1 (Pages 94 to 97)
`Page 96
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
`JEFFREY N. COSTAKOS, ESQUIRE
`Foley & Lardner LLP
`777 East Wisconsin Avenue
`Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202-5306
`414-297-5782
`jcostakos@foley.com
`ON BEHALF OF THE PATENT OWNER:
`JEFFREY L. JOHNSON, ESQUIRE
`DLA Piper LLP (US)
`1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 2800
`Houston, Texas 77002-5005
`713-425-8445
`jeffrey.johnson@dlapiper.com
`-and-
`JAMES M. HEINTZ, ESQUIRE
`DLA Piper LLP (US)
`One Fountain Square
`11911 Freedom Drive, Suite 300
`Reston, Virginia 20190-5602
`703-773-4148
`jim.heintz@dlapiper.com
`ALSO PRESENT:
`Orson Braithwaite, Videographer
`
`December 11,2014
`C O N T E N T S
`EXAMINATION OF
`JEFFREY S. VIPPERMAN, Ph.D.
`By MR. COSTAKOS
`By MR. JOHNSON
`
`E X H I B I T S
`PREVIOUSLY MARKED
`1067 previously marked
`2015 previously marked
`1001 previously marked
`
`Page 97
`
`PAGE
`99, 171
`158
`
`PAGE
`
`100
`119
`119
`
`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
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`
`78
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 94
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`---------------------------------x
`MICRO MOTION, INC.,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`Inter Partes Review
`No. IPR2014-00392
`INVENSYS SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`Patent No. 8,000906
`Issue Date: August 16, 2011
`Title: DIGITAL FLOWMETER
`---------------------------------x
`
`Volume II
`
`Continued Videotaped Deposition
`of
`JEFFREY S. VIPPERMAN, Ph.D.
`Reston, Virginia
`Thursday, December 11, 2014
`9:13 a.m.
`
`Pages: 94 - 176
`
`Reported by: Amy E. Sikora-Trapp, RPR, CRR,
`Former CSR-NY, CLR
`
`Page 95
`
`Videotaped Deposition of
`JEFFREY S. VIPPERMAN, Ph.D., held at the
`offices of:
`DLA Piper LLP (US)
`11911 Freedom Drive, Suite 300
`Reston, Virginia 20190-5602
`
`Pursuant to notice, before Amy E.
`Sikora-Trapp, Registered Professional Reporter,
`Certified Realtime Reporter, Former Certified
`Shorthand Reporter (NY)(license unrenewed),
`Certified LiveNote Reporter, and Notary Public
`within and for the Commonwealth of Virginia.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`
`78
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`SOUND DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
`(888) 297-6863
`
`Invensys Ex. 2026
`Micro Motion v. Invensys IPR2014-00393, page 1
`
`

