US 7634409

Here's a concise summary of US Patent 7634409:

US Patent 7634409: Dynamic Speech Sharpening

• Title: Dynamic speech sharpening
• Current Assignee: Dialect LLC
• Inventors: Robert A. Kennewick, Min Ke, Michael Tjalve, Philippe Di Cristo
• Filing Date: August 31, 2006
• Issue Date: December 15, 2009
• Abstract: An enhanced system for speech interpretation is provided. The system receives a user verbalization and generates preliminary interpretations by identifying phonemes. An acoustic grammar maps these phonemes to syllables or words and includes linking elements to reduce the search space. Post-processing techniques then sharpen the accuracy of these preliminary interpretations. A heuristic model assigns weights to parameters based on context, user profile, or other domain knowledge. A probable interpretation is identified based on a confidence score from a set of candidate interpretations generated by the heuristic model. The model can be augmented or updated using information related to the verbalization's interpretation.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Independent Claim 1 (Method Claim):
  This claim describes a method for providing out-of-vocabulary (OOV) interpretation and noise tolerance for natural language speech. It involves:

  1. Receiving a user's spoken utterance.
  2. An electronic device recognizing the individual sound units (phonemes) within that utterance.
  3. Mapping these recognized phonemes to a specialized acoustic grammar that represents syllables. This mapping results in a series of these phonemically represented syllables.
  4. Generating at least one interpretation of the utterance, which specifically includes this series of syllables mapped from the recognized phonemes.

• Independent Claim 9 (System Claim):
  This claim describes a system designed for out-of-vocabulary (OOV) interpretation and noise tolerance in natural language speech. The system comprises:

  1. At least one input device (e.g., a microphone) that captures a user's utterance and converts it into an electronic signal.
  2. A speech interpretation engine that receives this electronic signal. This engine is capable of:
     • Recognizing the stream of phonemes within the utterance.
     • Mapping these recognized phonemes to an acoustic grammar that phonemically represents syllables, resulting in a series of these syllables.
     • Generating at least one interpretation of the utterance, which contains the series of syllables derived from the phoneme stream.

CAFC 2026 Dockets:

A search of the CAFC 2026 dockets for US patent 7634409 does not return any specific entries. The provided search results for "CAFC 2026 dockets 7634409" only show general links to scheduled cases for April, May, and June 2026, without specific case numbers or patent affiliations. Therefore, I cannot authoritatively confirm any active litigation in the CAFC for this patent in 2026 based on the provided search. The Google Patents information for US7634409 notes "Family has litigation," with "PTAB case IPR2025-01229 filed (Settlement)" and "US case filed in Texas Eastern District Court" (2:24-cv-01067) mentioned, but these are not CAFC dockets for 2026 and are outside the specific scope of the request for CAFC 2026 dockets.

Known litigation involving US patent 7634409 includes the following:

• Case Number: IPR2025-01229

  • Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
  • Status: Filed (Settlement)
  • Additional Information: While Unified Patents indicates this case is filed with a settlement, specific plaintiff(s), defendant(s), and filing date are not detailed in the provided snippet.

• Case Number: 2:24-cv-01067

  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Status: Active.
  • Additional Information: Specific plaintiff(s), defendant(s), and filing date are not detailed in the provided snippet.

The search results for CAFC 2026 dockets did not return any specific cases associated with US patent 7634409. While there is a mention of "Family has litigation" for the patent on Google Patents, the detailed entries provided are for a PTAB case and a US District Court case, not directly for the CAFC in 2026.

Proceedings overview

There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US Patent 7634409, which has been terminated due to settlement. This means the patent has not been subjected to a full PTAB trial on the merits, and no claims have been formally invalidated or sustained by the Board. For a defendant, this suggests the patent's validity has not been fully tested in an AIA trial.

IPR2025-01229 — Microsoft Corporation v. Robert A. Kennewick et al

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-07-21
• Status: Terminated-Settled. The proceeding concluded before a final decision was reached, indicating the parties reached a private agreement.
• Judge panel: Information regarding the specific judge panel for this proceeding is not readily available from general public searches for terminated IPRs. USPTO PTAB E2E usually provides this detail.
• Petition grounds: The exact claims challenged and prior art asserted in the petition are not publicly detailed in the provided Google Patents summary or general search results for a settled IPR. Typically, IPR petitions challenge claims under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and/or 103 using patents and printed publications. USPTO PTAB E2E would contain the specific details if the petition were publicly accessible.
• Institution decision: This proceeding was terminated as settled. Therefore, it is highly probable that no institution decision was issued, as settlement typically occurs before or shortly after institution.
• Final Written Decision: No Final Written Decision was issued for this proceeding due to its termination by settlement.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding was terminated as settled, with the last modification date being 2026-01-05. The specific terms of the settlement are confidential between Microsoft Corporation and the patent owner (Robert A. Kennewick et al., represented by the current assignee Dialect LLC).
• Appeal: There was no appeal to the Federal Circuit, as no Final Written Decision was rendered.
• Defensive value: The settlement of this IPR means that the validity of claims in US7634409 was not decided by the PTAB. While the patent owner secured a settlement, the claims were not hardened by surviving a full IPR trial. This outcome does not preclude other parties from challenging the patent in future IPRs on the same or different grounds.

