, Visser, Bisgaard, Hou
`Avendano, Visser, Bisgaard, Hou,
`and Frequency Art (Byrne,
`Burnett, and/or Berglund)
`
`
`
`1 Sections I-VI of this petition are substantively identical to the corresponding
`
`sections in Amazon.com, Inc. v. Jawbone Innovations, LLC, IPR2023-00286, Paper
`
`1 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 28, 2022), which Petitioner seeks to join pursuant to the motion
`
`for joinder and consolidation filed herewith.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`C.
`
`Priority Date
`The ’611 patent was filed 10/26/2009 as a continuation-in-part of applications
`
`filed 05/25/2007 and 06/13/2008, and claims priority to a provisional application
`
`filed 10/24/2008.
`
`The Challenged Claims are not entitled to the 05/25/2007 and 06/13/2008
`
`dates because neither CIP application discloses: “generating an energy ratio of
`
`energies of the first virtual microphone and the second virtual microphone” and
`
`“detecting acoustic voice activity of a speaker when the energy ratio is greater than
`
`a threshold value.” Thus, the earliest possible priority date is 10/24/2008 (“Critical
`
`Date”).
`
`Each reference qualifies as prior art:
`
`Reference
`Avendano
`Visser
`
`Bisgaard
`
`Hou
`Byrne
`Burnett
`Berglund
`
`Date
`01/29/2007 (filed)
`07/22/2005 (filed)
`06/25/2007 (filed) 06/23/2006
`(filed, provisional application)
`03/14/2001 (filed)
`October 1994 (published)2
`12/26/2002 (published)
`May 1996 (published)3
`
`Section
`§102(e)
`§102(e)
`§102(e)
`
`§102(e)
`§102(b)
`§102(b)
`§102(b)
`
`
`
`2 Ex. 1013, ¶¶6-8.
`
`3 Id., ¶¶9-11.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`Bisgaard qualifies as prior art because its filing date (06/25/2007) and the
`
`filing date of its provisional application (06/23/2006) predate the Critical Date.
`
`1.
`
`Dynamic Drinkware Analysis
`Bisgaard claims priority to U.S. 60/816,244 (“Bisgaard Provisional”). Ex.
`
`1011, Cover. The Bisgaard Provisional is incorporated in its entirety in Bisgaard.
`
`Ex. 1010, [0001]. Bisgaard and the Bisgaard Provisional share a similar
`
`specification and similar claims. Ex. 1010, [0002]-[0006], [0008]-[0019], [0022]-
`
`[0027], [0033]-[0083], [0088]-[0090], claim 1; Ex. 1011, 1:3-3:18, 3:26-12:18,
`
`claim 1. Bisgaard is entitled to the 06/23/2006 filing date because the Bisgaard
`
`Provisional includes the relevant prior art disclosure and supports at least one of
`
`Bisgaard’s claims (claim 1), as shown below.
`
`(a) A hearing instrument, comprising:
`Ex. 1011, claim 1, 1:3-5, 2:1-9, 2:15, 4:1-4, FIG. 1; Ex. 1003, ¶81.
`
`(b)
`
`at least two microphones for reception of sound and
`conversion of the received sound into corresponding
`electrical sound signals that are input to the signal
`processor;
`Ex. 1011, claim 1, 1:13-15, 2:1-9, 4:1-9, 5:1-20, FIGS. 1-2; Ex. 1003, ¶81.
`
`(c) wherein the signal processor is configured to process
`the electrical sound signals into a combined signal
`with a directivity pattern with at least one adaptive
`null direction θ; and
`Ex. 1011, claim 1, 2:1-9, 3:3-13, 5:21-6:6, 11:30-12:18, FIGS. 1-2; Ex. 1003,
`
`¶81.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`(d) wherein the signal processor is further configured to
`prevent the at least one null direction θ from entering
`a prohibited range of directions, wherein the
`prohibited range is a function of a parameter of the
`electrical sound signals.
`Ex. 1011, claim 1, 2:6-9, 3:3-13, 6:18-19; Ex. 1003, ¶81.
`
`II.
`
`BACKGROUND
`The ’611 Patent
`The ’611 patent “relates to noise suppression systems, devices, and methods
`
`A.
`
`for use in acoustic applications.” Ex. 1001, 1:16-18. A first virtual microphone (V1)
`
`is generated by (i) applying a delay filter (z-γ) to a signal from a first physical
`
`microphone (O1), (ii) applying a calibration filter (α(z)) and an adaptive filter (β(z))
`
`to a signal from a second physical microphone (O2), and (iii) combining the filtered
`
`signals. Id., 5:20-6:19, FIG. 4.