`

`Page 98
`
`P R O C E E D I N G S
`Whereupon,
`JEFFREY S. VIPPERMAN, Ph.D.,
`called as a witness, having been first duly
`sworn by the Notary Public (Amy E. Sikora), was
`examined and testified further as follows:
`THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is volume
`two, tape number one of the videotaped deposition
`of Dr. Jeffrey Vipperman, taken in the matter of
`Micro Motion, Inc., Petitioner, versus Invensys
`Systems, Inc., Patent Owner, in the United States
`Patent and Trademark Office before the Patent
`Trial and Appeal Board, inter partes review
`number IPR2014-00392.
`This deposition is being held at
`the DLA Piper LLP, located at 11911 Freedom
`Drive, Reston, Virginia, on December 11, 2014, at
`approximately 9:13 a.m.
`My name is Orson Braithwaite, here
`with our court reporter, Amy Sikora-Trapp, and we
`are from Sound Deposition Services.
`For the record, will counsel
`please introduce themselves.
`MR. JOHNSON: Jeffrey Johnson from
`DLA Piper, on behalf of Invensys Systems, Inc.
`
`Page 99
`
`and the deponent.
`MR. HEINTZ: James Heintz from DLA
`Piper, on behalf of the same parties.
`MR. COSTAKOS: Chuck Costakos,
`Foley & Lardner, on behalf of petitioner
`Micro Motion, Inc.
`THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Now will the
`court reporter please swear or affirm the
`witness.
`
`P R O C E E D I N G S
`Whereupon,
`JEFFREY S. VIPPERMAN, Ph.D.,
`called as a witness, having been first duly
`sworn by the Notary Public (Amy E. Sikora), was
`examined and testified as follows:
`EXAMINATION (Cont'd.) BY COUNSEL
`FOR THE PETITIONER
`BY MR. COSTAKOS:
`Q.
`So, Dr. Vipperman, I assume you
`haven't had any substantive conversations with
`counsel?
`A. That's correct.
`Q. Okay. Between the time we started
`yesterday and now?
`A. That's correct.
`
`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
`
`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
`
`2 (Pages 98 to 101)
`Page 100
`Q. Okay. I'm going to hand you what
`has been previously marked as Exhibit 1067.
`(Exhibit Number 1067 previously
`marked.)
`MR. COSTAKOS: And just for the
`record, this is the model D meter supplement slug
`flow and loading/unloading instruction manual.
`Q.
`So this supplement relates in part
`to batching; is that right?
`A. Can I just have a minute, please?
`Q. Yeah, sure.
`A. Okay. Yes, this is a add-in for
`the model D meter that helps for the operation of
`running a single batch of fluid through the
`flowmeter. It helps correct for the fact that
`the model D cannot maintain oscillation during
`the course of one batch, and it sort of inhibits
`the -- the signal as to cut down on the erroneous
`readings.
`
`(Discussion off the record.)
`Q. Okay.
`MR. COSTAKOS: I move to strike
`the last part of that answer as nonresponsive.
`Q.
`So this model D supplement is
`meant to handle the situation of separate batches
`
`Page 101
`
`flowing through the flowmeter?
`A.
`It -- it discusses how to handle a
`batch at a time.
`Q. Okay.
`A. And it suggests that the meter
`is -- is off in between batches.
`Q.
`So if you look at the second page
`of the document, which is the page that says,
`"Slug Flow Inhibit Setup Instructions"?
`A. Okay.
`Q. Okay. Under "Scope," you'll see
`there's a reference to batching tanks.
`Do you see that?
`A. Okay.
`Q. You see that it says that; right?
`A.
`I see that it says that, yes.
`Q. Okay. And it says that the slug
`flow inhibit board is intended for use in systems
`susceptible to slug flow and on loading/unloading
`applications.
`Do you see that?
`I do.
`A.
`Q. Okay. And loading/unloading
`applications would include separate batches
`flowing through the flow tube; right?
`
`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
`
`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
`
`SOUND DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
`(888) 297-6863
`
`Invensys Ex. 2026
`Micro Motion v. Invensys IPR2014-00393, page 2
`
`

