UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`FORD MOTOR COMPANY
`
`Petitione1',
`
`V.
`
`PAICE LLC & ABELL FOUNDATION, INC.
`Patent Owners.
`
`US. Patent No. 7,237,634 to Severinsky er at.
`IPR Case No.
`IPR201-4-0078?
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. GREGORY W. DAVIS IN SUPPORT‘ OF
`
`PETITIONER’S REPLY TO PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`Page 1 of 30
`
`_
`
`_
`
`FORD 1809
`
`PAICE 2417
`Ford v. Paice & Abell
`IPR2015-00794
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`FORD MOTOR COMPANY
`
`Petitione1',
`
`V.
`
`PAICE LLC & ABELL FOUNDATION, INC.
`Patent Owners.
`
`US. Patent No. 7,237,634 to Severinsky er at.
`IPR Case No.
`IPR201-4-0078?
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. GREGORY W. DAVIS IN SUPPORT‘ OF
`
`PETITIONER’S REPLY TO PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`Page 1 of 30
`
`_
`
`_
`
`FORD 1809
`
`PAICE 2417
`Ford v. Paice & Abell
`IPR2015-00794
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`lPR20l5—0U?87
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0l04IPR5
`
`Table of Contents
`
`Updated Exhibit List ................................................................................................ ..3
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`III.
`
`Ibaraki ‘S82 discloses a torque based line ..................................................... ..7
`
`lbaraki ‘S82 compares road load to MTO ................................................... .. 10
`
`A.
`
`Figure 5 also discloses operating the motor and engine when
`“road load” is “more than MT ” ...................................................... ..2l
`
`The combination of Ibaraki "882 and Vittone teaches “controlling the
`engine” by “li1'nitiI1g a rate of change of torque output of the engine”
`“to achieve stoichiometry” .......................................................................... ..23
`
`A.
`
`Vittone’s ‘steady state management’ of the thermal engine
`teaches that the rate of change of torque output of the engine is
`limited ................................................................................................ ..23
`
`l.
`
`Paice’s narrow interpretation of Ibaraki ’882 and Vittone
`is incorrect ............................................................................... ..27
`
`IV.
`
`Conclusion ................................................................................................... ..30
`
`Page 2 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`lPR20l5-00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0l04IPR5
`
`Updated Exhibit List
`
`Descri a tion
`
`Date
`
`Identifier
`
`’634 Patent
`
`1
`
`
`
`Ibaraki ’882
`
`Vittone
`
`July 3, 2007
`Sept. 2014
`Au. 4, 1998
`
`1994
`
`Feb. 23, 1996
`
`2013-2014
`
`Yamaguchi
`Davis Dec.
`To ota Litigation
`Hyundai
`Litigation
`
`Exhibit
`
`No.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,237,634
`Ford Letter to Paice
`U.S. Patent No. 5,789,882
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,865,263
`
`Oreste Vittone er al., FIAT
`
` Research Centre, Ffat
`C0n.c'epi‘ual Approach to Hybrid
`
`Car Design,” 12”’ (International
`Electric Vehicle Symposium,
`1994)
`
`Declaration of Grego Davis
`
`
`
`Toyota Litigations
`
`Hyundai Litigation
`
`
`
`1755
`1756
`1757
`
` PTAB Decisions & Preliminary
`Response in 2014-00571
`
`7,237,634 File Histoiy (certified)
`History
`’347 File History Excerpt of USPN 7,104,347 File
`
`Set. 12, 2006
`
`’634 Patent File
`
`’347 Patent
`
`Unnewellr
`Bumby 1988
`
`
` n/a
`
`I1/a
`
`
`
`History
`
`U.S. Patent No.7,104,347
`
`
`
`1763
`
`1764
`1765
`
`SAE 760121 (Unnewehr~'1976)
`Feb. 1, 1976
`Microprocessor Design for HEV Sept. 1, 1988
`(Bumb -1988)
`SAE SP"-1331 (1993)
`Innovations in Design: 1993
`Ford Hybrid Electric Vehicle
`Challene
`
`Feb. 1993
`Feb. 1994
`
`1766
`
`1996 & 1997 Future Car
`
`Feb. 1997 &
`
`1767
`
`Challenge
`Introduction to Automotive
`
`Feb. 1998
`
`Davis Textbook
`
`Powertrain (Davis)
`
`1768
`
`U.S. Application 60-100095
`
`Filed Sept. 11,
`1998
`
`’O95 Provisional
`
`Page 3 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.: IPR2015-00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0l04IPR5
`
`Date
`
`1998
`
`Identifier
`Wakefield
`
`Feb. 1, 1992
`
`Burke 1992
`
`No.
