UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`______________
`
`
`FORD MOTOR COMPANY
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`PAICE LLC & ABELL FOUNDATION, INC.
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`______________
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,104,347 to Severinsky et al.
`
`IPR Case No.: IPR2014-00884
`
`______________
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. GREGORY W. DAVIS IN SUPPORT
`OF INTER PARTES REVIEW UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 311 ET SEQ.
`AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 ET SEQ. (CLAIMS 1, 7, 10, 21, 23, 24 OF
`U.S. PATENT NO. 7,104,347)
`
`Page 1
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`Table of Contents
`
`
`EXHIBIT LIST .......................................................................................................... 6
`
`I.
`
`QUALIFICATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE ...................... 9
`
`II.
`
`RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARDS ...........................................................16
`
`III. QUALIFICATIONS OF ONE OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART .......17
`
`IV. STATE OF THE ART ...................................................................................18
`
`A.
`
`“Series” Hybrid Vehicle ......................................................................22
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`“Parallel” Hybrid Vehicle ...................................................................25
`
`Hybrid Vehicle “Control Strategies” ..................................................39
`
`V.
`
`THE ’347 PATENT .......................................................................................50
`
`A.
`
`Effective Filing Date of the ’347 Patent .............................................50
`
`B.
`
`Prosecution History of the ’347 Patent ...............................................52
`
`VI. CHALLENGED CLAIMS OF THE ’347 PATENT AND
`PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS ...................................................57
`
`VII. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIOR ART .............................................................58
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`“Hybrid Power Unit Development for Fiat Multipla Vehicle”
`by Caraceni et. al (“Caraceni”) ...........................................................58
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,841,201 to Tabata et al. ..........................................60
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,158,541 to Tabata et al. ..........................................62
`
`D. U.S. Patent No. 6,081,042 to Tabata et al. ..........................................64
`
`VIII. GROUND 1 – CLAIMS 1, 7, 10 and 21 ARE OBVIOUS OVER
`CARACENI ...................................................................................................65
`
`A.
`
`Claim 1 ................................................................................................66
`
`
`
`[1.0] A hybrid vehicle, comprising: ........................................ 67
`
`Page 2
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[1.1] an internal combustion engine controllably coupled
`to road wheels of said vehicle; ................................................. 68
`
`[1.2] a first electric motor connected to said engine nd
`[sic] operable to start the engine responsive to a control
`signal; ....................................................................................... 72
`
`[1.3] a second electric motor connected to road wheels of
`said vehicle, and operable as a motor, to apply torque to
`said wheels to propel said vehicle, and as a generator, for
`accepting torque from at least said wheels for generating
`current ...................................................................................... 74
`
`[1.4] a battery, for providing current to said motors and
`accepting charging current from at least said second
`motor; and ............................................................................... 87
`
`[1.5] a controller for controlling the flow of electrical
`and mechanical power between said engine, first and
`second motors, and wheels, ..................................................... 90
`
`[1.6] wherein said controller starts and operates said
`engine when torque require to be produced by said
`engine to propel the vehicle and/or to drive either one or
`both said electric motor(s) to charge said battery is at
`least equal to a setpoint (SP) above which said engine
`torque is efficiently produced, and .......................................... 94
`
`
`
`[1.7] wherein the torque produced by said engine when
`operated at said setpoint (SP) is substantially less than the
`maximum torque output (MTO) of said engine. .................... 108
`
`B.
`
`Claim 7 ..............................................................................................112
`
`
`
`[7.0] The vehicle of claim 1, wherein said vehicle is
`operated in a plurality of operating modes responsive to
`the value for the road load (RL) and said setpoint SP,
`both expressed as percentages of the maximum torque
`output of the engine when normally-aspirated (MTO),
`and said operating modes include: ......................................... 113
`
`Page 3
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[7.1] a low-load mode I, wherein said vehicle is propelled
`by torque provided by said second electric motor in
`response to energy supplied from said battery, while
`RL<SP, ................................................................................... 126
`
`[7.2] a highway cruising mode IV, wherein said vehicle
`is propelled by torque provided by said internal
`combustion engine, while SP<RL<MTO, and ...................... 128
`
`[7.3] an acceleration mode V, wherein said vehicle is
`propelled by torque provided by said internal combustion
`engine and by torque provided by either or both electric
`motor(s) in response to energy supplied from said
`battery, while RL>MTO. ....................................................... 130
`
`C.