`

`Page 102
`A. Right. So subject to my prior
`comments, that's true.
`Q. Okay. And in this slug flow
`manual, it describes, under 2.0, principles of
`operation, you'll see there's a second paragraph
`there?
`A. Okay.
`Q. Okay. And there it's describing
`operation without the slug flow supplement where
`it says, "In some instances, when the flowmeter
`is filled with fluid from an initially empty
`state, the vibrating U-tubes become unbalanced,
`causing the flow rate indication to jump
`excessively high."
`You see that?
`I see that.
`A.
`Q. Okay. So with the model D by
`itself, during the transition from empty to full,
`vibration of the U-tubes may become unbalanced;
`agree?
`A. Well, I think that condition
`occurs with the model D whether or not the slug
`flow board is there, but -- but, yes, generally.
`Q.
`So with or without the slug flow
`add-on, during the transition from empty to full,
`
`Page 103
`the vibrating U-tubes may become unbalanced?
`A. Right. So what we would have
`there is a situation within an uncontrolled
`vibration that's -- that could potentially be
`subject to stall, so . . .
`Q. Okay. And so what the slug flow
`inhibit board does is, when it detects such a
`condition, for example, during transitions from
`empty to full and full to empty, it will inhibit
`the output of pulses; right?
`A. Right. So the -- the model D has
`essentially lost oscillation and so the slug flow
`board sees that it's producing a mass flow rate
`that's excessively high, you know, beyond the
`capability of the meter, and it will kick in and
`inhibit the -- the measurement output or --
`right.
`Q. And it detects that the readings
`are excessively high by monitoring the vibration
`of the flow tubes; right?
`A. Well, in the paragraph you were
`just in it says, to minimize errors -- well,
`starting back a sentence further, it talks about
`the U-tubes becoming unbalanced causing the flow
`rate indication to jump excessively high. To
`
`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
`
`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
`
`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
`
`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
`
`3 (Pages 102 to 105)
`Page 104
`minimize errors associated with this occurrence,
`the board also monitors the signal-out voltage.
`If the signal-out voltage exceeds 3.5 volts, the
`board will inhibit the output of flow pulses.
`And that's because the full-scale calibration of
`the meter corresponds to a voltage of 3.1 volts.
`So really we're monitoring the
`voltage of the output board which presumably is
`high because, you know, the oscillation is
`unbalanced, at best, and lost all together, at
`worst.
`Q. Okay. You'll see what it does in
`the first paragraph under principles of operation
`it says it monitors the density of the fluid in
`the sensor tube.
`You see that?
`I see that.
`A.
`Q. Okay. And so it monitors the
`density by monitoring the vibration of the flow
`tube; right?
`A.
`So then it goes on to say,
`typically, fluid densities will range between .5
`specific gravity and 3.0 specific gravity.
`However, gas densities are much less than .5
`specific gravity. Therefore, the board is
`
`Page 105
`normally set up to inhibit the output of flow
`pulses when the fluid density is less than .5
`standard gravity.
`So this sounds to me like it's a
`transition from full to empty. And it's being --
`sounds like it's being very proactive, and if the
`specific gravity drops below .5, it inhibits the
`pulses so that there's no output of the meter
`because, you know, the tough part of the
`transition is coming up.
`Where the next paragraph sounds
`like it's -- it characterizes starting from an
`initially empty state and the tubes become
`unbalanced, so this is the part where I was
`talking about before where it's monitoring the
`signal-out voltage and it would correspond an
`empty to full transition.
`Q. Okay. So the slug flow inhibit
`board monitors the density of the fluid by
`monitoring the vibration of the flow tube; right?
`A.
`That's true, subject to the -- my
`previous qual -- qualifications.
`Q.
`The density is a function of the
`frequency of the oscillation of the flow tube?
`A.
`True, prior to my previous
`
`SOUND DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
`(888) 297-6863
`
`Invensys Ex. 2026
`Micro Motion v. Invensys IPR2014-00393, page 3
`
`