`1769
`
`1770
`
`1771
`
`Descri _u tion
`History of Hybrid Electric
`Vehicle (Wal<efielcl—l998)
`
`SAE 920447 (Burke~l992)
`
`
`
`Vehicle Tester for HEV (Duoba— Aug. 1, 1997
`1997)
`
`1772
`
`DOE Report to Congress (1994) April 1995
`
`1773
`
`1774
`
`SAE SP—1. 156 (1996)
`
`Feb. 1996
`
`DOE HEV Assessment (1979)
`
`Sept. 30, 1979
`
`1775
`
`EPA HEV Final Study (1971)
`
`June 1, 1971
`
`W0 9323263A1 (Field)
`Toyota Prius (Yamaguchi~l998)
`
`r"NoV. 25, 1998
`Jan. 1998
`
`Duoba 1997
`
`1994 Report to
`Conress
`SAE SP-1156
`
`HEV Assessment
`1979
`
`EPA HEV Final
`Study
`9323263
`Toyota Prius
`Yamaguchi 1998
`
`1776
`1777
`
`1778
`
`1779
`
`1780
`
`1781
`
`1782
`
`1783
`
`1784
`1785
`1786
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Automotive Electronics
`
`US Patent 6,209,672
`
`Aril 3, 2001
`
`’672 Patent
`
`Propulsion System for Design
`for EV (Ehsani-1996)
`
`Propulsion System Design for
`I-IEV (Ehsani—l997)
`Bosch Automotive Handbook
`
`(1996)
`
`1996
`
`IEEE Eshani 1996
`
`Feb. 1997
`
`Oct. 1996
`
`IEEE Eshani I997
`_
`Bosch Handbook
`
`SAE SP—1089 (Anderson—l995)
`
`Feb. 1995
`
`SAE SP—1089
`
`Aug. 11, 1998
`
`A11 1998
`
`l
`
`
`Critical Issues in Quantifying
`
`HEV Emissions (An 1998)
`Gregory Davis Resume
`
`July 12, 1994
`U.S. Patent No. 5,327,992
`
`Sept. 6, 1994
`US Patent 5,343,970
`
`Bumby, JR. et al. “Optimisation Nov. 1987
`
`and control of a hybrid electric
`car” — IEE Proc. A 1987, 134(6)
`
`Paice Comlaint
` Feb. 25, 2014
`
`
`B011
`Severinsky ’970
`Bumby II
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1997
`
`
`
`
`Handbook (Jurgen)
`Engineering Fundamentals of the
`Internal Combustion Engine
`(Pulkrabek)
`
`Page 4 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0l04IPR5
`
`IPR2015—00787
`
`Case No.:
`
`No.‘
`
`Descri ntion
`
`Date
`
`Identifier
`
`Final Decision, IPR20l4—00904, December 10,
`
`’904 Decision
`
`Paper 41
`Final Decision, IPR20l4~0057l,
`Pa er 44
`
`2015
`September 28,
`2015
`
`’57l Decision
`
`Final Decision, IPR2014—01416, March 10, 2016
`Paer 26
`
`’l4l6 Decision
`
`Deposition Transcript of Neil
`
`Hannemann for IPR2014-01416
`Final Decision, IPR2014—00884, December 10,
`
`Sept. 4, 2015
`
`2015
`Paper 38
`Final Decision, IPR2014—O0875, November 23,
`Pa 1 er 38
`2015
`
`De.
`’884 Decision
`
`’875 Decision
`
`Final Decision, IPR2014-01415, March 10, 2016
`
`’ 1415 Decision
`
`Paper 30
`Deposition Transcript of Neil
`Hannemann for IPR2014~00570 .
`
`April 8, 2015
`'
`
`Hannemann ’570
`' De .
`
`Deposition Transcript of Neil
`Hannemann for IPR20l4—O0875
`Exhibit 2 from depositionof Neil April 30, 2015
`Hannernann for IPR20 l4~O0875
`
`April 30, 2015
`
`Hannemann ’875
`Dep.
`'875 Dep. Exhibit
`
`1801
`
`1802-
`
`1804
`
`1805
`
`1806
`
`Patent Owner’s Response,
`IPR2014—00884, Paper 19
`Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric
`and Fuel Cell Vehicles
`
`Bosch Handbook
`
`Deposition Transcript of Neil
`Hannernann for IPR2014—00884
`
`I Deposition Transcript of Neil
`
`Hannemann for IPR2014—0O787
`Exhibit 12 from Deposition
`Transcript of Neil Hannemann
`(IPR2014+0O884)
`
`March 10, 2015
`
`’884 POR
`
`2005
`
`1976
`
`April 30, 2015
`
`April 27, 2016
`
`April 30, 2015
`
`Elisani
`
`Bosch Handbook
`
`1976
`
`I-Iannemann ‘S84
`Dep.
`
`Hannemann ’787
`
`De.