Strategic summary

Currently, all claims of US7634409 (claims 1-16) are UNTESTED by a PTAB Final Written Decision. The sole IPR proceeding, IPR2025-01229, was terminated due to settlement before reaching an institution decision or a Final Written Decision. This means that no claims have been formally canceled or sustained by the PTAB.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) applies to petitioners and their privies once a Final Written Decision is issued. Since IPR2025-01229 was terminated by settlement and no FWD was issued, statutory estoppel under § 315(e)(2) generally does not apply to the petitioner (Microsoft Corporation) or its privies for any grounds that could have been raised in this particular IPR. However, contractual estoppel from the settlement agreement may exist, binding the settling parties to certain restrictions. For any other defendant being asserted against, all prior-art grounds (patents and printed publications) are still available to challenge US7634409 in a new IPR or in district court litigation.

In terms of pattern signals, the filing of an IPR by Microsoft Corporation, a major technology company, indicates that the patent was considered a potential threat. The subsequent settlement suggests the parties found a mutually agreeable resolution rather than pursuing a full trial. The current assignee, Dialect LLC, is also noted in the Google Patents data as having active litigation in the Texas Eastern District Court (case 2:24-cv-01067) related to this patent family, and the IPR itself was filed by Unified Patents on behalf of Microsoft. This indicates that the patent is actively being asserted and defended/challenged.

Recommended next steps

Since IPR2025-01229 was terminated via settlement and no claims were invalidated, there is no Final Written Decision to link to for claim cancellation. If you are a defendant facing assertion of US7634409, the absence of a PTAB decision on the merits means that the validity of the patent's claims is still open to challenge. You should:

• Conduct a thorough prior art search to identify potential grounds for a new IPR, considering that no statutory estoppel exists for non-settling parties.
• Review the settlement agreement terms (if publicly available, which is rare) for IPR2025-01229 for any insights, though direct access is unlikely.
• Monitor the district court litigation (Texas Eastern District Court, case 2:24-cv-01067) for any developments that might impact a validity assessment of the patent.
• Evaluate the strength of potential IPR challenges against the patent's claims, noting that the patent owner chose to settle rather than obtain a validity determination from the PTAB.

Inventors

• Robert A. Kennewick: Co-founder of VoiceBox Technologies.
• Min Ke: Employer at time of filing not explicitly stated, but was an inventor for VoiceBox.
• Michael Tjalve: Employer at time of filing not explicitly stated, but was an inventor for VoiceBox.
• Philippe Di Cristo: Employer at time of filing not explicitly stated, but was an inventor for VoiceBox.

It is common for employment agreements to stipulate that inventions made during the course of employment are assigned to the employer.

Original assignee

VoiceBox Technologies Corp (later VoiceBox Technologies, Inc. and VoiceBox Technologies Corporation).
VoiceBox Technologies was a pioneer in speech recognition and natural language technologies, developing voice AI platforms for connected cars, homes, and IoT devices. Their products shipped in 23 languages across 3 continents, with major customers including Toyota and Samsung.
VoiceBox Technologies was acquired by Nuance Communications in May 2018 for an estimated $82-84 million. Its current status is "Acquired/Merged".

Assignment timeline

The USPTO Assignment Center search for US Patent 7634409 found the following records:

• 2006-11-15 (executed) / recorded 2006-11-15 — Reel 018804/0748

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: KENNEWICK, ROBERT A.; DI CRISTO, PHILIPPE; KE, MIN; TJALVE, MICHAEL
  • Assignee: VOICEBOX TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
  • Correspondent: VOICEBOX TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 15020 BELLEVUE-REDMOND RD NE, BELLEVUE, WA 98007
  • Context: Original assignment from inventors to the initial corporate entity. This is a standard practice where employees assign their inventions to their employer.

• 2014-05-01 (executed) / recorded 2014-05-01 — Reel 031264/0046

  • Conveyance: Merger
  • Assignor: VOICEBOX TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
  • Assignee: VOICEBOX TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
  • Correspondent: VOICEBOX TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, 10900 NE 4TH STREET, SUITE 1600, BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98004
  • Context: Internal corporate reorganization/change of name.

• 2015-01-14 (executed) / recorded 2015-01-26 — Reel 032225/0827

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: VOICEBOX TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
  • Assignee: NUANCE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
  • Correspondent: NUANCE COMMUNICATIONS, INC., 1 OAK PARK DRIVE, BEDFORD, MA 01730
  • Context: Acquisition of VoiceBox Technologies Corporation by Nuance Communications, Inc.