`

`Page 106
`
`qualifications.
`Q.
`So what the slug flow inhibit
`board does is, if the density that is detected by
`monitoring the vibration of the flow tubes falls
`below .5 specific gravity, it will inhibit the
`output of pulses?
`A. Right. So again, since the fluids
`can have specific gravities that are higher, say,
`between .5 and 3.0, then it knows that if it
`drops below .5 we're going from a full to empty
`transition and it would inhibit the pulses.
`Q. Likewise, if the flow tube were --
`were simply empty, it would inhibit the output of
`pulses; right?
`A.
`Perhaps. My impression with this
`meter is that you just run a single batch at a
`time.
`Q. Right. My question, though, was
`if the meter were empty, so just filled with gas,
`then the specific gravity would be below .5 and
`the inhibit board would inhibit the output of
`flow pulses?
`A.
`Perhaps. I don't see where it
`says, but that seems like it could be true.
`Q.
`If you look at page five of the
`
`Page 107
`document, beneath the part that says table 2.
`Do you see that?
`A. Uh-huh.
`Q. Okay. You see in the first
`sentence under there it says that new switch
`settings can be calculated if a specific gravity
`inhibit point other than 0.5 SG is desired --
`A. Yes.
`Q.
`-- end quote.
`Do you see that?
`A. Yes.
`Q.
`So the inhibit point is adjustable
`by the user?
`A. Yes. So it seems.
`Q. On page two -- excuse me,
`page three of the document, it has a 3 in the
`middle and a 2 over on the right-hand of the
`page. It says, "Loading/Unloading." Okay.
`It says that if the board is going
`to be used in a loading and unloading
`application.
`Do you see that up at the top?
`I do.
`That is a batching application;
`
`A.
`Q.
`right?
`
`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
`
`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
`
`4 (Pages 106 to 109)
`Page 108
`It would be at least -- it would
`A.
`be -- it would be one batch.
`Q.
`It would at least be one batch;
`agree?
`I think the system's designed to
`A.
`do a batch at a time, when you consider the steps
`one through five that are down below there.
`So . . .
`Q. But unloading --
`MR. COSTAKOS: Strike that.
`Q. But loading/unloading relates to a
`batch; agree?
`A.
`I would consider one or the other
`to be a batch, and perhaps -- I -- I would
`consider one or the other, either loading or
`unloading, to be a batch.
`Q. Okay. You mentioned before the
`steps one through five. You'll see under step
`five it says, the amount of time required before
`the downstream valve can be fully opened is
`typically less than two minutes.
`Do you see that?
`A. Yes.
`Q.
`So the transition from empty to
`full is on the order of two minutes or less; is
`
`Page 109
`
`that fair?
`A. Well, if we -- if we back up to
`step two, we're instructed, close the upstream
`valve. And step three we open the downstream
`valve to allow one quarter or less of the normal
`fluid flow. This will minimize the amount of
`fluid missed at start-up, which is the -- the
`issue at hand that shows that this setup does not
`maintain oscillation because we're missing fluid.
`Then we slowly open -- in step
`four, we slowly open the upstream valve to force
`the air out and slowly fill the meter. This slow
`opening minimizes the shock to the meter and
`reduces recovery time, again suggesting that this
`combination has trouble maintaining oscillation
`through the transition.
`And then it says, in step five,
`once it begins counting in a normal manner,
`slowly open the downstream valve until it's fully
`open.
`
`So it sounds like the transition
`from empty to full has already occurred at -- at
`step four because we slowly force the air out.
`Q. Okay. So the recommended
`procedure in steps one through five is to slowly
`
`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
`
`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
`
`SOUND DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
`(888) 297-6863
`
`Invensys Ex. 2026
`Micro Motion v. Invensys IPR2014-00393, page 4
`
`