`‘S84 Dep. Exhibit
`
`' 1807
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’,s Response,
`IPR20l4—01416, Paper 17
`Deposition Transcript of Neil
`Hannemann for IPR2014—00571
`
`June 17, 2015
`
`’ 1416 POR ..
`
`_
`
`April 7, 2015
`
`Hannemann ’571
`Dep.
`
`Page 5 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`IPRZUIS-DOTS?
`
`Attorney Docket No. F1’-’GP0104IPR5
`
`
` Description Date
`
`
` Reply Declaration of D1‘.
`
`Gregory Davis
`
`Identifier
`
`Davis Reply
`
`
`
`Page 6 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`IPR2015—00?8'.*'
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGPO104IPR5
`
`I, Gregory Davis, hereby declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I previously submitted a declaration on February 23, 2015 at the
`
`request of Ford Motor Company in the matter of Inter Panes Review of U.S. Patent
`
`No. 7,237,634 (“the ’634 Patent”) to Severinsky et al.
`
`2.
`
`I provide this supplemental declaration in response to arguments
`
`presented by the Patent Owner.
`
`I.
`
`Ibaraki ’882 discloses a torque based line
`
`3.
`
`I understand that Paice argues that boundary line B in Figure 11 of
`
`Ibaraki ‘S82 is a “power curve.” (see e.g., Ex. 2706, Hann. Decl. at ‘fl53.) But I
`
`disagree as the curved portion Mr. Hannemann relies upon is only a segment of the
`
`entire “boundary line B.”
`
`4.
`
`When looking at the entire “boundary line B” I understand it to be the
`
`“vehicle drive torque” (as the y-axis states) at all “vehicle speeds."
`
`5.
`
`For instance, “boundary line B” includes (1) a hyperbolic curved
`
`portion that I have highlighted in red; and (2) a flat (constant) portion which I have
`
`highlighted in blue.
`
`Page 7 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`[PR20l5—O{)'r'87'
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGPO l 04113115
`
`Lonsiamtftatl pomon oi‘
`
`"\.'E|u:Iedrluet-3rqi.»a'
`
`
`
`
`
`VEHICLEDFIIVETORQUE
`
`Hyperbol lca |iv,r sloping
`portion of "vehicle drive
`torque"
`
`
`
`
`VEHICLE SPEED
`
`EX. 1752, Ibaraki ’882 at Fig. 11 (annotated)
`
`6.
`
`This is important as it appears that Mr. Hannemann (and Paice) are
`
`solely relying on the hyperbolic curved portion to argue that “boundary line B” is a
`
`line of constant power.
`
`7.
`
`But I do not believe this to be an accurate statement as demonstrated
`
`by Ex. 2711 that I understand was introduced by the Patent Owner with its
`
`response. Specifically, Ex. 2711 confirms that a person having ordinary skill in the
`
`art would understand the below graph to be the ideal characteristics of what an
`
`engine (or electric motor) would output at the drive wheels.
`
`Page 8 of 30
`
`FORD 1309
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`lPR20l5—00?'87
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0l{}4IPRS
`
`Power
`
`Torque
`
`Speed
`
`Ex. 2711 at 14, Fig. 2.10
`
`8.
`
`As shown two curves are illustrated. The first curve labeled “torque”
`
`includes a flat portion at low vehicle speeds and then a segment where the “torque
`
`varies with speed hyperbolically.” (Ex. 2711 at 14.) This hyperbolically varying
`
`portion would be a torque line indicating a constant power value.
`
`9.
`
`In fact, the above graph illustrates this fact by also including a power
`
`output line. As is shown, when the “torque varies with speed hype1'bolically” the
`
`power line is constant (flat). (Ex. 2711 at 14.)
`
`10.
`
`Likewise, as shown by Fig. 2.10, when the torque is constant (flat) the
`
`power line increases rapidly up to its constant (flat) value. This graph simply
`
`further illustrates the well~known relationships between torque and power with
`
`respect to speed.
`
`Page 9 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`IPR20I5—0{)7S7'
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0104IPRS
`
`11.
`
`But simply because a hyperbolically varying torque line might be
`
`understood as representing a constant power curve, does not mean the line is a
`
`power curve.
`
`12.
`
`Again, Fig. 11 is expressly labeled in terms of “vehicle drive torque”
`
`and “vehicle speed.” This alone should confirm that “boundary line B” is a torque
`
`line.
`
`13.
`
`Further, Ex. 2711 illustrates a person having ordinary skill would
`
`understand that the torque at the wheels is constant (flat) at low vehicle speeds, and
`
`- then the “torque varies with speed hyperbolically.”
`
`14.
`
`A person having ordinary skill would therefore have understood the
`
`entire portion of boundary line B as being a “vehicle drive torque” line (as the
`
`graph expressly is labeled) which is constant (flat) at low “vehicle speeds,” and
`
`then which “varies with speed hyperbolically.”
`
`II.
`
`Ibaraki ‘882 compares road load to MTO
`
`15.