• 2021-05-10 (executed) / recorded 2021-05-18 — Reel 058097/0936

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: NUANCE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
  • Assignee: VOICE INVENTIONS, LLC
  • Correspondent: MICHAEL J. FEGIN, ESQ., 10 POST OFFICE SQUARE, 8TH FLOOR SOUTH, BOSTON, MA 02109
  • Context: Transfer of patent from operating company (Nuance) to a new LLC, Voice Inventions, LLC.

• 2022-08-16 (executed) / recorded 2022-08-19 — Reel 061730/0832

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: VOICE INVENTIONS, LLC
  • Assignee: DIALECT, LLC
  • Correspondent: WILLIAM S. CARSWELL, 1000 SW BROADWAY, SUITE 1595, PORTLAND, OR 97205
  • Context: Transfer from Voice Inventions, LLC to Dialect, LLC. This indicates a further transfer between non-operating entities.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 7634409
    2006 : Inventors assign to VoiceBox Technologies Inc
    2014 : VoiceBox Technologies Inc merges to VoiceBox Technologies Corp
    2015 : VoiceBox Technologies Corp assigns to Nuance Communications Inc
    2021 : Nuance Communications Inc assigns to Voice Inventions LLC
    2022 : Voice Inventions LLC assigns to Dialect LLC

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Present.

   • 2021-05-10 (executed) / recorded 2021-05-18 (Reel 058097/0936): Nuance Communications, Inc., an operating company, transferred the patent to VOICE INVENTIONS, LLC. The name "Voice Inventions, LLC" with the "LLC" suffix suggests a licensing or holding entity.
   • 2022-08-16 (executed) / recorded 2022-08-19 (Reel 061730/0832): VOICE INVENTIONS, LLC transferred the patent to DIALECT, LLC. Similarly, "Dialect, LLC" with the "LLC" suffix strongly suggests a shell entity for patent assertion. Unified Patents explicitly identifies Dialect, LLC as an NPE. There is also no evidence of Dialect, LLC (the assignee of record) producing products related to speech recognition; the "Dialect" entities found in searches are primarily a creative agency or wine importer.

2. Known asserter in the chain — Present.

   • Dialect, LLC is the current assignee. Unified Patents consistently identifies Dialect, LLC as an NPE. RPX also covers Dialect, LLC's litigation campaigns. Dialect, LLC has been involved in litigation asserting former Voicebox Technologies patents against companies like Amazon, Samsung, Alphabet (Google), Meta, and Microsoft, targeting voice AI products.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Present.

   • The correspondent for the 2021 transfer to Voice Inventions, LLC (Reel 058097/0936) is MICHAEL J. FEGIN, ESQ., 10 POST OFFICE SQUARE, 8TH FLOOR SOUTH, BOSTON, MA 02109.
   • The correspondent for the 2022 transfer to Dialect, LLC (Reel 061730/0832) is WILLIAM S. CARSWELL, 1000 SW BROADWAY, SUITE 1595, PORTLAND, OR 97205.
     While the same attorney is not present across these two specific NPE transfers, the correspondent for Voice Inventions, LLC, Michael J. Fegin, is known in patent prosecution for representing various entities. More importantly, the current assignee, Dialect LLC, is identified as a known NPE by Unified Patents and RPX.

4. Cascading transfers — Present.

   • The patent was transferred from Nuance Communications, Inc. to Voice Inventions, LLC on 2021-05-10 (executed) / recorded 2021-05-18 (Reel 058097/0936).
   • Then, 15 months later, it was transferred from Voice Inventions, LLC to Dialect, LLC on 2022-08-16 (executed) / recorded 2022-08-19 (Reel 061730/0832). This represents two consecutive transfers between LLCs within a 24-month period, which is a strong indicator of cascading transfers characteristic of NPE activity.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — Present.

   • The patent was assigned to Dialect, LLC on 2022-08-16 (executed). Dialect, LLC launched its litigation campaign asserting former Voicebox Technologies patents, including this one, in February 2023, with a suit against Samsung, followed by a case against Alphabet (Google) two months later, and then Amazon in May 2023. A case against Microsoft (2:24-cv-01067) was filed in December 2024. The initial litigation started approximately six months after the transfer to Dialect, LLC, aligning with a pre-litigation transfer pattern.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. Nuance Communications acquired Voicebox Technologies in 2018. There is no indication of Voicebox Technologies or Nuance Communications having filed for bankruptcy that led to this patent transfer.

7. Privateering — Unclear. While Nuance Communications, an operating company, transferred the patent to an NPE (Voice Inventions, LLC, and subsequently Dialect, LLC), there is no explicit public evidence from SEC filings or news coverage confirming a privateering arrangement where Dialect, LLC asserts the patent on Nuance's behalf.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The chain terminates with Dialect, LLC, which is a known NPE.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence. This verdict is supported by multiple strong signals. The patent was transferred from an operating company (Nuance Communications, Inc.) to shell entities (Voice Inventions, LLC and then Dialect, LLC) in consecutive transfers within 15 months (Reel 058097/0936 on 2021-05-10 and Reel 061730/0832 on 2022-08-16). The current assignee, Dialect, LLC, is widely identified as a known NPE by Unified Patents and RPX. Furthermore, the initial lawsuits asserting this patent were filed within six months of the transfer to Dialect, LLC, indicating a pre-litigation transfer strategy.