`

`Page 110
`
`fill the flowmeter with fluid?
`A. Correct. To minimize the shock
`and reduce recovery time.
`Q. Okay. So the transition from
`empty to full in this recommended procedure will
`be done slowly to minimize the shock and reduce
`recovery time?
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`A. Can you please repeat the
`question.
`
`MR. COSTAKOS: Can you read it
`back, please.
`(Record read.)
`A. Okay. So I think back to the
`passage we read that talked about filling the
`flow tubes causing an unbalanced vibration
`condition, and I think that relates here, because
`in step three we're talking about minimizing the
`fluid missed on start-up, and then in step four
`we're talking about the slow transition from
`empty to full to reduce the shock to the meter
`and reduce the recovery time because, again, it's
`not maintaining oscillation.
`And so when we reduce the recovery
`time, we're also minimizing the amount of fluid
`
`Page 111
`
`missed on start-up in step three.
`Q.
`So you said before that your view
`was that this procedure related to separate
`batches?
`A. Yes.
`Q. Or a batch at a time I think is
`the way characterized it; is that fair?
`A. Yes.
`Q. Okay. And if you look on the
`second paragraph on this page, it says, "In
`loading/unloading applications, the meter is
`typically empty on start-up, a batch is run and
`the meter is purged of liquid at the end of the
`run."
`
`Do you see that?
`I do.
`A.
`Q. Okay. So the notion here is that
`this procedure, which is in steps one through
`five, would be repeated when a batch is run, and
`then the batch would be run and then the meter
`would be purged of liquid, and then the procedure
`would be run again?
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`So I would consider this a single
`A.
`run, this process that you just read back.
`
`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
`
`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
`
`5 (Pages 110 to 113)
`Page 112
`Q. Right. My question was that the
`way it would work is that you would run this
`single run, as you described it, and then, as
`described in that sentence that I just read to
`you, the meter would be purged of liquid at the
`end of the run; correct?
`A. Correct.
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`Q. And then the meter would be able
`to process another batch; correct?
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`A. Are -- are you asking me if that's
`what you're reading from the sentence?
`Q.
`I'm asking you if that's how this
`meter would work.
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`Objection, scope.
`Q. Let me ask it -- let me ask it
`this way: This section here describes loading
`and unloading applications; right?
`A. Yes.
`Q. Okay. And it describes a
`procedure which we've just walked through for
`processing a single batch; correct?
`A. Yes.
`
`Page 113
`Q. Okay. And then it says that the
`meter is purged of liquid at the end of the run;
`correct?
`A. The sentence one says that, yes.
`Q. Okay. And then the meter could be
`used after the meter has been purged of liquid at
`the end of the run to process a second batch
`using the same procedure; right?
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`Objection, scope.
`A. Well, I would like to point your
`attention to the paragraph just before figure two
`on page 3. It says, just as with slug flow, the
`slug flow inhibit board will prevent a portion of
`the fluid flow from being counted during loading
`or unloading. The amount of fluid not counted
`will depend upon the piping arrangement, the
`meter location, the fluid properties, the flow
`rate and the purging method. However, if the
`start-up and purge operation is always performed
`in the same manner, the amount of fluid not
`measured by the flowmeter can be characterized.
`And then on section 3.2.1 below
`figure two it says, calculating the
`loading/unloading correction factor. Step one,
`
`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
`
`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
`
`SOUND DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
`(888) 297-6863
`
`Invensys Ex. 2026
`Micro Motion v. Invensys IPR2014-00393, page 5
`
`

`

`Page 114
`we place a container at the end of the pipe run.
`Step two, run three to five test batches
`representative of a normal run. Start with the
`meter empty, and purge the meter at the end of
`each run. The batch size is unimportant as long
`as the pipeline is completely filled before
`purging.
`
`So that suggests that we actually
`stop this meter when it's still full.
`And then step three, we weigh the
`fluid. Step four, we subtract the total measured
`by the flowmeter from the actual fluid weight,
`again, showing that we missed fluid because it
`didn't maintain oscillation.
`It goes on to say the
`loading/unloading procedure is consist -- if the
`unloading -- I'm sorry. Let me start the
`sentence over.
`If loading/unloading procedure is
`consistence, the difference calculated from the
`test run should also be fairly consistent.
`And then five, average the results
`from the test runs. This is the correction
`factor.
`
`So these sound like individual
`
`Page 115
`test runs to me. You know, we -- we turn the
`meter on, slowly fill it, run a batch, stop it
`when it's full so that we can prevent the other
`transition, and then that's one batch. And then
`to measure the next batch we would flip it back
`on.
`
`Q. Okay.
`MR. COSTAKOS: Move to strike that
`entire answer as nonresponsive.
`Q.
`In section 3.2 in the middle of
`the page you pointed to a paragraph that begins,
`"Just as with slug flow."
`Do you see that?
`A. Okay.
`Q. And it says, the sentence -- one
`sentence you read says, "However, if the start-up
`and purge operation are always performed in the
`same manner, the amount of fluid not measured by"
`a -- "by the full meter can be characterized."
`Do you see that?
`I see that.
`A.
`Q. Okay. So what that is saying is
`that the process or procedure that you use for
`doing batches should be done the same way each
`time; right?
`
`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
`
`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
`
`6 (Pages 114 to 117)
`Page 116
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`A. Well, I mean, I think it's talking
`about that missed fluid, again, because we
`didn't -- didn't maintain oscillation. And so
`the missed fluid that's still left in the
`pipeline will be same, as long as we start up the
`meter for a batch and turn it off and do our
`purge in the same manner. That's what I get from
`that.
`
`So what this is recommending is
`Q.
`that the same procedure be used every time a
`batch is processed?
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`A. Well, subject to my previous
`comments, yes.
`Q. And the paragraph that we looked
`at further up on the page that begins with "In
`loading/unloading applications."
`Do you see that paragraph?
`I do.
`A.
`Q. Okay. The third sentence says, "A
`flag mount or mounting with the tubes up prevents
`any liquid left in the pipe from draining into
`the flow sensor. This type of mount will insure
`the sensor is empty after the pipeline is
`
`Page 117
`
`purged."
`
`Do you see that?
`I do.
`A.
`Q. Okay. So what they're
`recommending is an orientation of the tubes so
`that the sensor will be empty at the end of a
`run; right?
`A. Okay, right. For those cases
`where you can't fully purge the lines.
`Q. Now, we've talked before about the
`inhibition of pulses. So the slug flow inhibit
`board will inhibit pulses under certain
`circumstances; right?
`A. Yes.
`Q. Okay. But the slug flow inhibit
`board does not inhibit the output of a drive
`signal, does it?
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`So not to my knowledge, and I
`A.
`don't think you'd want to do that, because you
`would want the measurement to recover once you're
`through the -- the two-phase transition and the
`oscillation resumes.
`Q.
`So with the slug flow inhibit
`board, it would always be producing a drive
`
`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
`
`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
`
`SOUND DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
`(888) 297-6863
`
`Invensys Ex. 2026
`Micro Motion v. Invensys IPR2014-00393, page 6
`
`