`
`Claim 10 ............................................................................................132
`
`D.
`
`Claim 21 ............................................................................................135
`
`IX. GROUND 2 – Claim 23 Is Obvious Over U.S. Patent No. 5,841,201
`(Tabata ’201) In View Of U.S. Patent No. 6,158,541 (Tabata ‘541)
`and General Knowledge of a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art ......137
`
`A.
`
`Claim 23 ............................................................................................137
`
`
`
`
`
`[23.0] A method of control of a hybrid vehicle, said
`vehicle comprising ................................................................. 140
`
`[23.1] an internal combustion engine capable of
`efficiently producing torque at loads between a lower
`level SP and a maximum torque output MTO, ...................... 143
`
`
`
`[23.2] a battery, and ............................................................... 151
`
`
`
`
`
`[23.3] one or more electric motors being capable of
`providing output torque responsive to supplied current,
`and of generating electrical current responsive to applied
`torque,..................................................................................... 153
`
`[23.4] said engine being controllably connected to wheels
`of said vehicle for applying propulsive torque thereto and
`to said at least one motor for applying torque thereto, .......... 156
`
`Page 4
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`[23.5] determining the instantaneous torque RL required
`to propel said vehicle responsive to an operator
`command; ............................................................................... 161
`
`
`
`[23.6] monitoring the state of charge of said battery; ............ 168
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[23.7] employing said at least one electric motor to
`propel said vehicle when the torque RL required to do so
`is less than said lower level SP; ............................................. 172
`
`[23.8] employing said engine to propel said vehicle when
`the torque RL required to do so is between said lower
`level SP and MTO; ................................................................. 176
`
`[23.9] employing both said at least one electric motor and
`said engine to propel said vehicle when the torque RL
`required to do so is more than MTO; and .............................. 180
`
`[23.10] employing said engine to propel said vehicle
`when the torque RL required to do so is less than said
`lower level SP and using the torque between RL and SP
`to drive said at least one electric motor to charge said
`battery when the state of charge of said battery indicates
`the desirability of doing so; and ............................................. 186
`
`
`
`[23.11] wherein the torque produced by said engine when
`operated at said setpoint (SP) is substantially less than the
`maximum torque output (MTO) of said engine. .................... 190
`
`B.
`
`Claim 24 ............................................................................................192
`
`
`
`[24] The method of claim 23, comprising the further step
`of employing said controller to monitor patterns of
`vehicle operation over time and vary said setpoint SP
`accordingly. ............................................................................ 192
`
`X. OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE OF NONOBVIOUSNESS ...............................198
`
`XI. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................199
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
`
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Exhibit
`No.
`1201
`1202
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 7,104,347
`’347 Patent File History
`
`Date
`n/a
`n/a
`
`1203
`
`1204
`1205
`1206
`
`1207
`
`1208
`
`1209
`
`1210
`
`1211
`
`1212
`
`1213
`
`Hybrid Power Unit Development
`for Fiat Multipla Vehicle
`U.S. Patent No. 5,841,201
`U.S. Patent No. 6,158,541
`Plaintiff Paice LLC’s Reply Claim
`Construction Brief
`(Case No.
`2:04-cv-00211
`Plaintiff Paice LLC’s Claim
`Construction Brief
`(Case No.
`2:04-cv-00211)
`Claim Construction Order (Case
`No. 2:04-cv-00211)
`Plaintiff Paice LLC’s Opening
`Claim Construction Brief (Case
`No. 2:07-cv-00180)
`Plaintiff Paice LLC’s Reply Brief
`on Claim Construction (Case No.
`2:07-cv-00180)
`Claim Construction Order (Case
`No. 2:07-cv-00180)
`Plaintiff Paice LLC and Abell
`Foundation, Inc.’s Opening Claim
`Construction Brief
`(Case No.
`1:12-cv-00499)
`Plaintiff Paice LLC and Abell
`Foundation,
`Inc.’s Responsive
`Brief on Claim Construction (Case
`No. 1:12-cv-00499)
`
`Identifier
`The ’347 Patent
`’347 Patent File
`History
`Caraceni
`
`Feb. 23, 1998
`
`Feb. 27 1997
`Feb. 27 1997
`Mar. 8, 2005
`
`Tabata ’201
`Tabata ’541
`n/a
`
`Mar. 29, 2005
`
`n/a
`
`Sept. 28, 2005
`
`n/a
`
`June 25, 2008
`
`n/a
`
`Aug. 1, 2008
`
`n/a
`
`Dec. 5, 2008
`
`n/a
`
`Nov. 14, 2013
`
`n/a
`
`Dec. 16, 2013
`
`n/a
`
`Page 6
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`Exhibit
`No.