`
`I understand that Paice argues that boundary line C in Figure 11 of
`
`Ibaraki ‘882 does not use or disclose the use of MTO in its mode control strategy. I
`
`disagree with this statement.
`
`16.
`
`As I stated in my original declaration, a person having ordinary skill
`
`would have understood “boundary line C” as being equal to 01' possibly less than
`
`the MTO of an engine. (Ex. l755, Davis Dec. at 91238.)
`
`Page 10 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No: IPRZUIS-00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGPOI 04IPR5
`
`17.
`
`Again, it is my understanding that Paice has introduced Ex. 2711 with
`
`its Current response to explain the MTO graph illustrated on page 15, Fig. 2.11. It
`
`is also my understanding that Mr. Hannemann has overlayed what he states is
`
`“boundary line C” onto an engine graph having an MTO line.
`
`(Ex. 2706,
`
`Hannemann Declaration at 9185.)
`
`18.
`
`But it is my opinion that Ex. 2711 illustrates that Mr. I-Iaiinemantfs
`
`overlay graph is not accurate with respect to Figure I1’s data map.
`
`19. Mr. Hannemann uses the overlayed curves to explain that
`
`the
`
`engine’s MTO curve is a hyperbolic curve that looks different than boundary line C
`
`in Figure 11. But there are several reasons for the difference in appearance, even
`
`though both lines are based on the engine’s MTO.
`
`20.
`
`First, the drawing generated by Mr. Hannematul is a graph of en.gr’ne
`
`torque (y—axis) versus engine speed (x—axis).
`
`In other words, it is an engine graph
`
`like the one shown by Figure 5 of Ibaraki ’882. Figure 11, however,
`
`is a “data
`
`map” lllLlSt1"c1lZlI1g the vehicle torque versus vehicle speed, as highlighted below.
`
`Page 11 of 30
`
`FORD 1309
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`IPR2015—00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0l{}41PR5
`
`Paice’s Illustration
`
`Tnrrluc ENn1l
`
`lbaraki ‘882
`
`Eng‘i‘fi‘e‘é“’5'E:"i5§ed
`
`
`
`EngineTorque
`
`.000
`
`2.100
`
`-30
`
`mm
`
`21. And below is Mr. Hannemann’s generated figure where he overlays
`
`what he alleges is “boundary line C” onto the above engine graph.
`
`(EX. 2706,
`
`Hannemann Declaration at ‘]I‘][84-85.)
`
`
`
`I E
`
`i i
`
`i
`
`Ex. 2706, Hannemann Declaration at ‘I[85
`
`Page 12 of 30
`
`.
`
`_
`
`xv.
`
`.
`
`.t.
`.‘-.‘v
`
`_
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`IPR20l5~00?S'!'
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP(}lG4IPR5
`
`22.
`
`A person having ordinary skill
`
`in the art would understand M1‘.
`
`I-lannemannis graph as being incorrect
`
`is because Ibaraki
`
`’882 discloses a
`
`“transmission 116” being included between the engine and drive wheels. (Ex.
`
`1752, Ibaraki ’882 at 19:23-33.)
`
`ELEGTHIO EH EH6‘!
`STORAGE DEVICE
`
`ESNGWE BRAKJNG
`
`Ex. 1752, Ibaraki ’882 at Fig. 8
`
`23.
`
`A person having ordinary skill in the art would there'fore understand
`
`that the engine’s torque and speed would be modified by the “transmission U6”
`
`and the corresponding “vehicle drive torque” and “vehicle speed” would be based
`
`on the particular gear ratio of the transmission.
`
`24.
`
`Ex. 2711 even explains that
`
`it was known to use a “multigear
`
`transmission... to modify” the “torque—speed profile” shown in Figure 2.11. (Ex.
`
`Page 13 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.: IPR20l5-00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0l04IPR5
`
`2711 at 15.) Ex. 2711 further states that how a tiansmission modifies the “torque-
`
`speed profile” is shown in “Figure 2.13.” (Ex. 2711 at 15.)
`
`25.
`
`It is my understanding however, that Paice did not include the portion
`
`of the textbook including Figure. 2.13. I have acquired a copy of this textbook and
`
`included chapter 2 in its entirety. (Ex. 1802, Ehsani.')
`
`26.
`
`Shown below is “Figure 2.13” which was discussed on page 15 of Ex.
`
`2711. (Ex. 1802, Ehsani at 39.) As shown below, Figure 2.13 illustrates that each
`
`gear in the transmission has a different gear ratio that modifies the single torque vs
`
`speed curve of the engine to map to various torque vs speed curves for the vehicle?
`
`For instance, in first (15') gear, the engine provides the greatest torque to the wheels
`
`at a low vehicle speed. On the other hand, in fourth (film) gear the engine torque
`
`' Ex. 1802 (Ehsani) is a true and accurate copy of excerpts from a textbook titled
`
`“Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles Fundamentals, Theory,
`
`and Design” that was published by CRC Press in 2005 and authored by Mehrdad
`
`Ehsani et al.