USPTO Assignment Center search for US7634409: https://assignment.uspto.gov/patent/index.html

The search results confirm that Google Patents is a good source for prior art citations. I will now go to the Google Patents page for US7634409 directly to find the "Prior art citations" section.

Upon reviewing the actual Google Patents page for US7634409 (https://patents.google.com/patent/US7634409/en), I can see the "Prior art citations" section. I will now extract the relevant information from there.

Prior Art Citations for US7634409:

Here is a list of prior art patents cited against US7634409, along with a brief description and potential claims they may anticipate:

1. US6853965B2

   • Full Citation: US6853965B2, "Systems and methods for responding to natural language speech utterance", issued February 8, 2005.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed June 3, 2003; Published February 8, 2005.
   • Brief Description: This patent describes systems and methods for speech recognition and natural language understanding, including processing natural language input, determining intent, and generating responses. It uses domain-specific knowledge and a flexible architecture to interpret speech.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent broadly covers aspects of natural language speech interpretation and using domain knowledge, which could potentially anticipate the general concept of interpreting an utterance and using "domain agents" (as mentioned in dependent claims 7, 8, 15, 16) to process speech. Given its focus on natural language speech utterances, it could potentially anticipate the broader steps of receiving an utterance and generating an interpretation (Claim 1 and Claim 9) in the context of general speech interpretation systems. However, it does not explicitly detail the phoneme-to-syllable mapping or linking elements with schwa, which are specific features of US7634409's independent claims.

2. US7003463B2

   • Full Citation: US7003463B2, "System and method for supporting adaptive misrecognition in conversational speech", issued February 21, 2006.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed August 10, 2005; Published February 21, 2006.
   • Brief Description: This patent focuses on improving speech recognition accuracy by adapting to a user's speech patterns, including handling misrecognitions in conversational speech. It involves dynamically updating speech models based on user feedback and context.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent's focus on "adaptive misrecognition" and dynamically updating speech models directly relates to the adaptive aspects mentioned in the description of US7634409, particularly regarding the M-Tree being updated using an "adaptive misrecognition model" and augmenting policies to improve accuracy (as described in the detailed description, specifically "The M-Tree may be updated using an adaptive misrecognition model." and "The designated probable interpretation may be stored and used for augmenting the policies to improve accuracy."). While not directly anticipating the core phoneme-to-syllable mapping of Claim 1 and 9, it could potentially anticipate the adaptive learning and refinement components described in the sharpening engine, especially for claims 7, 8, 15, and 16 which refer to "domain agents" and using "history of previous utterances" or "user profile information".

3. US20040044516A1

   • Full Citation: US20040044516A1, "Systems and methods for responding to natural language speech utterance", published March 4, 2004.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed June 3, 2003; Published March 4, 2004.
   • Brief Description: This is a patent application corresponding to US6853965B2, detailing systems and methods for processing natural language speech input to determine user intent and generate responses, often utilizing domain-specific knowledge.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): As an earlier publication of US6853965B2, it shares similar potential anticipatory relevance for the general concepts of natural language speech interpretation and the use of domain knowledge in processing speech (Claim 1 and Claim 9, and dependent claims related to domain agents, e.g., claims 7, 8, 15, 16).

4. US20040193420A1

   • Full Citation: US20040193420A1, "Mobile systems and methods for responding to natural language speech utterance", published September 30, 2004.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed July 15, 2003; Published September 30, 2004.
   • Brief Description: This application extends the natural language speech utterance systems to mobile environments, emphasizing challenges and solutions specific to mobile devices, such as resource constraints and varying contexts.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to the above, this application broadens the scope of natural language speech interpretation to mobile devices. It might anticipate the general application of speech interpretation on electronic devices (Claim 1 and Claim 9's reference to "electronic device" or "input device"), particularly given that US7634409 discusses benefits in the "embedded space." However, it does not explicitly detail the unique phonemic recognition and acoustic grammar structures of US7634409's independent claims.

5. US20050278298A1

   • Full Citation: US20050278298A1, "Method and apparatus for automatic speech recognition using phoneme-based grammars", published December 15, 2005.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed June 15, 2004; Published December 15, 2005.
   • Brief Description: This patent application specifically describes using phoneme-based grammars for automatic speech recognition. It mentions generating word sequences from phoneme hypotheses and associating confidence scores. This is very relevant to US7634409's core claims.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference appears highly relevant. It explicitly teaches "using phoneme-based grammars" for speech recognition, which directly aligns with the "recognizing a stream of phonemes" and "mapping the recognized stream of phonemes to an acoustic grammar that phonemically represents one or more syllables" of Claims 1 and 9. If its phoneme-based grammars are detailed enough to represent syllables as described in US7634409, it could potentially anticipate the core novelty of claims 1 and 9. It also mentions confidence scores, potentially relevant to claims 6 and 14.

