Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` __________
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` __________
` GREENE'S ENERGY GROUP LLC
` Petitioner
` v.
` OIL STATES ENERGY SERVICES LLC
` Patent Owner
` __________
`
` Case IPR2014-00216
`
` Patent 6,179,053
`
` Case IPR2014-00364
` Patent 6,289,993
`
` VIDEOTAPED ORAL DEPOSITION OF
` GARY R. WOOLEY, PH.D.
` Houston, Texas
` Wednesday, November 12, 2014
`
`Reported by:
`MICHAEL E. MILLER, FAPR, RDR, CRR
`Notary Public
`JOB NO. 87046
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1 2
`
`3
`
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`00001
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` __________
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` __________
` GREENE'S ENERGY GROUP LLC
` Petitioner
` v.
` OIL STATES ENERGY SERVICES LLC
` Patent Owner
` __________
`
` Case IPR2014-00216
`
` Patent 6,179,053
`
` Case IPR2014-00364
` Patent 6,289,993
`
` VIDEOTAPED ORAL DEPOSITION OF
` GARY R. WOOLEY, PH.D.
` Houston, Texas
` Wednesday, November 12, 2014
`
`Reported by:
`MICHAEL E. MILLER, FAPR, RDR, CRR
`Notary Public
`JOB NO. 87046
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1 2
`
`3
`
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`00001
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
` November 12, 2014
` 9:09 a.m.
`
` VIDEOTAPED ORAL DEPOSITION OF GARY R.
`WOOLEY, PH.D., held at the offices of Morgan
`Lewis & Bockius, 1000 Louisiana Street,
`Suite 4000, Houston, Texas, pursuant to the
`Federal Rules of Civil Procedure before
`Michael E. Miller, Fellow of the Academy of
`Professional Reporters, Registered Diplomate
`Reporter, Certified Realtime Reporter and Notary
`Public in and for the State of Texas.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1 2 3 4
`
`5
`
`6 7 8
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`00002
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
` FOLEY & LARDNER
` BY: JOHN FELDHAUS, ESQUIRE
` BRADLEY ROUSH, ESQUIRE
` 3000 K Street, NW
` Washington, D.C. 20007
` Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
` MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS
` BY: ARCHIS OZARKAR, ESQUIRE
` 1000 Louisiana Street
` Houston, Texas 77002
` Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
` Pam Longoria, Videographer
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1 2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`6
`7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`00003
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
` PROCEEDINGS
` (November 12, 2014 at 9:09 a.m.)
` (Deposition Exhibit 1020 marked.)
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the start
`of tape labeled number 1 of the videotaped
`deposition of Dr. Gary Wooley in the matter
`Greene's Energy Group LLC v. Oil States Energy
`Services LLC, Case Nos. IPR2014-00216 and
`IPR2014-00364. This deposition is being held at
`1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 4000, Houston,
`Texas, 77002, on November 12th, 2014, at
`approximately 9:09 a.m.
` My name is Pam Longoria. I'm the
`Legal Video Specialist from TSG Reporting Inc.,
`headquartered at 747 Third Avenue, New York,
`New York. The court reporter is Mike Miller in
`association with TSG Reporting.
` Will counsel please introduce
`yourselves.
` MR. FELDHAUS: John Feldhaus of
`Foley & Lardner for petitioner Greene's Energy
`Group.
` MR. ROUSH: Brad Roush of Foley &
`Lardner for petitioner Greene's Energy Group.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1 2
`
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`00004
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` MR. OZARKAR: Neil Ozarkar of Morgan
`Lewis & Bockius representing Oil States Energy
`Services.
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Will the court
`reporter please swear in the witness.
` GARY R. WOOLEY, Ph.D.,
` having been duly sworn,
` testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. FELDHAUS:
` Q. Good morning, Dr. Wooley.
` A. Good morning.
` Q. Could you state your full name for
`the record, please?
` A. Gary Wooley.
` Q. And, Dr. Wooley, you have in front of
`you an exhibit marked Exhibit 1020 for
`identification. That's a notice of deposition in
`regard to case IPR2014-00216 and case
`IPR2014-00364.
` Are you appearing here today subject
`to this deposition notice?
` A. That's my understanding, yes.