`

`Page 118
`
`7 (Pages 118 to 121)
`Page 120
`
`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
`
`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
`
`signal?
`
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`MR. COSTAKOS: Well, strike that.
`I'll withdraw the question.
`Q.
`So the slug flow inhibit board
`would --
`
`MR. COSTAKOS: Well, strike that.
`Q. You can put that down.
`A.
`Is this a good time for a break?
`Q.
`If you want one, that's fine with
`
`me.
`
`A. Yeah, I'd like one.
`Q. Okay.
`THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is
`9:59 a.m. We're going off the record.
`(Recess taken.)
`THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is
`10:06 a.m. We are back on the record.
`BY MR. COSTAKOS:
`Q. Okay. I'm going to ask you
`questions now about the Romano patent, which is
`Exhibit 1006. And I'm also going to hand you
`some other documents, in case you want them.
`So first I'm handing you what's
`been previously marked as Exhibit 2015 from the
`
`Page 119
`'393 IPR, so this is your declaration from the
`'062 patent. And I'm going to hand you also
`Exhibit 1001 from the same IPR, the '393 IPR,
`which is a copy of the '062 patent.
`(Exhibit Number 2015 previously
`marked.)
`(Exhibit Number 1001 previously
`marked.)
`Q. Okay. So I have some questions
`about Romano. Is there something in there you
`want to look at before I start asking questions
`or --
`
`If I could, please.
`A.
`Q. Yeah. Go ahead.
`A. Okay.
`Q. Okay. So if we turn to column 18
`of the Romano patent, you'll see, beginning at
`line 42, there's a reference to figure two.
`Do you see that?
`I do.
`A.
`Q. Okay. And then on line 46 it
`says, "The drive circuit is essentially an
`integral controller that produces a drive signal
`that is in phase with the sum of the left and
`right velocity sensor waveforms."
`
`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
`
`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
`
`Do you see that?
`I see where it says that, yes.
`A.
`Q. Okay. So that means that the
`drive circuit will produce a drive signal that
`has a frequency that matches the oscillation of
`the flow tubes?
`A. Yes. So this column relates to
`drive circuit 40, which is the analog drive
`circuit for Romano, which is described in more
`detail in column 25, but it is an integral
`controller that produces a drive signal that's in
`phase with the sum of left and right velocity
`sensor waveforms.
`Q. And what's the advantage of having
`a drive signal that's in phase with the sum of
`the left and the right velocity waveforms?
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`And scope.
`A. Unlike the -- the digital drive,
`which is driving a system open loop, this is what
`I call a positive feedback arrangement,
`specifically an analog positive feedback
`arrangement. And it would produce this
`particular condition or one close to it.
`Q. What's the advantage of having the
`
`Page 121
`drive signal be in phase with the velocity sensor
`waveforms?
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form and
`
`scope.
`A. Well, it doesn't have to be
`exactly in phase. If it's off some, it will
`still work sufficiently well. But if you had it
`perfectly lined up, like in the Henry patents,
`positive feedback, then you're driving precisely
`on the resonant frequency, which would give you a
`little bit more gain in your system.
`Q. And in the drive circuit that's
`described in this passage that's in column 18,
`line 46, the drive signal would be in phase with
`the velocity sensor waveforms; right?
`A. Give or take. It wouldn't
`necessarily be perfectly in phase.
`Q. What makes you believe it wouldn't
`be perfectly in phase?
`A.
`Perhaps there could be a phase
`delay, and there's no disclosure for correcting
`for that, as in the Henry patents.
`Q. Would you expect there to be a
`phase delay with the analog circuit that's shown
`in figure four?
`
`SOUND DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
`(888) 297-6863
`
`Invensys Ex. 2026
`Micro Motion v. Invensys IPR2014-00393, page 7
`
`