`
`2 One of ordinary skill in the art recognizes that Tractive Effort at the wheel (kN)
`
`(shown on the y—axis of Fig. 2.13) is simply the Tractive Torque at the wheel (kN—
`
`in) divided by the rolling radius of the wheel. (see Ex. 1781, Bosch Handbook at 6»
`
`7.)
`
`Page 14 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.: TPRZIOIS-00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0lO4IPR5
`
`provided at the wheels has a relatively flat curve and can only provide a low torque
`
`but can do so up to a much higher vehicle speed. (Ex. 1802, Ehsani at 39.)
`
`-h
`
`(.0
`
`M
`
`
`
`Tractiveeffononwheel{km
`
`00
`
`20
`
`40
`
`100 120 140 160 180 200
`BO
`80
`Vehicle speed (krnm)
`
`_
`_
`FIGURE 2.13
`Tractive effort of internal combustion engine and :1 multigear transmission vehicle vs. vehicle
`speed
`
`27.
`
`The above figure illustrates what was commonly known to a person
`
`having ordinary skill. For instance, a person driving a n1anual-transmission vehicle
`
`would have understood that 1“ gear cannot be used to drive vehicles at higher
`
`speeds (e.g., driving oil
`
`the freeway). Likewise, a person driving a manual-
`
`transmission vehicle in 1998 would have also understood that higher gears cannot
`
`be used when attempting to climb a very steep hill or tow a heavy load at low
`
`speed. This is because higher gears (e.g., 4"‘ gear) cannot produce the torque
`
`necessary to meet
`
`these vehicle demands. Therefore,
`
`lower gears (and lower
`
`vehicle speeds) are used to operate the vehicle under these situations.‘
`
`_.&.
`
`Page 15 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`lPR20l5-00?87
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0104iPR5
`
`28.
`
`It was also well-known to a person having ordinary skil.l_
`
`that
`
`transmissions were used not only to improve the performance of an engine, but
`
`also to improve the efficiency. For instance, Ex. 1802 describes that the gear ratios
`
`of a transmission are “selected in such a way that the engine can operate in the
`
`same speed range for all the gears. This approach would benefit the fuel economy
`
`and performance of the vehicle.” (Ex. I802, Ehsani at 40; Ex. 2711 at 15.)
`
`29.
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that Figure 2.13
`
`(Ex. 1802, Ehsani at 39) illustrates the engine’s MTO at each gear, as provided at
`
`the wheels of the vehicle. As annotated below, the engine’s MTO (as modified by
`
`each gear of the transmission) is limited by a hyperbolic curve.
`
`_
`E"'B'"‘°-' M70
`
`Torque
`
`300
`
`'E*
`E.
`240 s
`E
`O
`;—
`
`100
`
`so
`
`'5
`2
`
`53 40
`
`Specific fuel
`
`0
`1000
`
`1
`000
`
`2
`
`1
`I
`3000
`Speed{|.pn:)m0
`
`I
`5000
`
`Engine MTD
`as modified by each gear
`of the transmission
`
`Upper boundary that limits
`engine's MTO at the drive wheels
`
`2
`f.
`._
`G)
`
`1:
`°
`
`‘“
`
`___§% E
`(I?
`310 § 2'
`2;
`D.
`270%;
`§
`U
`
`E
`
`
`
`0
`
`20
`
`40
`
`120 140 160 180 200
`100
`30
`60
`Vehicle speed (kmfh)
`
`Ex. 1802, Ehsani at Fig. 2.11 and 2.13
`
`30.
`
`As is further illustrated below, Figure 2.13 (Ex. 1802, Ehsani at 39)
`
`includes a dashed line (highlighted in yellow) that
`
`is the upper bound of each
`
`Page 16 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.: LPR20l 5-00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGPO I04IPR5
`
`individual MTO curve that has been modified by the transinission and provided at
`
`the drive wheels. This upper bound represents the maximum power that could be
`
`provided to the drive wheels by the engine at any vehicle speed.
`
`In other words,
`
`the dashed line represents the maximum torque output of the engine that can be
`
`provided to the wheels at any given vehicle speed.
`
`engine MTO in 1“geat'
`
`2nd gear
`engine MTO in 2”“ gear
`
`'\
`
`3rd gear
`engine MTO in 3rd gear
`E
`41h gfigihe MTO in
`--.
`*-
`4"‘ gear
`
`
`
`
`
`Tractiveeffortonwheel(KN)
`
`0
`
`20
`
`40
`
`60
`
`80
`
`100
`
`120 140 160 180 200
`
`Vehicle speed (km/h)
`
`Ex. 1802, Ehsani at 39, Fig. 2.13 (annotated)
`
`31.