` Q. And, Dr. Wooley, you, I think,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`00005
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 6
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`submitted three declarations in connection with
`the two IPR cases that I mentioned; is that
`correct?
` A. I believe that's correct, yes, sir.
` Q. And we're going to have one
`deposition that covers all those declarations.
`Is that all right with you?
` A. Sure. Whatever you'd like.
` Q. So I'll put in front of you your
`expert declaration, Exhibit 2012, in
`IPR2014-00216. Is that your declaration, sir?
` A. Yes, sir.
` Q. And is there a copy of your CV
`attached to this declaration? I believe you
`might refer to page 57.
` A. Yes, that's correct.
` Q. Is that the most -- your most
`up-to-date CV, sir?
` A. Yes.
` Q. With who are you currently employed?
` A. Wooley & Associates.
` Q. How long have you been with Wooley &
`Associates?
` A. Since 1986.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`00006
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 7
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` Q. What's the business of Wooley &
`Associates?
` A. Petroleum and mechanical engineering
`consulting work.
` Q. How many employees does Wooley &
`Associates have?
` A. One full-time employee.
` Q. So do you have any other business
`associations, other than Wooley & Associates?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What other business associations do
`you have?
` A. Several others, but they're unrelated
`to this matter.
` Q. Well, I'd still just like to know
`what they are, sir.
` A. Well, I'm not willing to discuss
`unrelated matters or other things that I do.
` Q. As business ventures?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Why are you unwilling to discuss
`those?
` A. As I mentioned, I believe them to be
`unrelated.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`00007
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 8
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` Q. And what, in your estimation, does
`"unrelated" mean?
` A. Have no bearing on the matters in
`this case.
` Q. Do they have anything to do with the
`oil and gas industry?
` A. No.
` Q. How much of your time do you spend
`working for Wooley & Associates?
` A. Most of it.
` Q. And by "most," what would you -- what
`percentage of your time is devoted to Wooley &
`Associates?
` A. I'm not sure what you mean by that.
`Most of it. I don't have any numbers. I sleep
`eight, I work on charitable events, I do some
`other things, but most of my time -- most of my
`working time is spent on Wooley & Associates.
` Q. How much of -- you do expert witness
`work as Wooley & Associates; is that right?
` A. From time to time, yes, sir.
` Q. How much of the work of Wooley &
`Associates relates to expert witnessing?
` A. That varies a lot. Again, I don't
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`00008
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 9
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`have any numbers. I don't keep track of that.
`Today, it's probably going to end up a hundred
`percent. It varies a lot. Generally, I would
`guess it's less than 50% of my time with Wooley &
`Associates.
` Q. What is the other 50% of your time
`taken up with, sir?
` A. All sorts of petroleum and mechanical
`engineering consulting, mostly for the oilfield.
` Q. So how many expert witnessing
`assignments are you involved in currently?
` A. I don't know.
` Q. Well, do you have an estimate?
` A. Five, maybe more, but I don't know.
`I mean, there are things that settle and go away
`and I don't find out about it until a year later.
` Q. Is the list of recent testimony up to
`date on your CV? That's page 59.
` A. Well, it was up to date at the time
`this was written. I don't know if there's been
`anything else. There may have been one or two
`others.
` Q. Let's quickly go through some of
`these.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`00009
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 10
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` Can we go to testimony entry 26, and
`that's a patent case; is that right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What does that -- what's the
`technology involved in that?
` A. Well, it's actually a dispute over
`some pumping equipment for -- mostly used for
`water, pool equipment, that sort of thing. But
`there was a reference to oilfield pumping
`equipment in the matter, and so I was called in
`to address that specific part of it.
` Q. Is number 25 -- is that a patent
`case?
` A. No. That was more of a trade secrets
`issue.
` Q. Does that have anything to do with
`fracking?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What -- how does it relate to
`fracking?
` A. It related to some downhole tools
`that are used for fracking.
` Q. What kind of downhole tools?
` A. Sleeves.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000010
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 11
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` Q. Sleeves? Sleeves for isolation?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Who manufactured the sleeves?
` A. Both of those companies shown there
`manufacture sleeves.
` Q. What about number 24, does that -- is
`that a patent case?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What's the technology?