`1214
`
`1215
`1216
`
`1217
`1218
`1219
`
`1220
`1221
`
`1222
`
`1223
`
`1224
`
`1225
`
`1226
`
`1227
`
`1228
`
`1229
`
`1230
`
`1231
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal
`Board January 3, 2014 Decision
`(Appeal No. 2011-004811)
`Declaration of Gregory Davis
`Innovations in Design: 1993 Ford
`Hybrid Electric Vehicle Challenge
`1996 Future Car Challenge
`1997 Future Car Challenge
`History of the Electric Automobile
`– Hybrid Electric Vehicles
`Hybrid Vehicle for Fuel Economy
`Hybrid/Electric Vehicle Design
`Options and Evaluations
`Challenges for the Vehicle Tester
`in Characterizing Hybrid Electric
`Vehicles
`Electric and Hybrid Vehicles
`Program
`for Electric
`Technology
`Hybrid Vehicles
`Strategies in Electric and Hybrid
`Vehicle Design
`Hybrid
`Vehicle
`Assessment
`Final Report Hybrid Heat Engine /
`Electric Systems Study
`Transactions of the Institute of
`Measurements and Control: A
`microprocessor controlled gearbox
`for use in electric and hybrid-
`electric vehicles
`Propulsion System Design of
`Electric Vehicles
`Propulsion System Design of
`Electric and Hybrid Vehicles
`Bosch Handbook
`
`Potential
`
`and
`
`Date
`Jan. 3, 2014
`
`Identifier
`n/a
`
`n/a
`Feb. 1994
`
`Feb. 1997
`Feb. 1998
`1998
`
`Davis
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Declaration Ex.
`Declaration Ex.
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Feb.24-28, 1992 Declaration Ex.
`
`April
`1997
`
`9-11,
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`April 1995
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Feb. 1998
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Feb. 1996
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Sept. 30, 1979 Declaration Ex.
`
`June 1, 1971
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Sept. 1, 1988
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`1996
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Feb. 1997
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Oct. 1996
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Page 7
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`Exhibit
`No.
`1232
`
`1233
`1234
`
`1235
`
`1236
`
`1238
`1239
`1240
`
`1241
`
`1242
`
`Description
`Design Innovations in Electric and
`Hybrid Electric Vehicles
`U.S. Patent No. 6,209,672
`Introduction
`to
`Automotive
`Powertrains (Davis Textbook)
`Yamaguchi article: Toyota Prius,
`Automotive
`Engineering
`International
`60/100,095
`Application
`1237 Amendment in File History of
`U.S. Patent 8,214,097
`U.S. Patent No. 6,098,733
`U.S. Patent No. 6,081,042
`Surface Vehicle Recommended
`Practice
`Publication
`PCT
`WO93/23263
`Curriculum Vitae of Gregory
`Davis
`
`Date
`Feb. 1995
`
`Identifier
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Apr. 3, 2001
`n/a
`
`Declaration Ex.
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Jan. 1998
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Filed Sept. 11,
`1998
`Feb. 29, 2012
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`n/a
`
`Oct. 9, 1996
`Feb. 27 1997
`Dec. 1989
`
`Declaration Ex.
`Declaration Ex.
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Nov. 25, 1993 Declaration Ex.
`
`n/a
`
`Declaration Ex.
`
`Provisional
`
`No.
`
`
`
`Page 8
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`I, Gregory Davis, hereby declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I am making this declaration at the request of Ford Motor Company in
`
`the matter of Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,104,347 (“the ’347 Patent”)
`
`to Severinsky et al.
`
`2.
`
`I am being compensated for my work in this matter at a rate of
`
`$315/hour. My compensation in no way depends on the outcome of this
`
`proceeding.
`
`3.
`
`In preparation of this declaration, I have studied the exhibits as listed
`
`in the Exhibit List shown above in my report.
`
`4.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed below, I have considered:
`
`
`
`(1) The documents listed above as well as additional patents and
`
`documents referenced herein;
`
`
`
`(2) The relevant legal standards, including the standard for
`
`obviousness provided in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S.