`
`It was further known by a person having ordinary skill that if an
`
`“infinitely variable transmission” was used, the hyperbolic curve highlighted above
`
`Page 17 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.: IPR20l5-0078?
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0lO4lPR5
`
`in yellow could be attained over a range of gear ratios.
`
`(Ex.
`
`l803,3 Bosch
`
`Handbook 1976 at 3.) In other words, the dashed line would be the engine’s MTO
`
`as seen at the vehicle wheels when using an infinitely variable transmission. This
`
`concept is illustrated somewhat by the 4 gear transmission shown in Figure 2.13.
`
`Specifically, it can be seen that each gear follows the hyperbolic curves for at least
`
`a portion. With the infinitely variable transmission, there would not be any “steps”
`
`or gaps between gears; thus the engine MTO at the wheels of the Vehicle would
`
`follow the hyperbolic curve highlighted in yellow.
`
`32.
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that boundary
`
`line C in Fig. ll of Ibaraki ‘882 represents the upper bound of the engine’s MTO
`
`as seen at the output of the “transmission 116” (i.e., at the drive wheels) in any
`
`gear represented on a graph of vehicle torque versus speed, as described by Dr.
`
`Ehsani in Ex. 271 l. A comparison is shown below.
`
`3 Ex. 1803 (Bosch Handbook 1976) is a true and accurate copy of excerpts from
`
`the 1976 Bosch Automotive Handbook that was published by Robert Bosch GmbH
`
`in 1976.
`
`Page 18 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.: IPR2015-0078?
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGPO l04lPR5
`
`Ehsani (Ex. 2711)
`
`Ibaraki '88}!
`
`
`
`-
`s
`c:
`s
`as
`:1:
`3
`
`E.
`
`EG)E3
`
`5
`r
`,2
`-v
`S
`Q
`,:
`
`
`
`20
`
`40
`
`‘I40 160 180 200
`‘[20
`100
`80
`60
`Vahlcle speed {kmfl1)
`
`VEHICLE SPEED
`
`33. While Ex. 2711 is not prior art, illustrating the transmission output for
`
`each gear of the engine's MTO was well—known as shown and described in the
`
`Bosch Handbook in 1976. (Ex. 18034.) Ex. 1803 also explains that it was well
`
`known that without a transmission,
`
`the engine could
`
`provide only little
`
`(I
`
`acceleration and exhibit unsatisfactory climbing ability.” (Ex. 1803, Bosch
`
`Handbook 1976 at 3.) This is shown below by the dashed line labeled “direct
`
`drive.” In other words, with a direct drive gear ratio the engine’s MTO is not
`
`4 Just as before with Ehsani, one of ordinary skill in the art recognizes that the
`
`Tractive force at the wheel (shown on the y-axis of Ex. 1803 at 3) is simply the
`
`Tractive Torque at the wheel divided by the rolling radius of the wheel.
`
`(see Ex.
`
`1781, Bosch Handbook at 6-7; See also Ex. 1803 at 3; explaining that “M = F*r,”
`
`where M = torque, F = force, 1' = radius.)
`
`Page 19 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`[PR2Ul5-00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGPOI 04IPR5
`
`modified and will be far below the hyperbolic “ideal tractive force liyperbola”
`
`curve illustrated below at most vehicle speeds.
`
`Ideal tractive
`
`force hyperbole
`, , -'. ;-- .-'3
`9;
`, ’
`sparkignitlon engine with
`speed transmission
`30%
`
`"9 Diesel engine with
`speed lransmis sion
`
`Plpvmax
`
`Performance man
`
`Vl1'Inu..\
`
`Ex. 1803, Bosch Handbook 1976 at 3
`
`34.
`
`The direct drive illustration just further demonstrates that a person
`
`having ordinary skill would have understood that the hyperbolic “boundary line C”
`
`curve is at or possibly below the engine’s MTO at all points. The “direct drive”
`
`curve shows that without a transmission, the MTO of the engine at the wheels is
`
`below the engine MTO curve at the wheels for each gear ratio of the transmission
`
`that follows the hyperbolic “ideal tractive force” curve.
`
`Page 20 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.: IPR20I5~00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0104IPR5
`
`A.
`
`Figure 5 also discloses operating the motor and engine when “road
`load” is “more than MT0”
`
`35.
`
`As I explained in my opening declaration, Figure 5 describes how an
`
`engine map can be modified to embody the data map shown by Figure 11. (Ex.
`
`1755, Davis at ‘][‘]I218—2l9; Ex. I752, Ibaraki ’882 at 25:46-65.)
`
`36. Aside from describing using Figure 5 for selecting just the “ENGINE
`
`DRIVE” mode and “MOTOR—DRIVE” mode, Ibaraki ‘S82 also contemplates the
`
`engine graph of Figure 5 could be used for selecting the “ENGINEMOTOR
`
`DRIVE” mode.