` A. It deals with downhole plugs, bridge
`plugs and frac plugs.
` Q. That also relates to fracking?
` A. It is.
` Q. Which party did you work for?
` A. In number 24?
` Q. Yes.
` A. Tony McClinton.
` Q. I guess 25, which party did you work
`for?
` A. Team Oil Tools.
` Q. I take it in 26, you worked for the
`patent owner or -- no, I'm sorry. I guess I
`misunderstood.
` Who did you work for in 26?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000011
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` A. Pentair Water Pool & Spa.
` Q. So number 23, what's that case
`involve?
` A. That was an injury accident at a well
`site during moving a rig.
` Q. Anything to do with fracking?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay. 22, what's that relate to?
` A. That relates to a downhole problem
`that occurred during a coiled tubing operation.
` Q. Did it have anything to do with
`fracking?
` A. I don't think so.
` Q. 20, what's that relate to?
` A. We skipped 21. Did you intend to do
`that?
` Q. Oh. No, let's go to 21, yes, please.
` A. Okay. Because we're getting far
`enough back, you're testing my memory.
` That was a problem with casing
`downhole in a well.
` Q. Anything related to fracking there?
` A. No.
` Q. All right. Now let's go to 20. What
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000012
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 13
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`did 20 relate to?
` A. That's a patent infringement matter
`relating to offshore drilling equipment.
` Q. Anything having to do with fracking?
` A. Not directly, no.
` Q. And number 19, what did that relate
`to?
` A. That's a patent infringement matter
`dealing with an automatic drilling system.
` Q. And number 18, what did that relate
`to?
` A. That deals with a problem with casing
`in a well.
` Q. Did it have anything to do with
`fracking?
` A. I just don't recall.
` Q. Okay. Which party you did work for
`in number 18?
` A. Wuxi Steel Pipe.
` Q. What about number 19?
` A. We already did 19.
` Q. I didn't ask you, though. Which
`party did you work for?
` A. Oh, I'm sorry. The one with the
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000013
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 14
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`attorney's name on it is the one I worked for in
`each one of these. In number 19, it would be
`National Oilwell VARCO.
` Q. Okay. Thank you.
` What about number 17, what did that
`relate to?
` A. That was a patent infringement matter
`dealing with tracers in hydraulic fluids for
`fracturing.
` Q. So did it have to do with fracking?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And number 16, what did that relate
`to?
` A. That dealt with some environmental
`damage as a result of a well in Pennsylvania.
` Q. Did it have to do with fracking?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What about number 15, what did that
`relate to?
` A. That deals with a downhole casing
`issue.
` Q. Anything to do with fracking?
` A. I don't think they fracked those
`wells, no.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000014
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 15
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` Q. Number 14, what did that relate to?
` A. That was a trade secrets dispute
`regarding bridge plugs and frac plugs for
`fracturing operations.
` Q. Number 13, what did that relate to?
` A. A patent infringement dispute
`regarding composite bridge plugs and frac plugs.
` Q. Number 14 [sic], what did that relate
`to?
` A. Some downhole problems in a well and
`responsibilities of various parties.
` Q. Did it have to do with fracking at
`all?
` A. Not that I recall.
` Q. What about number 11?
` A. That was a dispute over some drilling
`problems and some wireline and other operations
`in a well.
` Q. Did it relate to fracking?
` A. No.
` Q. And number 10, what did that relate
`to?
` A. That was a trade secrets dispute
`dealing with some downhole drilling tools.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000015
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 16
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` Q. Did it relate to fracking?
` A. Not directly, no.
` Q. And number 9, what did that relate
`to?
` A. That related to some equipment that
`was used on a well that was alleged to have
`failed to do its job.
` Q. What kind of equipment?
` A. It was a downhole tool. I don't
`recall exactly what the details of it are.
` Q. Did it have anything to do with
`fracking?
` A. No.
` Q. And what about 8, what did that
`relate to?
` A. That dealt with the incorrect
`location by the railroad commission of a well and
`operations conducted on the wrong well.
` Q. What about number 7, what did that
`relate to?
` A. That was the same issue as one of the
`others we had talked about. It's an automatic
`drilling system, and that was a patent dispute.