`
`Ex. 1001, FIG. 44
`
`
`
`
`4 Red annotations added throughout.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`Further, a second virtual microphone (V2) is generated by (i) applying an
`
`adaptive filter (β(z)) and a delay filter (z-γ) to the signal from a first physical
`
`microphone (O1), (ii) applying a calibration filter (α(z)) to the signal from a second
`
`physical microphone (O2), and (iii) combining the filtered signals. Id., 5:20-6:19,
`
`FIG. 3.
`
`
`
`Ex. 1001, FIG. 3
`The ratio of energies of the first and second virtual microphones is used “to
`
`determine when speech is occurring.” Id., 6:20-10:8, FIGS. 5-11. A ratio that is
`
`greater than a threshold value is indicative of acoustic voice activity, whereas a ratio
`
`that is less than the threshold value is indicative of an absence of acoustic voice
`
`activity. Id., 6:47-51, 7:5-7, FIGS. 5-11; Ex. 1003, ¶¶42-49.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`B.
`
`Prosecution History
`The claims were allowed after the filing of a terminal disclaimer over U.S.
`
`12/606,146. Ex. 1002, 195-196, 218-219, 227-233.
`
`C.
`
`Level of Ordinary Skill
`A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) would have at least a
`
`bachelor of science in electrical engineering, computer engineering, computer
`
`science, mechanical engineering, or a related discipline, with at least two years of
`
`relevant experience in a field related to acoustics, speech recognition, speech
`
`detection, or signal processing. Ex. 1003, ¶¶22-23. Additional education or industry
`
`experience may compensate for a deficit in the other. Id.
`
`D.
`
`Claim Construction
`No formal claim constructions are necessary because “claim terms need only
`
`be construed to the extent necessary to resolve the controversy.” Well-man, Inc. v.
`
`Eastman Chem. Co., 642 F.3d 1355, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2011).5
`
`
`5 Petitioner is neither conceding that each claim satisfies all statutory requirements,
`
`such as §§101 and 112, nor waiving any arguments concerning claim scope or
`
`grounds that can only be raised in district court.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`III. GROUND 1: AVENDANO AND VISSER (CLAIMS 1-7, 25-28)
`Avendano Overview
`Avendano determines “inter-microphone level differences (ILD) ... based on
`
`A.
`
`energy level differences of a pair of omni-directional microphones,” and uses ILD
`
`“to attenuate noise and enhance speech.” Ex. 1005, 2:5-9.
`
`Avendano discloses “audio device 104” having “primary microphone 106”
`
`and “secondary microphone 108,” which may be “omni-directional microphone[s].”
`
`Id., 3:27-35; FIGS. 1a-1b.
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1005, FIG. 1a
`
`Ex. 1005, FIG. 1b
`
`7
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`Avendano’s “primary microphone 106 is much closer to [an] audio source 102
`
`than the secondary microphone 108,” and thus “the intensity level is higher for the
`
`primary microphone 106 resulting in a larger energy level during a speech/voice
`
`segment.” Id., 3:45-55, FIGS. 1a-1b.
`
`Avendano uses this “level difference … to discriminate speech and noise in
`
`the time-frequency domain.” Id., 3:55-57. For example, Avendano receives signals
`
`from the two microphones (signals x1 and x2), and processes the signals using
`
`“differential microphone array (DMA) module 302” to “create two different
`
`directional patterns around the audio device 104.” Id., 4:20-41. As Avendano
`
`explains, “[e]ach directional pattern is a region about the audio device 104 in which
`
`sounds generated by an audio source 102 within the region may be received by the
`
`microphones 106 and 108 with little attenuation,” and “[s]ounds generated by audio
`
`sources 102 outside of the directional pattern may be attenuated.” Id., 4:41-46.
`
`Avendano’s DMA module 302 generates (i) a first processed signal having a
`
`directional pattern for receiving sounds “within a front cardioid region around the
`
`audio device 104” (i.e., “cardioid primary signal (Cf)”), and (ii) a second processed
`
`signal having a directional pattern for receiving sounds “within a back cardioid
`
`region around the audio device 104” (i.e., “cardioid secondary signal (Cb)”). Id.,
`
`4:47-52, 5:25-35, 9:29-42, Figure 6 (below).
`
`8
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`
`
`Ex. 1005, FIG. 6
`Avendano’s “cardioid primary signal (Cf)” is generated by combining (i)
`
`signal x1 from primary microphone 106, and (ii) signal x2 from secondary
`
`microphone 108 (signal x2 having been filtered by “delay node 404” and “gain
`
`module 406”). Id., 5:15-35, FIG. 4a. Avendano’s “cardioid secondary signal (Cb)”
`
`is generated by combining (i) signal x2 from secondary microphone 108, and (ii)
`
`signal x1 from primary microphone 106 (signal x1 having been filtered by “delay
`
`node 402”). Id. The “delay nodes” are implemented using filters (e.g., “allpass
`
`filters”). Id., 8:47-51.
