[trollingpenalty]

Defendant should not have so engaged Plaintiff.

That being said, shouldn't it be trivial to find prior art; prior software or articles already published on the internet that does what USPTO allowed Plaintiff to patent (2017) after searching only its own database?

[trollingpenalty]

Please understand how frustrating this obvious, on a mobile PC, prior-art-invalidateable patent is:

   def on_voice_input(audio):
      text = speech_to_text(audio)
      tasks = parse_text(text) #
      for task in tasks:
          exec(task) # run locally, or
          exec("ssh user@remote_host -- $task") # run remotely

Isn't that what Hal does in "2001: A Space Odyssey" (1968)?

Pretty sure there were voice command apps for Palm, Symbian, Blackberry, WinMo, etc; years before the date on the cited patents.

(And furthermore, such has certainly been possible on desktop computers (PCs) for many years prior to 2017.) E.g. Dragon Naturally Speaking (now Nuance) has been able run to custom commands `on_voice_input()` on a PC since the early 2000s at least IIRC)

Given voice commands prior art, to then run a remote command - over SSH, for example - is an obvious next step and thus not a patentable invention to this reasonable person.

[trollingpenalty]

(Industry has developed open specifications for running commands on remote computers: Instead of keying SSH over IP for all devices in a LAN/WLAN, Thread (2014) and Matter (2019) transmit task messages with just AES over IEEE 802.15.4 protocols over WiFi. Thread is designed to replace existing, older protocols which lacked security features. Thread_(network_protocol)#IoT_protocols_landscape https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_(network_protocol)#IoT_...

Thus there is also prior art for running remote commands on remote devices (whether they be PCs, Macs, Linuxes, or mobile devices)

[trollingpenalty]

If you can run a desktop operating system on a mobile device, is mobile device a relevant distinction?

(In my opinion, on a PC patents are vexatious.)