` Q. And number 6, what was that -- or
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000016
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 17
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`what did that relate to?
` A. Let's see. The same issues as
`number 11, just different parties.
` Q. And number 5, what was that case
`regarding?
` A. That was a downhole casing issue.
`There was a problem with some casing, and the
`issue was the responsibility for the downhole
`problem.
` Q. Was fracking involved in that?
` A. I don't recall.
` Q. Number 4, what did that relate to?
` A. That dealt with some insurance
`coverage issues related to a matter I had worked
`on with some downhole equipment problems. I
`think it was a casing failure.
` Q. Any relation to fracking?
` A. I don't recall.
` Q. What about number 3, do you remember
`what that was about?
` A. Yeah. There were some productivity
`issues, or some less-than-expected productivity,
`and there was a dispute as to what caused it.
` Q. Did it have anything to do with
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000017
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 18
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`fracking?
` A. I just don't remember.
` Q. Okay. Number 2, do you remember what
`that was about?
` A. Yes. There were some problems during
`the drilling of some wells, and there was a
`dispute over who was responsible for those
`problems.
` Q. Have anything to do with fracking?
` A. No.
` Q. And number 1, do you remember what
`that was about?
` A. Yes. That was a patent infringement
`matter dealing with some surface pipe handling
`equipment.
` Q. Anything to do with fracking?
` A. No, sir.
` Q. And you mentioned there may have been
`one or two more recent testimonial experiences
`that are not listed here; is that right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Can you tell me what they're about?
` A. Let me think about that. One of
`these went to trial, so it would be something
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000018
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 19
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`we've already covered.
` Q. Do you know which one it was that
`went to trial?
` A. Yeah. I'll have to find it.
` (Document review.)
` A. Well, I don't see it. I thought we
`covered it.
`BY MR. FELDHAUS:
` Q. What was the other? Was there
`another one, a more recent?
` A. Yes. I had a deposition in a matter
`that dealt with a gas gathering system in South
`Texas.
` Q. Would you turn to page 14 of your
`declaration, Exhibit 2012. And on the bottom of
`that you have this notation, "Fixed point casing
`head." Can you explain what that is?
` A. You're talking about the label?
` Q. Yes, the label.
` A. Yeah, the fixed point is identified
`outside the seal sub there that's labeled just
`above that, and it's part of the casing head.
`You can see there's a bit guide and casing below
`it, so it's just above the bit guide.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000019
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 20
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` Q. What do you mean by "casing head"?
` A. It's a -- I'm not sure what your
`question is. A casing head is part of a wellhead
`that sits on top of the casing. The casing is
`hung in the casing head and there's a bit guide
`on top of that, much like a tubing spool that you
`may be more familiar with from the terminology in
`the patents.
` Q. But I guess I'm -- my question is:
`Where does that call out -- it looks like it
`terminates at the bottom -- the top of what you,
`I think, referred to as a bit guide, right?
` A. Yes, it starts there. There's a
`little region from there up outside the seal sub.
` Q. Okay. You mentioned tubing spool.
`What is a tubing spool?
` A. It's a cylindrically shaped component
`in a wellhead.
` Q. What's a tubing head?
` A. Those terms sometimes get used
`interchangeably. The head is typically where you
`hang things, such as casing or tubing.
` Q. Okay. And sometimes it's terminology
`I'm still trying to clarify, what terms are used
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000020
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 21
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`in what particular context.
` What about the term "tubing head
`spool," is that essentially the same thing?
` A. Yeah, it's sort of a combination of
`two different terms. Some of that terminology is
`a function of who's using it. It's not a very
`precise terminology.
` Q. Okay. All right. I'm going to give
`you a copy of U.S. Patent 6,179,053, which is
`marked Greene's Energy Exhibit 1001. And I
`believe the figure that we've been discussing on
`page 14 is -- yeah, it's an annotated version of
`Figure 8, right? Is that right?
` A. Yes, that's correct.
` Q. And so the element that the bit guide
`is in is shown at the bottom of Figure 8 as --
`with the number 102; is that right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. 102 is identified in the patent as
`the tubing head spool; is that right?
` A. I'll have to look.
` Q. You can look on, say, column 8,
`line 50.