`
`398 (2007), and any additional documents cited in the body of this
`
`declaration; and
`
`
`
`(3) My knowledge and experience based upon my work and study
`
`in this area as described below.
`
`I.
`
` QUALIFICATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
`
`5.
`
`I have provided my full background in the curriculum vitae that is
`
`Page 9
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`attached as Exhibit 1242.
`
`6.
`
`I received my Bachelor of Science Degree in Mechanical Engineering
`
`from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor in 1982 and my Master of Science
`
`Degree in Mechanical Engineering from Oakland University in 1986.
`
`7.
`
`I further am a licensed “Professional Engineer” in the state of
`
`Michigan.
`
`8.
`
`As shown in my resume, most of my career has been in the field of
`
`automotive engineering that includes numerous positions in both the academia and
`
`industry settings.
`
`9.
`
`After receiving my Master’s degree, I began work at General Motors
`
`where I had several assignments involving automotive design, advanced
`
`engineering and manufacturing. Over the course of my years at General Motors, I
`
`was involved in all aspects of the vehicle design process, from advanced research
`
`and development to manufacturing.
`
`10. Specifically, my work at General Motors included aspects of engine
`
`and fuel system design relating to the production of fuel sending units, and
`
`modeling the effects of fuels and EGR on vehicle performance and emissions.
`
`11. After leaving General Motors, I returned to the University of
`
`Michigan where I was awarded a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering in 1991. My
`
`thesis was directed
`
`to automotive engineering including
`
`the design and
`
`Page 10
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`development of systems and models for understanding combustion in automotive
`
`engines.
`
`12. Upon completion of my Ph.D., I joined the faculty of the U.S. Naval
`
`Academy where I led the automotive program in mechanical engineering. As part
`
`of my responsibilities while at the Academy, I managed the laboratories for
`
`Internal Combustion Engines and Power Systems.
`
`13.
`
`I further taught automotive and mechanical engineering courses while
`
`at the U.S. Naval Academy. Some of the courses I taught were directed specifically
`
`to design and operation of internal combustion engines in both conventional and
`
`hybrid vehicles. I also taught courses pertaining to the design and operation of
`
`hybrid vehicles.
`
`14.
`
`In addition to my work at the U.S. Naval Academy, I also served as
`
`faculty advisor for the USNA Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). During this
`
`time I served as project director for the research and development of hybrid electric
`
`vehicles.
`
`15. My work with regards to hybrid electric vehicles included extensive
`
`design and modifications of the powertrain, chassis, and body systems. This
`
`development work included the design, modifications and implementation of
`
`alternate fuel delivery and injection systems.
`
`16. The hybrid electric vehicle work that I worked on at the U.S. Naval
`
`Page 11
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`Academy was published in a bound 1994 SAE special publication. (Ex. 1216 at 6-
`
`11.)
`
`17. While at the Naval Academy, I also taught classes in mechanical
`
`engineering at Johns Hopkins University.
`
`18.
`
`In 1995, I joined the faculty of Lawrence Technological University
`
`where I served as Director of the Master of Automotive Engineering Program and
`
`Associate Professor in the Mechanical Engineering Department.
`
`19. The master’s program in automotive engineering is a professionally
`
`oriented program aimed at attracting and educating practicing engineers in the
`
`automotive industry.
`
`20.
`
`In addition
`
`to
`
`teaching and designing
`
`the curriculum
`
`for
`
`undergraduate and graduate students, I also worked in the automotive industry
`
`closely with Ford Motor Company on the development of a hybrid electric vehicle.
`
`21. Specifically, I served as project director on a cooperative research
`
`project to develop and design all aspects of a hybrid electric vehicle. While in
`
`many instances we used standard Ford components, we custom designed many
`
`automotive subsystems. As part of this project, we completely redesigned and
`
`replaced the existing powertrain including the fuel storage, delivery and injection
`
`systems. We also did analytical and actual testing of the systems.
`
`22. While at Lawrence Technological University, I also served as the
`
`Page 12
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`faculty advisor on several student based hybrid vehicle competitions that were
`
`sponsored primarily by Ford Motor Company, General Motor Company, and
`
`Chrysler Corporation.