`
`9
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`
`
`Ex. 1005, FIG. 4a
`Further, Avendano detects speech based on the ratio between (i) the energy of
`
`“cardioid primary signal (Cf)” and (ii) the energy of “cardioid secondary signal
`
`(Cb).” Id., 5:49-6:34. Specifically, an “energy level” (Ef) associated with “cardioid
`
`primary signal (Cf)” is calculated:
`
`Ex. 1005, 5:60
`Further, an “energy level” (Eb) associated with “cardioid secondary signal
`
`
`
`(Cb)” is calculated:
`
`Ex. 1005, 6:5
`The ratio between these two energy levels (ILD) is determined:
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`
`
`Ex. 1005, 6:16
`
`Avendano compares the ratio (ILD) to a “threshold” to determine the presence
`
`or absence of speech:
`
`
`
`Ex. 1005, 6:61
`
`If the ratio (ILD) is “smaller than a threshold value (e.g., threshold=0.5) above
`
`which speech is expected to be,” a value λ1 is set to zero (e.g., indicating an absence
`
`of speech). Id., 6:58-7:3. However, if the ratio (ILD) “starts to rise (e.g., because
`
`speech is present within the large ILD region), λ1 increases” (e.g., is set to one,
`
`indicating a presence of speech). Id.
`
`Avendano’s ratio (ILD) is used to process audio signals “through a noise
`
`reduction system 310” to “enhance the speech of the primary acoustic signal.” Id.,
`
`Abstract, 6:35--8:23, 10:18-50, FIGS. 7-8; Ex. 1003, ¶¶51-67.
`
`11
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`B.
`
`Visser Overview
`Visser “improv[es] the quality of a speech signal extracted from noisy
`
`acoustic environment” using a “voice activity detector.” Ex. 1006, 6:57-60. Visser’s
`
`“speech separation process 100” separates speech from “sound signals from
`
`microphones ... 102 and 104.” Id., 8:4-8, FIG. 1. Specifically, “voice activity
`
`detector (VAD) 106 ... receives two input signals 105, with one of the signals defined
`
`to hold a stronger speech signal,” and generates “control signal 107 ... to activate the
`
`signal separation process only when speech is occurring.” Id., 8:33-40.6
`
`Ex. 1006, FIG. 1
`
`
`
`
`6 All emphasis added.
`
`12
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`Visser’s “signal separation process” is performed based on signals generated
`
`by an “ICA [independent component analysis] or BSS [blind signal source]
`
`processing function.” Id., 8:16-18, 16:3-28, 17:29-30, FIG. 10. Visser’s “ICA or
`
`BSS processing function” receives “signals X1 and X2 ... from channels 610 and
`
`620,” each of the signals “typically ... com[ing] from at least one microphone.” Id.,
`
`17: 36-39, FIG. 10. Further, Visser’s “ICA or BSS processing function” generates
`
`(i) “channel 630 of separated signals U1” (i.e., “speech channel”) that “contains
`
`predominantly desired signals,” namely speech, and (ii) “channel 540 of separated
`
`signals U2” (i.e., “noise channel”) that “contains predominantly noise signals.” Id.,
`
`17:39-44.
`
`Visser’s system generates the “speech channel” by combining “input signal
`
`X1” and “input signal X2” (“input signal X2” having been filtered by “cross filter
`
`w12”). Id., FIG. 10. Further, the system generates the “noise channel” by combining
`
`“input signal X2” and “input signal X1” (“input signal X1” having been filtered by
`
`“cross filter w21”). Id.
`
`13
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`
`
`Ex. 1006, FIG. 10
`These channels are provided as inputs to “VAD 106” (e.g., “input signals
`
`105”) to determine “when speech is present.” Id., 8:33-36.
`
`As Visser describes, “cross filters W21 and W12 can have sparsely distributed
`
`coefficients over time to capture a long period of time delays.” Id., 17:56-64.
`
`Further, the “speech separation process ... may be adaptive and learn according to
`
`the specific acoustic environment,” and to “adapt to particular microphone
`
`placement, the acoustic environment, or a particular user’s speech.” Id., 9:8-12. In
`
`Visser’s “ICA process,” each filter “ha[s] an adaptable and adjustable filter
`
`coefficient.” Id., 16:63-65. Specifically, “the coefficients are adjusted to improve
`
`separation performance ... and the new coefficients are applied. This continual
`
`adaptation of the filter coefficients enables the [speech separation] process ... to
`
`provide a sufficient level of separation, even in a changing acoustic environment.”
`
`Id., 16:65-17:4, FIG. 9; Ex. 1003, ¶¶68-77.
`
`14
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,326,611
`
`C.
`
`Combination of Avendano and Visser
`A POSITA would have found it obvious to combine Avendano and Visser.
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶¶101-125. Both references come from the same field of endeavor of
`
`enhancing speech and attenuating nois