` A. Yes, it's referred to as "tubing head
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000021
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`spool 102."
` Q. That's different than a casing head,
`isn't it?
` A. Well, there is a casing 98, and so
`some people refer to those as casing heads. But
`that's a tubing head spool, as it continues up.
` Q. Okay. Let me go back to your CV.
`Did any of the cases that we discussed have
`anything to do with wellhead isolation tools?
`Actually, I believe you said one had to do with a
`sleeve, and a sleeve is a wellhead isolation
`tool; is that correct?
` A. No. I was referring to downhole
`sleeves.
` Q. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. Then let me
`ask my question again.
` Do any of the cases that we just
`discussed have anything to do with wellhead
`isolation tools?
` A. As I recall, none of them directly,
`but, of course, all of those dealing with
`fracture stimulation dealt with wellhead
`isolation tools in some sense; maybe a minor
`part, but not directly.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000022
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 23
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` Q. And do you have any experience, other
`than in this case, directly with wellhead
`isolation tools?
` A. Sure. Yes.
` Q. What is that experience?
` A. Well, there have been a number of
`times where I've recommended them to clients or
`used them or done analyses that dealt with how
`they operate, and I've had clients that had
`problems with wells that included wellhead
`isolation tools. So its role in all of those
`problems might be evaluated.
` Q. When did you first have some
`experience with wellhead isolation tools?
` A. I have no idea when was my first
`exposure. At least back into the early '90s, but
`I can't tell you my first one.
` Q. I'm going to give you a copy of
`Canadian Application 2,195,118, which is marked,
`actually, with multiple exhibits. It's Greene's
`Energy Exhibit 1003 in the IPR2014-00216. It's
`also marked as Exhibit 2009 in both IPRs that
`we've been discussing.
` So are you familiar with the -- I'll
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000023
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 24
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`just call this the "Canadian '118 application."
`Are you familiar with the Canadian '118
`application?
` A. I am, yes, sir.
` Q. So would you turn to Figure 4, which
`is at the back. And you see the reference to
`number 82 there?
` A. Yes.
` Q. If you look on, well, page 13 of this
`application, in line 10, you can see that
`reference numeral is called out as a tubing head.
` A. I must have the wrong location. I
`don't see 82 on page 13 -- oh, wait, I'm looking
`at 13 at the bottom. You're talking about 13 at
`the top.
` Q. Yeah, I'm sorry. Look at -- well,
`look at 16 at the bottom or 13 at the top.
` A. Gotcha.
` Yes, that's correct. It uses the
`terminology "tubing head" for 82.
` Q. All right. So, again, that tubing
`head, then, would be the same as a tubing head
`spool or a tubing spool; is that right?
` A. For most people, yes, sir.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000024
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
` Q. Okay. Thank you.
` So the purpose of this device,
`the '118 -- the Canadian '118 device, is to allow
`a mandrel, which is 28, and the mandrel extension
`58 with a -- I believe they call it a --
`number 68, they refer to as a packoff assembly.
`The purpose here is to apply pressure to move the
`packoff assembly into engagement with a bit guide
`that is positioned in the tubing head; is that
`right?
` A. Yes, sir.
` Q. Okay. I'm going to show you the
`patent owner response in IPR-00216. And if you
`turn to page 5 of that patent owner response,
`there are two pictures there of the '851 patent,
`right?
` A. Yes, that's correct.
` Q. And can we agree that the '851 patent
`is the equivalent and has the same disclosure as
`the Canadian '118 application?
` A. Close. At least close. Whether it's
`precise or not, I'd have to spend some time
`looking at that.
` Q. All right. So Figure 2 here shows
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000025
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 26
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`the mandrel, you know, in one -- in the left-hand
`picture, the mandrel is above the bit guide. The
`right-hand picture, the mandrel is on the bit
`guide; is that right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And so the way the mandrel gets moved
`into contact with the bit guide is that hydraulic
`pressure is -- pressurized fluid, that is, is
`input to the top of the cylinder and forces a
`piston downwardly that forces the mandrel down
`onto the bit guide; is that right?
` A. Yes, that's correct.
` Q. Okay. Now, your position, I take it,
`is that that hydraulic fluid would be inadequate
`to perform that task?