`
`23. These competitions required the complete design of hybrid vehicle,
`
`including the design of the power train. These competitions also required the
`
`complete design of the software and hardware required to control the hybrid
`
`vehicle.
`
`24. Attached as Exhibits 1217 and 1218 are the competition papers that
`
`were submitted for the 1996 and 1997 competitions for which I served as the
`
`faculty advisor. (Ex. 1217 & Ex. 1218.)
`
`25. During my time at Lawrence Technological University, I further
`
`served as advisor for 145 automotive graduate and undergraduate project students.
`
`Many of the graduate students whom I advised were employed as full time
`
`engineers in the automotive industry. This service required constant interaction
`
`with the students and their automotive companies which included the major
`
`automotive manufacturers (e.g., Ford, Chrysler, General Motors, Toyota, etc.)
`
`along with many automotive suppliers, including those that supply fuel delivery
`
`systems (e.g., Denso, Delphi and Bosch.)
`
`26. Currently, I am employed as a Professor of Mechanical Engineering
`
`& Director of the Advanced Engine Research Laboratory (AERL) at Kettering
`
`Page 13
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`University—formerly known as “General Motors Institute.”
`
`27. At Kettering University I develop curriculum and teach courses in
`
`mechanical and automotive engineering to both undergraduate and graduate
`
`students.
`
`28. Since coming to Kettering, I have advised over 90 undergraduate and
`
`graduate theses in automotive engineering. Further, I actively pursue research and
`
`development activities within automotive engineering.
`
`29. My work requires constant involvement with my students and their
`
`sponsoring automotive companies which have included not only those mentioned
`
`above, but also Walbro, Nissan, Borg Warner, FEV, Inc., U.S. Army Automotive
`
`Command, Denso, Honda, Dana, TRW, Tenneco, Navistar, and ArvinMeritor.
`
`30. As is further shown by resume, I have published over 50 peer
`
`reviewed technical articles and presentations involving topics in automotive
`
`engineering.
`
`31. Automotive and mechanical engineering topics covered in these
`
`articles include development of hybrid vehicles, mechanical design and analysis of
`
`components and systems, vehicle exterior design including aerodynamics,
`
`development of alternative fueled vehicles and fuel systems, thermal and fluid
`
`system design and analysis, selection and design of components and sub-systems
`
`for optimum system integration, and system calibration and control.
`
`Page 14
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`32.
`
`I have also chaired or co-chaired sessions in automotive engineering
`
`at many
`
`technical conferences
`
`including sessions
`
`involving powertrain
`
`development and control in automotive engineering.
`
`33. Additionally, while acting as director of the AERL, I am responsible
`
`for numerous laboratories and undergraduate and graduate research projects, which
`
`include On-road and Off-road engine and chassis testing laboratories. Projects
`
`have included the design and development of fuel injection systems for off-road
`
`vehicles, fuel compatibility studies of vehicle storage and delivery systems,
`
`modification of fuel delivery systems to accommodate alternative fuels, and other
`
`extensive modifications and development of vehicular powertrains.
`
`34.
`
`I also serve as faculty advisor to the Society of Automotive Engineers
`
`International (SAE) at the national level, on the local Student Branch and for the
`
`“SAE Clean Snowmobile Challenge.” I have served as a director on the SAE
`
`Board of Directors, the Engineering Education Board, and the Publications Board.
`
`35. Further, I have chaired the Engineering Education Board and several
`
`of the SAE Committees.
`
`36.
`
`I also actively develop and
`
`teach Continuing Professional
`
`Development (CPD) courses both for SAE and directly for corporate automotive
`
`clients. These CPD courses are directed to automotive powertrain, exterior body
`
`systems, hybrid electric vehicle design, and include extensive engine performance,
`
`Page 15
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`emissions, and economy considerations. These courses are taught primarily to
`
`engineers who are employed in the automotive industry.
`
`37. Finally, I am a member of the Advisory Board of the National
`
`Institute for Advanced Transportation Technology at the University of Idaho. In
`
`addition to advising, I also review funding proposals and project reports of the
`
`researchers funded by the center.
`
`II. RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARDS
`
`38.
`
`I have been asked to provide opinions on the claims of the ’347 Patent
`
`in light of the prior art.
`
`39.