`

`Page 122
`I'm not sure. I wasn't asked to
`A.
`analyze that.
`Q. Okay. So you agree, though, that
`the passage that we read before says that it will
`produce a drive signal that is in phase with the
`sum of the left and right velocity sensor
`waveforms; right?
`A.
`I do see where it says that, yes.
`Q. Okay. And the integral controller
`will adjust the phase of the drive signal to keep
`it in phase with the velocity sensor waveforms;
`right?
`A. Well, I mean, when I read this
`second paragraph under section E, drive circuit
`40 in column 25, there's an integrator 425, and
`it looks as though the integral controls for --
`it's been a while since I've looked at this
`analog circuit. It looks like it's for amplitude
`control.
`So the passage that we read on
`Q.
`page 18 says that it's an integral controller
`that will produce a drive signal that's in phase
`with the velocity sensor waveforms; right?
`A.
`I agree that it says that.
`Q. Okay.
`
`Page 123
`A. And then, like I say, in -- in
`column 25 it gives -- elaborates on the integral
`control, which is for the amplitude.
`Q. And if you look at column 25, at
`line 23, it says, in describing figure four, it
`says, "As noted, this circuit produces a
`sinusoidal voltage which is applied to drive coil
`180, via lead 185, to keep both flow tubes
`oscillating at their natural frequency"; right?
`A.
`I see that, yeah.
`Q. Okay. And then it says, "In
`essence, as discussed, the drive circuit is
`essentially an integral controller that produces
`a drive signal that is in phase with the sum of
`the left and right velocity sensor waveforms";
`right?
`I see that it says that, yes.
`A.
`Q. Okay. So the circuit that's shown
`in figure four overall will adjust the phase of
`the drive signal to keep it in phase with the sum
`of the left and right velocity sensor waveforms?
`
`A. Right. That's a result of the --
`the positive feedback of the system.
`Q. Right. That's because it's --
`
`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
`
`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
`
`8 (Pages 122 to 125)
`Page 124
`
`it's feeding back the sensor --
`MR. COSTAKOS: Strike that.
`It's feeding back the sum of the
`Q.
`left and right velocity sensors; right?
`A. Yes. Drive circuit 40 feeds back
`the sum of the velocity sensors.
`Q. Okay. And because it feeds back
`the sum, it will produce a drive signal that's in
`phase with the sum; correct?
`A.
`So that's the way a positive
`feedback drive works, yes. You would sum the two
`sensors and feed it back positively. And you
`will have the tubes in phase with the drive
`signal, more or less, as I've discussed before.
`Q.
`Figure four in Romano is a closed
`loop system?
`A.
`I would characterize it as such.
`Q. Okay. And because it's closed
`loop, it can produce a drive signal that's in
`phase with the sum of the left and right velocity
`waveforms; right?
`A. Well, it can't be any closed loop
`per se, but this specific arrangement in figure
`four, analog drive circuit 40, does so because of
`its closed loop arrangement between the sum of
`
`Page 125
`the sensor signals and the output to the drive
`coil, both of which are attached to the meter.
`Q. Okay. So let's look at column 24.
`We've looked at this in the past. Beginning at
`line 32, there's the discussion of a digitally
`based drive circuit; right?
`A. Okay.
`Q. Okay. And you'll look at --
`MR. COSTAKOS: Strike that.
`Q. That discussion of a digitally
`based drive circuit continues from line 32 of
`column 24 over to column 25, at least to
`line six; agree?
`A. Okay. There's brief mentions of
`analog drive circuit but in general it describes
`the digital drive.
`Q. And then if you look at column 25,
`line two, beginning at line two, it says,
`"Through use of such a digital drive circuit,
`both flow tubes can be driven at a frequency that
`very accurately matches their resonant
`frequency."
`Do you see that?
`I see that.
`A.
`Q. Okay. So the idea of the digital
`
`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
`
`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
`
`SOUND DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
`(888) 297-6863
`
`Invensys Ex. 2026
`Micro Motion v. Invensys IPR2014-00393, page 8
`
`