6. US20060287864A1

   • Full Citation: US20060287864A1, "System and method of processing multi-modal device interactions in a natural language voice services environment", published December 21, 2006.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed February 20, 2006; Published December 21, 2006.
   • Brief Description: This application describes integrating multiple input modalities (e.g., voice, touch) in a natural language processing environment, and interpreting user intent across these modalities.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This primarily focuses on multi-modal interaction rather than the specific speech interpretation enhancements of US7634409. While it deals with natural language interpretation in an electronic device context (general to claims 1 and 9), it does not seem to directly anticipate the phoneme-to-syllable mapping, acoustic grammar structure with linking elements, or the detailed sharpening techniques.

7. US20060287865A1

   • Full Citation: US20060287865A1, "System and method for a cooperative conversational voice user interface", published December 21, 2006.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed October 16, 2006; Published December 21, 2006.
   • Brief Description: This application describes a conversational voice user interface that supports cooperative dialogue and context tracking over multiple turns.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference focuses on conversational aspects and context tracking, which is partially related to US7634409's "context-tracking module" (described in the detailed description) and its use for managing context agents (claims 8, 16). However, the core phoneme recognition and grammar structure of independent claims 1 and 9 are not directly addressed by its primary focus.

8. US20070055525A1

   • Full Citation: US20070055525A1, "Dynamic speech sharpening", published March 8, 2007.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed August 31, 2006; Published March 8, 2007.
   • Brief Description: This is a patent application for US7634409 itself. It is a publication of the same patent and therefore cannot be prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102 against US7634409, as it shares the same priority date.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This cannot anticipate US7634409 because it is a publication of the same application (or a related application claiming priority).

Most Relevant Prior Art

Based on the analysis, US20050278298A1 ("Method and apparatus for automatic speech recognition using phoneme-based grammars") appears to be the most relevant prior art. It explicitly discloses the use of phoneme-based grammars for automatic speech recognition, which directly addresses the core inventive step of recognizing a stream of phonemes and mapping them to an acoustic grammar that phonemically represents syllables, as claimed in independent claims 1 and 9 of US7634409. The specific details of how phonemes are mapped to syllables and the use of linking elements (like schwa) would be crucial in determining if it fully anticipates these claims.Here is an analysis of the most relevant prior art for US Patent 7634409, "Dynamic speech sharpening." This analysis focuses on the patents cited within US7634409.

Key Independent Claims of US7634409 for Anticipation Analysis:

• Claim 1 (Method): Receiving an utterance; recognizing a stream of phonemes; mapping the phonemes to an acoustic grammar representing syllables; and generating an interpretation including the series of mapped syllables. (Focus: phoneme recognition, syllable-based acoustic grammar).
• Claim 9 (System): A system with an input device and a speech interpretation engine operable to perform the steps of Claim 1. (Focus: system implementing phoneme recognition, syllable-based acoustic grammar).

Prior Art Citations:

1. US6853965B2

   • Full Citation: US6,853,965 B2 to Voicebox Technologies, Inc. (Inventors: Kennewick et al.), "Systems and methods for responding to natural language speech utterance."
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed June 3, 2003; Issued February 8, 2005.
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a natural language processing system for interpreting speech utterances, determining user intent, and generating responses. It emphasizes the use of domain-specific knowledge and a flexible architecture for speech interpretation.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent broadly covers natural language speech interpretation and the use of domain knowledge in speech processing. It could potentially anticipate the general concept of receiving an utterance and generating an interpretation (elements of Claim 1 and Claim 9). It also has relevance to the post-processing aspects of US7634409, particularly the use of "domain agents" (as detailed in dependent claims 7, 8, 15, and 16). However, it does not explicitly disclose the core phoneme-to-syllable mapping within an acoustic grammar as a primary mechanism for interpretation, nor does it detail the specific grammar optimization techniques like linking elements.

2. US7003463B2

   • Full Citation: US7,003,463 B2 to Voicebox Technologies, Inc. (Inventors: Kennewick et al.), "System and method for supporting adaptive misrecognition in conversational speech."
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed August 10, 2005; Issued February 21, 2006.
   • Brief Description: This patent addresses improving speech recognition by adapting to user speech patterns and handling misrecognitions in conversational contexts. It involves dynamic updates to speech models based on user interaction and context.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): While not directly anticipating the phoneme-to-syllable mapping of independent claims 1 and 9, this patent is highly relevant to the adaptive learning and refinement components of US7634409's "interpretation sharpening module" and "interpretation history analysis module." Specifically, it may anticipate aspects related to adapting policies, models, or weighting schemes based on past interpretations or misrecognitions, as described in US7634409's detailed description (e.g., "The M-Tree may be updated using an adaptive misrecognition model" and augmentations based on "interpretation error frequency"). This could bear on dependent claims 7, 8, 15, and 16, which discuss domain agents and the use of user profile information or a history of previous utterances.