`
`ENGINEMDTOR DRIVE mode
`
`Engine MTG
`
`ENGINEDRIVE mode
`
`TORQUETE
`
`ENGINE
`
`ENGINE SPEED NE
`
`Ex. 1752, ibaruki '882 at Fig. 5 (annotated)
`
`37.
`
`Specifically, Ibaraki ’88?. described the modification as applying to
`
`the “first embodiment.” Then, Ibaraki ’88?. also explains that the first embodiment
`
`may be further “modified to have the ENGINE-MOTOR DRIVE mode... which is
`
`Page 21 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`IPR20l5—00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGPOl04IPR5
`
`selected when the vehicle load is comparatively hi gh.” (Ex. 1752, Ibaraki ’882 at
`
`26:28-33.)
`
`38.
`
`Based on this disclosure,
`
`it
`
`is my opinion that a person having
`
`ordinary skill would have understood that Figure 5 could further include a
`
`“ENGINE-MOTOR DRIVE” mode. A person having ordinary skill would have
`
`further understood that high “vehicle loads” means loads that exceed the MTO of
`
`an engine. For instance, as I described in ‘H34 above, a “direct drive” vehicle (i.e.,
`
`vehicle without transmission) is limited as to how much tractive effort (load) that
`
`the engine can provide at the drive wheels. In conventional vehicles, a transmission
`
`is used to increase the torque (load) output at low vehicle speeds.
`
`39. However,
`
`in hybrid vehicles,
`
`it was understood that at high load
`
`demands the electric motor can also provide the extra torque (or power) needed to
`
`propel the vehicle. (see e.g., Ex. 1755, Davis at ‘][‘j[240-243, 129-134; Ex. I762,
`
`Unnewehr at 5.)
`
`40.
`
`This would allow the engine the capability of providing a certain
`
`amount of torque (as modified by the transmission) to the diive wheels. And then
`
`beyond the engine’s MTO, additional
`
`torque (again as modified by the
`
`transmission) could be provided using a combination of the engine and the electric
`
`motor. This torque which is modified by the transmission would be above
`
`“boundary line C” which I discussed above in fl[31—33.
`
`Page 22 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`lPR20l5—0078?
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGPDIO-4IPR5
`
`III. The combination of Ibaraki ’882 and Vittone teaches “controlling the
`engine” by “limiting a rate of change of torque output of the engine” “to
`achieve stoichiometry”
`
`A.
`
`Vittone’s ‘steady state management’ of the thermal engine teaches
`that the rate of change of torque output of the engine is limited
`
`41.
`
`It is my understanding that Paice has argued Ford provided no support
`
`that Figure 8 discloses limiting a rate of Change of torque output of the engine
`
`during transient phases. (I-Iannemann Declaration, Ex. 2706 at ‘][l04.)
`
`42.
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the
`
`change in engine output torque, as illustrated in Figure 8 of Vittone,
`
`is limited
`
`during the transient phases,
`
`i.e., between (t.-13) and (t4~t5), because the engine
`
`output torque (green) lags the driveability torque requirement
`
`(yellow) in these
`
`phases.
`
`Page 23 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`IPR20l5—0078'r'
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0104IPR5
`
`m
`
`Rapid accelerationz
`
`Rapid
`
`FIGURE 8
`
`DRIVING TORQUE HANAGEMENT
`
`Ex. 1753, Vittone, Figure 8 (annotated)
`
`43. With reference to Figure 8 above, the vehicle is subjected to a first
`
`transient
`
`input when, between t1
`
`and t2,
`
`the DRIVEABILITY TORQUE
`
`REQUIREMENT increases at a constant rate. This is illustrated by the slope of the
`
`DRIVEABILITY TORQUE REQUIREMENTS curve (i.e., the “rate of change of
`
`road load”) between time t, and t; that is labeled as Rapid accelerationl. The
`
`steady state management of the engine in response to Rapid accelerationl
`
`is
`
`illustrated by the slope of the ENGINE TORQUE curve (t'.e., the “rate ofchange of
`
`torque output ofthe engine”) between tI and t3.
`
`I
`
`44.
`
`The vehicle is then subjected to a second transient
`
`input when,
`
`between t4 and t5, the DRIVEABILITY TORQUE REQUIREMENT increases at a
`
`constant rate. This is illustrated by the slope of the DRIVEABILITY TORQUE
`
`Page 24 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`IPR20l5-OUTS?
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0l04IPRS
`
`REQUIREMENTS curve (t'.e., the rate of change of “mad load”) between time t4
`
`and t5, which I have labeled as Rapid acceleration2. The steady state management
`
`of the engine in response to Rapid aCceleration2 is also illustrated by the slope of
`
`the ENGINE TORQUE Curve 07.6.,
`
`the “rate of change of torque output o_f'n'1e
`
`engine”) between t4 and t5.