`

`Page 126
`drive circuit is to produce a drive frequency
`that matches the resonant frequency; right?
`MR. JOHNSON: Objection, form.
`A. Okay. So now we're discussing the
`digital drive, which is shown in figure three as
`dashed lines. It's items 388, 390, 392, and 394.
`And in the description in 24, as well as all of
`the -- or many of the descriptions of the
`software routines that follow, starting in
`column 26 of the software description.
`The way that Romano does his
`digital drive is he performs an FFT, he finds the
`peak frequency, which corresponds to the
`resonance frequency, and then he begins
`generating a frequency of that signal using
`external circuitry. It's not related to figure
`three; in particular, the timer, 340.
`And so it's driven as an open loop
`system on resonance.
`Q. Okay.
`MR. COSTAKOS: I move to strike
`that answer as nonresponsive.
`Q.
`So the question I had asked you
`was that the digital drive circuit, which is
`described in column 24, through the first part of
`
`Page 127
`column 25, will output a drive seq -- a drive
`frequency that is meant to match the resonant
`frequency; right?
`A.
`That's correct. So as we've
`discussed, that gives you your best gain,
`although it would still work if it were off
`resonance by some margin, but the desire is to
`drive it on resonance.
`Q. Now, you said a couple of times,
`and perhaps you say in your report, I don't know,
`I can't remember, that the circuit, as you
`understand it, that's described in column 24 is
`an open loop circuit.
`Is that a fair characterization of
`your opinion?
`A. Right. So I've traced the
`software through the software description and
`also in the figure starting with five. So in --
`in figure five, that's sort of the main routine,
`and that's where the power on reset occurs at the
`very beginning, and we execute initialization in
`routine 600, which is shown in figure six.
`And then in step 625 we execute
`DFT routine 700 to perform a course frequency
`search, sampling the left waveform at a sample
`
`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
`
`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
`
`9 (Pages 126 to 129)
`Page 128
`
`rate of 640 hertz. We select the course
`frequency at which the DFT is a magnum --
`maximum, rather, in step 630. And then we fix
`that value in timer 340. So that's also -- the
`timer 340 is just associated with the measurement
`portion.
`
`And so this is the course DFT
`that's being referred to in column 24, so that
`maximum -- that frequency at which the maximum of
`the D -- magnitude of the DFT occurs is also
`going to be the drive frequency for the digital
`drive.
`So it's your opinion that the
`Q.
`digital drive circuit, which is described
`beginning in column 24, line 32 or so, is an open
`loop circuit?
`A. Yes.
`Q.
`So when you say "an open loop
`ci