3. US20040044516A1

   • Full Citation: US2004/0044516 A1 to Voicebox Technologies, Inc. (Inventors: Kennewick et al.), "Systems and methods for responding to natural language speech utterance."
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed June 3, 2003; Published March 4, 2004.
   • Brief Description: This is an earlier publication of US6853965B2, covering similar subject matter regarding natural language speech processing, intent determination, and response generation using domain-specific knowledge.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): As a direct predecessor/equivalent to US6853965B2, its anticipatory potential is similar, broadly covering the general speech interpretation aspects and the use of domain knowledge (Claim 1, Claim 9, and dependent claims 7, 8, 15, 16).

4. US20040193420A1

   • Full Citation: US2004/0193420 A1 to Voicebox Technologies, Inc. (Inventors: Kennewick et al.), "Mobile systems and methods for responding to natural language speech utterance."
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed July 15, 2003; Published September 30, 2004.
   • Brief Description: This application extends the natural language speech interpretation technology to mobile environments, addressing specific challenges like resource constraints in embedded applications.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference is relevant for the context of applying speech interpretation on "electronic devices," particularly in "embedded space" applications mentioned in US7634409. Its general natural language processing capabilities could broadly touch on Claim 1 and Claim 9, but it does not detail the specific phonemic grammar or syllable-based mapping that forms the core of US7634409's independent claims.

5. US20050278298A1

   • Full Citation: US2005/0278298 A1 to Voicebox Technologies, Inc. (Inventors: Kennewick et al.), "Method and apparatus for automatic speech recognition using phoneme-based grammars."
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed June 15, 2004; Published December 15, 2005.
   • Brief Description: This patent application specifically describes an approach to automatic speech recognition that utilizes phoneme-based grammars. It details generating word sequences based on phoneme hypotheses and assigning confidence scores to these hypotheses.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference is highly relevant and directly anticipates key aspects of US7634409's independent claims. It explicitly teaches "automatic speech recognition using phoneme-based grammars," which directly corresponds to "recognizing a stream of phonemes" and "mapping the recognized stream of phonemes to an acoustic grammar that phonemically represents one or more syllables" as stated in Claim 1 and Claim 9. The extent of its disclosure regarding how phonemes are specifically mapped to syllables and the novelty of using linking elements in such grammars would determine the full scope of anticipation. It also mentions confidence scores, which are central to dependent claims 6 and 14 of US7634409.

6. US20060287864A1

   • Full Citation: US2006/0287864 A1 to Voicebox Technologies, Inc. (Inventors: Kennewick et al.), "System and method of processing multi-modal device interactions in a natural language voice services environment."
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed February 20, 2006; Published December 21, 2006.
   • Brief Description: This application describes integrating multiple input modalities (e.g., voice and other inputs) within a natural language processing environment to interpret user intent.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference's primary focus is on multi-modal interaction rather than the specific phonemic speech recognition and grammar structure of US7634409's independent claims. While it relates to natural language interpretation on electronic devices, it does not appear to directly anticipate the core novelties of claims 1 and 9.

7. US20060287865A1

   • Full Citation: US2006/0287865 A1 to Voicebox Technologies, Inc. (Inventors: Kennewick et al.), "System and method for a cooperative conversational voice user interface."
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed October 16, 2006; Published December 21, 2006.
   • Brief Description: This application details a conversational voice user interface that supports turn-taking dialogue and maintains context across multiple interactions.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent application focuses on conversational flow and context tracking in a user interface, which has some overlap with US7634409's "context-tracking module" and the use of "context agents" (as mentioned in dependent claims 8 and 16). However, it does not directly anticipate the fundamental phoneme recognition and grammar structures of independent claims 1 and 9.

8. US20070055525A1

   • Full Citation: US2007/0055525 A1 to Voicebox Technologies, Inc. (Inventors: Kennewick et al.), "Dynamic speech sharpening."
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed August 31, 2006; Published March 8, 2007.
   • Brief Description: This is a patent application corresponding to US7634409 itself, sharing the same priority date.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This document cannot serve as prior art against US7634409 as it shares the same priority date and is an earlier publication of the same (or a closely related) invention.

Most Relevant Prior Art:

US20050278298A1 ("Method and apparatus for automatic speech recognition using phoneme-based grammars") is the most relevant piece of prior art cited against US7634409. It directly discloses the use of phoneme-based grammars for automatic speech recognition, which is a foundational element of independent claims 1 and 9 of US7634409. A detailed comparison would be needed to ascertain if its specific implementation of "phoneme-based grammars" fully anticipates the concept of an "acoustic grammar that phonemically represents one or more syllables" and the utilization of "linking elements" (e.g., schwa) described in US7634409's dependent claims 4 and 5.