` A. Well, it certainly is capable of
`pushing it down, as illustrated here.
` Q. But it would be --
` A. But the problem is the reliability in
`the field and being able to hold that contact
`pressure so that you maintain the seal.
` Q. Okay.
` A. And that's been -- it would not only
`technically be questionable, whether you could
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000026
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 27
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`hold that in the field. It's been proven to not
`work.
` Q. Are you saying you could never use
`this tool?
` A. That's not what I said.
` Q. Okay. Thank you.
` A. It's possible, under certain
`circumstances for a certain brief period of time,
`it might hold pressure. It's been proven
`unreliable, which makes it an unacceptable tool
`in the field.
` Q. And do you know how many of the tools
`were built?
` A. I don't know the exact number; you'd
`have to talk to Mr. Dallas about that. But it
`was several, and we've had conversations about
`several.
` Q. And you're familiar also, are you
`not, with looking back at the '053 patent,
`Exhibit 1001, which was filed August 12, 1999?
` A. Yes, sir.
` Q. All right. So as of August 12, 1999,
`looking at column 2, line 58, with reference to
`the '851 patent, with reference to the blowout
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000027
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 28
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`protector described in the '851 patent,
`Mr. Dallas said that the blowout protector is
`widely accepted in the industry; is that right?
` A. Which column?
` Q. Column 2.
` A. Which line?
` Q. Line 58.
` A. Yes, the idea was widely accepted and
`very popular. It's the reason they continued to
`pursue it. It was something that the operators
`had a need for. Unfortunately, it was not
`reliable, as we talked about a moment ago, so
`there was a need for revision to that blowout
`protector tool that was described in the '118
`patent.
` Q. Does the '053 mention anything about
`the tool being unreliable?
` A. Yes, there's some -- well, not
`specifically the instances where the wells were
`that had a problem, but it's the basis for
`the '053 patent. The fact that it was unreliable
`is the basis for the invention. And there are
`descriptions at several points in the patent
`about how that's an improvement over the old '118
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000028
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 29
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`design and what the shortcomings of that design
`were.
` It does describe the unreliability of
`trying to seal pressure with a hydraulic
`cylinder. That's the reason for the mechanical
`lockdown in the '053.
` Q. But as of 1999, the '053 indicates
`that the '851 tool was in use and well accepted
`in the industry; isn't that right?
` A. No, just the opposite. The '053
`actually describes the shortcomings of that
`device. The idea was certainly popular. It was
`something that the customers wanted, the
`operators in the oilfield wanted that tool, but
`they can't live with an unreliable tool. It's
`got to be able to function. The economics are
`such that the price is too high if you've got an
`unreliable tool.
` Q. Well, let me read you the sentence
`again in column 2, starting at line 58. "The
`blowout preventer protector is widely accepted in
`the industry and the hydraulic setting tool is
`very convenient for securing a mandrel of a well
`tool in the operative position, requiring
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000029
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 30
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`fixed-point packoff in the well."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes, I do see that.
` Q. Do you see anything there that says,
`"Well, the concept was optimistically accepted,
`but the tool didn't work"?
` A. Yes, there's some very specific
`descriptions of the shortcomings in the patent.
` Q. Show me anything in this patent where
`it says the tool didn't work, sir.
` A. Sure, be glad to. Might take a
`minute.
` Q. Take your time.
` A. You want all of them, or anything?
` Q. Wherever it says the tool doesn't
`work, that's what I'm interested in.
` (Document review.)
` A. Okay. The first one I ran across was
`column 2, line 41, "It is apparent from the
`examples described above," which includes
`the '851 patent," as a result of new tools being
`invented and new technology being developed,
`there is a need for a lockdown mechanism for
`securing a well tool requiring a fixed-point
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`000030
`
`GREENE'S ENERGY 1011
`Greene's Energy v. Oil States IPR2014-216
`
`
`
`Page 31
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` G. WOOLEY
`packoff in an operative position in the well."
` That's a shortcoming of the '851, and
`that need is what this '053 addresses.
`BY MR. FELDHAUS:
` Q. All right. So you're saying that
`sentence indicates that the '851 didn't work?
` A. Yes, it indicates that there
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
