Google, LLC v. Sonos, Inc.
Infringement action filed 9 Aug 2022 in the United States International Trade Commission and closed 13 Dec 2023, with 4 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: judgment on the merits for defendant.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US9632748B2US9812128B2US11050615B2US11024311B2
- Case no.
- 337-TA-1330
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- United States International Trade Commission
- Court level
- ITC
- Case region
- District of Columbia
- Chief judge
- Cameron Elliot
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 9 Aug 2022 – 13 Dec 2023
- Duration
- 491 days
- Basis of termination
- Judgment on the merits for Defendant
- Products & marks
- Apparatus and method for seamless commissioning of wireless devices · Device designation for audio input monitoring · Device leadership negotiation among voice interface devices
Check this patent against your own product
Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.
Get an FTO claim chart- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Device designation for audio input monitoring
A computing device comprises at least one processor, and at least one module operable by the at least one processor to designate a particular computing device from a plurality of computing devices to process audio input, wherein the computing device comprises a first computing device from the plurality of computing devices. The at least one module may be further operable by the at least one processor to, if the particular computing device is not the first computing device, cease processing of audio input, and if the particular computing device is the first computing device, receive first audio input and process the first audio input to determine whether the first audio input includes a predetermined audio command.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 25 Apr 2017
- Earliest priority
- 24 Jun 2014
- Est. expiry
- 29 Jul 2034
- Validity challenges
- 1 on recordIPR2023-01288 · Patentability · filed by SONOS, INC
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- FAABORG, ALEXANDER
- Classification
- G10L21/00G06F3/16G10L15/22G10L15/28
- Prosecution counsel
- Shumaker & Sieffert, P.A.
- Examiner
- RILEY, MARCUS T
Device leadership negotiation among voice interface devices
A method at a first electronic device of multiple electronic devices, each electronic device of the plurality of electronic devices including one or more microphones and a speaker, includes detecting a voice input; determining a quality score for the detected voice input; communicating the quality score to the other devices of the plurality of electronic devices; receiving quality scores generated by the other devices for detection of the voice input by the other devices; if the quality score generated by the first electronic device is the highest amongst the quality scores, outputting an audible and/or visual response to the detected voice input, where the other devices of the plurality of electronic devices forgo outputting an audible response to the detected voice input; and if the quality score generated by the first electronic device is not the highest amongst the quality scores, forgoing outputting a response to the detected voice input.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 7 Nov 2017
- Earliest priority
- 9 Oct 2014
- Est. expiry
- 1 Apr 2035
- Validity challenges
- 1 on recordIPR2022-01594 · Patentability · filed by SONOS, INC
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- MIXTER, KENNETH · MELENDO CASADO, DIEGO · GRUENSTEIN, ALEXANDER HOUSTON · TAI, TERRY · HUGHES, CHRISTOPHER THADDEUS · SHARIFI, MATTHEW NIRVAN
- Classification
- G10L15/00G10L15/32G10L15/22G10L15/08G10L25/60
- Prosecution counsel
- HONIGMAN LLP
- Examiner
- PULLIAS, JESSE
Also asserted in this case
2 moreThe docket lists 4 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 2 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
Parties of record
Google, LLC
- Core tech
- G10L21/00G06F3/16G10L15/22G10L15/28
- Counsel
- Alex Lasher
- Firm
- Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
Sonos, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Bas de Blank
- Firm
- Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Alex Lasher | Google, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Bas de Blank | Sonos, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Participant Disposition: No Violation found”
Case 337-TA-1330 · United States International Trade Commission · closed 13 December 2023
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 337-TA-1330?
337-TA-1330 is a patent infringement action brought by Google, LLC against Sonos, Inc., filed on 9 Aug 2022 in the United States International Trade Commission. The case closed on 13 December 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 337-TA-1330?
US9632748B2 (“Device designation for audio input monitoring”), assigned to GOOGLE LLC, currently active; US9812128B2 (“Device leadership negotiation among voice interface devices”), assigned to GOOGLE LLC, currently active; US11050615B2 (“Apparatus and method for seamless commissioning of wireless devices”), assigned to GOOGLE LLC; US11024311B2 (“Device leadership negotiation among voice interface devices”), assigned to GOOGLE LLC. The record also lists Apparatus and method for seamless commissioning of wireless devices, Device designation for audio input monitoring and Device leadership negotiation among voice interface devices.
How was case 337-TA-1330 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is judgment on the merits for defendant. The termination text reads: “Participant Disposition: No Violation found”
What does judgment on the merits mean?
A judgment on the merits decides the substance of the claims, as opposed to ending the case on procedural grounds.
How long did case 337-TA-1330 take?
491 calendar days, from filing on 9 Aug 2022 to closure on 13 December 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 337-TA-1330?
Chief Judge Cameron Elliot presided. Alex Lasher is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Google. Bas de Blank appears for defendant Sonos.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 337-TA-1330 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.
Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.
No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.
No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.