`
`It is my understanding that a claimed invention is unpatentable under
`
`35 USC § 102 if a prior art reference teaches every element of the claim. Further,
`
`it is my understanding that a claimed invention is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 103 if the differences between the invention and the prior art are such that the
`
`subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the alleged
`
`invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the subject
`
`matter pertains. I also understand that an obviousness analysis takes into factual
`
`inquiries including the level of ordinary skill in the art, the scope and content of the
`
`prior art, and the differences between the prior art and the claimed subject matter.
`
`40.
`
`It is my understanding that the Supreme Court has recognized several
`
`rationales for combining references or modifying a reference to show obviousness
`
`Page 16
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`of the claimed subject matter. Some of these rationales include the following:
`
`combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable
`
`results; simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable
`
`results; a predictable use of prior art elements according to their established
`
`functions; applying a known technique to a known device to yield predictable
`
`results; choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a
`
`reasonable expectation of success; and some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in
`
`the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art
`
`reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed
`
`invention.
`
`III. QUALIFICATIONS OF ONE OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE
`ART
`
`41.
`
`I have reviewed the ’347 Patent, those patents cited in the ’347 Patent
`
`as well as the prior art documents. Based on this review and my knowledge of
`
`hybrid electric vehicles, including my work on multiple hybrid vehicles during the
`
`course of the 1990’s, it is my opinion that a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`would have either: (1) a graduate degree in mechanical, electrical or automotive
`
`engineering with at least some experience in the design and control of combustion
`
`engines, electric or hybrid electric vehicle propulsion systems, or design and
`
`control of automotive transmissions, or (2) a bachelor's degree in mechanical,
`
`electrical or automotive engineering and at least five years of experience in the
`
`Page 17
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`design of combustion engines, electric vehicle propulsion systems, or automotive
`
`transmissions.
`
`42.
`
`I understand that this determination is made at the time of the
`
`invention, which I understand that the patentee purports as being the September 14,
`
`1998 filing of U.S. Provisional Application
`
` No. 60/100,095 (“the ’095
`
`Provisional,” Ex. 1236). As I also discussed in my “Qualifications and Professional
`
`Experience” (¶¶ 5-37) above, I am familiar with the level of knowledge and the
`
`abilities of a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed
`
`invention based on my experience in the industry (both as an employee and as a
`
`professor).
`
`IV. STATE OF THE ART
`
`43. Hybrid-Electric Vehicles (hybrid vehicle) were conceived over 100
`
`years ago in an attempt to combine the power capabilities of electric motors and
`
`internal combustion engines1 (ICE) to satisfy all the driver demand required to
`
`propel a vehicle. (Ex. 1219 at 11).
`
`44.
`
`I am aware that one of the first functioning hybrid vehicles was
`
`designed and built by Justus Entz in May 1897. (Ex. 1219 at 11-13).
`
`45.
`
`I am also aware that hybrid vehicle patents extend as far back as 1909
`
`
`1 An engine could also be referred to as a “heat engine” and is commonly known to
`
`be a part of the overall “Auxiliary Power Unit” of a hybrid vehicle (i.e., “APU”).
`
`Page 18
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`for U.S. Patent No. 913,846 to Pieper that was granted for a “Mixed Drive Auto
`
`Vehicle.”
`
`46.
`
`I am aware that the hybrid vehicle disclosed by the Pieper patent was
`
`likewise assembled as a functioning hybrid vehicle that was publically used. (Ex.
`
`1219 at 13-14).
`
`47.
`
`I am also aware of well-known hybrid vehicles that were built and
`
`publically used by Baker and Woods in 1917. (Ex. 1219 at 21-23).
`
`48. While these early hybrid vehicles did not include the complex
`
`microprocessor based control strategies found in present-day hybrid vehicles, it has
`
`always been known that one goal of hybrid vehicles is the possibility of operating
`
`the engine at its “optimum efficiency.”
`
`From almost
`
`the beginning of
`
`the Automotive Age, various
`
`combinations of drive systems have been tried in order to achieve
`
`vehicle performance characteristics superior to those that can be
`
`obtained using a single type of drive. These efforts have been made
`
`in the name of many worthwhile goals such as increased vehicle
`
`acceleration capability, audible noise reduction, operation of an
`
`engine or turbine at optimum efficiency, reduction of noxious
`
`emissions, and improved fuel economy.
`
`(Ex. 1220 at 1, emphasis added).
`
`49.