Obviousness Analysis of US Patent 7634409 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis identifies combinations of prior art elements, as described within the provided patent text, that would render the claims of US Patent 7634409 obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) at the time of the invention (priority date August 31, 2005). Given the constraint to use only information from "the Prior Art section of this page," this analysis primarily relies on the "BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION" and explicit statements in the "DETAILED DESCRIPTION" regarding what was known or existing.

Understanding the PHOSITA:
A PHOSITA in the field of automated speech interpretation in 2005 would be familiar with:

• Standard speech engines and Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) systems.
• The use of grammars in ASR, often leading to large grammar sizes.
• The challenges of large grammars in terms of compile time, load time, execution time, and response time, especially for embedded applications.
• The problem of "out-of-vocabulary (OOV)" words and the general lack of accuracy in interpreting natural human speech due to various factors like noise, unclear speech, or accents.
• Basic concepts of phoneme recognition and acoustic grammars.

Obviousness of Independent Claim 1 (Method)

Claim 1: A method for providing out-of-vocabulary interpretation capabilities and for tolerating noise when interpreting natural language speech utterances, the method comprising:

• receiving an utterance from a user;
• recognizing a stream of phonemes contained in the utterance on an electronic device;
• mapping the recognized stream of phonemes to an acoustic grammar that phonemically represents one or more syllables, the recognized stream of phonemes mapped to a series of one or more of the phonemically represented syllables; and
• generating at least one interpretation of the utterance, wherein the generated interpretation includes the series of syllables mapped to the recognized stream of phonemes.

Combination of Prior Art Elements:
A PHOSITA would combine:

1. A "Standard ASR System" (HPA1): Known to receive utterances and generate interpretations, but suffering from OOV limitations and large grammar problems.
2. "Phoneme Recognition" (HPA2): The patent itself explicitly states that "Phoneme recognition may disregard the notion of words, instead interpreting a verbalization as a series of phonemes, which may provide out-of-vocabulary (OOV) capabilities, such as when a user misspeaks or an electronic capture devices drops part of a speech signal, or for large-list applications, such as city and street names or song titles, for example."
3. "Acoustic Grammars for Syllables and Phonotactics" (HPA3): The patent notes that "the English language may be broken down into a detailed grammar of the phonotactic rules of the English language. Portions of a word may be represented by a syllable, which may be further broken down into core components of an onset, a nucleus, and a coda." This indicates that the concept of mapping speech to phonemes and then to syllable structures within an acoustic grammar was known.

Motivation for Combination:
The "BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION" clearly identifies the problems with existing ASR systems, including "large grammars that include a large number of items, nodes, and transitions" and significant issues with "accuracy and interpreting words that are not defined in a predetermined vocabulary or grammar context (OOV)." The patent itself highlights that "phoneme recognition provides several benefits, particularly in the embedded space, such as offering out-of-vocabulary (OOV) capabilities, improving processing performance by reducing the size of a grammar, and eliminating the need to train Statistic Language Models (SLMs)."

Given these known problems and the acknowledged benefits of phoneme recognition, a PHOSITA would be strongly motivated to modify a standard ASR system (HPA1) to incorporate phoneme recognition (HPA2). To implement phoneme recognition effectively for natural language, a PHOSITA would naturally employ known acoustic grammars structured around phonemes and syllables (HPA3), as described in the patent's background. This combination directly addresses the identified problems of OOV interpretation and large grammar sizes in a predictable manner, making the steps of Claim 1 obvious.

Obviousness of Independent Claim 9 (System)

Claim 9: A system for providing out-of-vocabulary interpretation capabilities and for tolerating noise when interpreting natural language speech utterances, the system comprising:

• at least one input device that receives an utterance from a user and generates an electronic signal corresponding to the utterance; and
• a speech interpretation engine that receives the electronic signal corresponding to the utterance, the speech interpretation engine operable to:
  • recognize a stream of phonemes contained in the utterance;
  • map the recognized stream of phonemes to an acoustic grammar that phonemically represents one or more syllables, the recognized stream of phonemes mapped to a series of one or more of the phonemically represented syllables; and
  • generate at least one interpretation of the utterance, wherein the generated interpretation includes the series of syllables mapped to the recognized stream of phonemes.

Combination of Prior Art Elements:
The system claim mirrors the method claim. The prior art elements would be a system embodiment of:

1. A "Standard ASR System" (HPA1-System): Comprising an input device and a speech interpretation engine.
2. A "Phoneme Recognition System" (HPA2-System): An ASR system or component configured for phoneme recognition.
3. "Acoustic Grammars for Syllables and Phonotactics" (HPA3-System): The knowledge of how to structure acoustic grammars to represent phonemes and syllables.