`
`It was not until events in the 1970’s, however, that a renewed interest
`
`in hybrid vehicles emerged as a means to combat the U.S. dependency on oil and
`
`Page 19
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`to meet increased air pollution reduction goals. (See e.g., Ex. 1221 at 3; Ex. 1222
`
`at 3).
`
`50. For instance, in 1976 the U.S. government enacted Public Law 94-413
`
`pertaining to the “Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Research, Development, and
`
`Demonstration Act” that was to “encourage and support accelerated research into,
`
`and development of electric and hybrid vehicle technologies.” (Ex. 1223 at 4).
`
`51. As a result of this law, multiple fully functional hybrid and electric
`
`vehicles were developed by automotive corporations. (Ex. 1223 at 4).
`
`52.
`
`I am specifically aware that Ford Motor Company and Toyota Motor
`
`Company invested considerable time and money into developing both hybrid and
`
`electric vehicles. (See e.g., Ex. 1220 at 1; Ex. 1224 at 4).
`
`53. Further collegiate competitions intensified during the 1990’s starting
`
`with the 1993-1995 Ford Hybrid Electric Vehicle Challenge. The 1993 Ford
`
`Hybrid Electric Vehicle Challenge is attached as Exhibit 1216. By 1994 these
`
`competitions had grown to include teams from over 38 universities representing
`
`more than 800 students. (Ex. 1223 at 10).
`
`54. As I mentioned in my “Qualifications and Professional” section
`
`above, I was personally involved with the U.S. Naval Academy’s hybrid vehicle
`
`design that was entered in the 1993 “Ford Hybrid Vehicle” competition. (Ex. 1216
`
`at 6).
`
`Page 20
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`55.
`
`I was also personally
`
`involved with Lawrence Technological
`
`University’s hybrid vehicle design that was entered in the 1996 and 1997 “Future
`
`Car” hybrid vehicle competitions. (Ex. 1217 at 6; Ex. 1218 at 10).
`
`56. Based upon the level of research and development prior to 1998,
`
`numerous hybrid vehicle “architectures” were well-known. (See e.g., Ex. 1225 at 4
`
`& 7-8). Hybrid vehicle “architectures” may also be generally referred to as hybrid
`
`“topologies” or “configurations.” As I explain in detail below, known hybrid
`
`vehicle “architectures” included what was commonly referred to as: (1) “series”
`
`hybrid vehicles (¶¶ 61-69 below); and (2) “parallel” hybrid vehicles (¶¶ 70-72
`
`below). As I further explain in detail below, “parallel” hybrid vehicle architectures
`
`were further known to include: (1) one motor “parallel” hybrid vehicle
`
`architectures (¶¶ 73-86 below); and (3) two motor “parallel” hybrid vehicle
`
`architectures (¶¶ 87-107 below).
`
`57. As I explain further below, these varying hybrid vehicle architectures
`
`differed in how the powertrain (i.e., the engines and motors) was arranged and
`
`connected to the wheels. The various architectures were done in order to achieve
`
`many of the goals I mentioned above in ¶48, including operating the engine at its
`
`peak efficiency. (See e.g., Ex. 1220 at 1; Ex. 1225 at 4 & 7).
`
`58. Due to the rapid advancement of computers starting in the 1970’s,
`
`each of these hybrid vehicles included microprocessor based control strategies for
`
`Page 21
`
`
`
`FORD 1215
`
`

`

`
`
`properly controlling the engine, motor(s), transmission, and/ clutching mechanisms
`
`used. (See e.g., Ex. 1224 at 4).
`
`59. While the control strategies varied based on the architecture being
`
`employed, the primary goal still focused on operating the engine within its “sweet
`
`spot” or “optimum efficiency range.” (See e.g., Ex. 1220 at 1; Ex. 1224 at 4).
`
`60. Such efficient engine control strategies were desired so as to meet the
`
`Federal government’s reduced air pollution goals of 1976 and to meet California’s
`
`“Low Emissions Vehicle” regulation that was enacted in 1990. (Ex. 1222 at 3).
`
`A.
`
`“Series” Hybrid Vehicle
`
`61. A person of ordinary skill in the art knew well-prior to September
`
`1998 of the design and operational advantages of “series” hybrid vehicle
`
`architectures. (Ex. 1221 at 6-7; Ex. 1225 at 7).
`
`62.
`
`In fact, by 1979 it was well-known that “series” hybrid vehicles could
`
`be designed in various arrangements that could include one or more electri