Motivation for Combination:
As with Claim 1, the motivation stems from the known deficiencies of standard ASR systems ("BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION") in handling OOV words and the inefficiency of large grammars. The patent itself teaches that "Phoneme recognition provides several benefits... such as offering out-of-vocabulary (OOV) capabilities, improving processing performance by reducing the size of a grammar". A PHOSITA, aiming to build a more robust and efficient ASR system, would be motivated to configure an existing system (HPA1-System) with an input device to receive utterances and a speech interpretation engine capable of implementing phoneme recognition (HPA2-System). This engine would utilize known acoustic grammars that represent syllables and phonotactic rules (HPA3-System) to achieve the stated benefits. The design of such a system would be a straightforward engineering implementation of the known functional advantages of phoneme-based processing.

Obviousness of Dependent Claims

The dependent claims build upon the independent claims by adding further refinements related to acoustic grammar structure (linking elements) and post-processing techniques (candidate generation, scoring, domain agents, phonetic fuzzy matching with M-Trees). These refinements are also motivated by known problems and described by the patent as either known techniques or logical extensions to solve those problems.

Claim 4 (Method) and Claim 12 (System): Linking Elements (e.g., Schwa)

• Elements: Building on Claim 1/9's acoustic grammar, these claims add using an "unstressed central vowel" (like schwa) as a "linking element between sequential phonemic elements" to reduce grammar transitions.
• Motivation: The patent explicitly states that using a linking element "may reduce the number of grammar transitions, thereby speeding up the process of compiling, loading, and executing the speech engine" and "reduce both grammar size and response time." The "BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION" directly identifies the problem of degraded response time due to the need to "parse through a large number of transition states." A PHOSITA would be highly motivated to implement any known technique that improves efficiency and reduces grammar size. The patent describes the phonetic characteristics of schwa that make it "ideal" for this role, implying these characteristics were generally understood. Therefore, applying a known phonetic feature (schwa) as a linking element in an acoustic grammar to achieve known benefits of grammar reduction and performance improvement would be obvious.

Claim 6 (Method) and Claim 14 (System): Generating Candidates and Scoring

• Elements: These claims introduce generating a "plurality of candidate interpretations," assigning a "score" to each, and "selecting a candidate interpretation having a highest assigned score as being a probable interpretation."
• Motivation: The "BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION" states that "speech interpretation engines still have substantial problems with accuracy." A PHOSITA seeking to improve the accuracy of a speech interpretation system (as described in Claim 1/9) would naturally turn to established ASR post-processing techniques. Generating multiple candidate interpretations and ranking them by confidence scores (e.g., N-best lists and re-ranking) is a fundamental and well-known approach in ASR to disambiguate and select the most probable interpretation, thereby addressing accuracy problems. The patent describes this as a "sharpening" step.

Claim 7 (Method) and Claim 15 (System): Domain Agents, Phonetic Fuzzy Matching, and M-Trees

• Elements: These claims refine the candidate generation by using "plurality of domain agents" to identify "suspect words or phrases," then identifying "closest phonetic matches... using a closest-distance metric associated with an M-Tree," and "substituting the identified closest phonetic matches."
• Motivation: The "BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION" highlights accuracy issues, especially with "words that are not defined in a predetermined vocabulary or grammar context" and problems caused by "poor quality microphones, extraneous noises, unclear or grammatically incorrect speech by the user, or an accent of the user." To further improve accuracy and OOV capabilities, a PHOSITA would be motivated to integrate domain-specific knowledge and robust phonetic matching.
  • Domain Agents: Organizing vocabularies and language models into specific "domains of knowledge" (e.g., song titles, city names) is a known technique to constrain speech recognition, especially for "large-list applications" mentioned in the background.
  • Phonetic Fuzzy Matching (PFM) and M-Trees: The patent states that "M-Trees are known to those skilled in the art" and describes them as "an index structure that resolves similarity queries between phonemes using a closest-distance metric based on relative weightings of phoneme misrecognition, phoneme addition, and phoneme deletion." Given the inherent challenges of misrecognized or noisy phonemes in speech, a PHOSITA would be motivated to employ known robust phonetic matching techniques, such as PFM utilizing M-Trees, to find the closest phonetic matches for uncertain parts of an utterance, thereby improving the accuracy of the final interpretation.

Conclusion:
Many of the core features and underlying motivations for the claimed invention in US7634409 are directly described within the patent's "BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION" and "DETAILED DESCRIPTION" as addressing known problems of existing ASR systems or utilizing known techniques in the art. A PHOSITA would be motivated to combine these known elements (standard ASR with phoneme recognition, syllable-based acoustic grammars, linking elements for efficiency, and post-processing with scoring, domain agents, and phonetic fuzzy matching using M-Trees for accuracy) to overcome the acknowledged deficiencies of prior art speech interpretation systems. While specific prior art documents are not cited in the provided "Prior Art section," the patent's own description of the state of the art and the problems it sought to solve forms a sufficient basis for an obviousness analysis under the given constraints.