`
`45.
`
`As shown above in the annotated Figure 8 of Vittone, Rapid
`
`accelerationl
`
`is greater that Rapid acceleration2. This means that the rate of
`
`change of “road load” is greater during the first transient phase than during the
`
`second transient phase. However, the slope of the ENGINE TORQUE curve (i.e.,
`
`the “rate of change of torque output of the engine”) is approximately equal during
`
`both transient phases. Further, due to the “steady state management" of the engine
`
`during the transient phases, the slope of the ENGINE TORQUE curve is limited to
`
`a common rate of change that
`
`is
`
`less
`
`than Rapid acceleration] or Rapid
`
`accelerationl. This common rate of change of the engine output torque during
`
`different transient Conditions illustrates Vittone’s ‘steady — state’ management of
`
`the engine during transient phases.
`
`46.
`
`Figure 7 of the ’634 Patent includes a similar graph illustrating the -
`
`engine output
`
`torque during transient conditions. During a deposition, Mr.
`
`Hannernann described Figure 7 of the related 38% Patent, which is the same as
`
`Figure 7 of the ’634 Patent, and circled regions (shown in red below) where the
`
`Page 25 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`IPR20l5—00'r'87
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0104IPR5
`
`rate of change of engine output torque is limited to a threshold value. (Ex. 1799,
`
`Hannemann ’8'75 Deposition Transcript, l8:4—19:l8.)
`
`F5
`E”
`’-:1Q3
`83F9
`
`g
`:
`.4-
`
`§
`
`33O
`
`h
`
`E
`
`F216. 7(0)
`
`Rom LONE} ta‘/.
`0% MM. Eucaue
`1oRQ,uE out em
`
`(°!.M1c‘:
`
`/-7'6.7{b)
`Ed-JTERY BANK
`3'1 rm:-_ nr- cu NREE
`Lest}
`
`§
`v
`t
`.
`K,
`/-76. M; M
`F
`r
`I
`V
`;
`
`.T.1—r////2-W a
`enema womut W
`ouwur
`0 ' - 8
`.
`38!19
`.
`
`Ex. 1800, Hannemann ’875 Deposition Ex. 2 at 2 (annotated in original)
`
`47. Mr. Hannemann explained that he knew where the rate of change of
`
`engine output torque is limited because the engine output torque lags the road load
`
`at those portions of the graph, and that “[i]f the engine torque output is not limited,
`
`I would assume that it would follow the road load.” (Fax. 1799, Hannemann ’8'75
`
`Deposition Transcript, at 18:18-19:43
`
`48.
`
`As confirmed by Mr. Hannemann, a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`could tell by visual inspection of a graph including an engine output torque curve
`
`Page 26 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.: 1PR20l5-00787
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0l04IPR5
`
`and a “road load” (:'.e., the torque required for propulsion of the vehic]_e) curve,
`
`that the engine output torque is limited during transient phases in which the engine
`
`output torque lags the torque required for propulsion of the vehicle.
`
`49.
`
`Thus, Vittone’s Figure 8 discloses “h'm.ir:'r:g a rate ofc/range ofrorque
`
`output Qfthe en.gin.e,” as required by claim 24}.
`
`1.
`
`Paice’s narrow interpretation of Ibaraki ’882 and Vittone is
`incorrect
`
`50.
`
`It is my understanding that Paice is arguing a person of ordinaiy skill
`
`in the art would not have combined lbaraki ’882 and Vittone because Ibaraki ‘S82
`
`and Vittone are directed to Very different hybrid control strategies; and Vittone
`
`would not have worked with the engine control strategies of Ibaraki ’882. (Ex.
`
`2706, Hannemann Declaration, at ‘][108.) Fuither, I understand Paice argues the
`
`Vittone discloses that the driver uses a switch to select between the electric and
`
`hybrid modes. (Ex. 2706, Hannemann Declaration, at ‘J[109.)
`
`51.
`
`As explained in my first declaration, Ibaraki ‘E382 teaches operating
`
`the engine based on “RL”,
`
`r'.e., the “torque required to propel the vehicle” — not
`
`_based solely on power. (Ex. 1755, Davis Dec at ‘][‘][l64—l72.)
`
`52.
`
`Paice’s characterization of Vittone’s control strategy as requiring the
`
`driver to select the mode is misleading. Vittone describes development trends in
`
`Europe as including “city centers with mobility restricted to [zero emission
`
`vehicles] ZEV vehicles.” (Ex. 1753, Vittone at 24.) Accordingly, one of the
`
`Page 27 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`lPR20l5-OOYST
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0104lPR5
`
`goals/missions of the hybrid development project described in Vittone is a parallel
`
`hybrid vehicle capable of “short trips in urban areas with zero emissions by only
`
`using the electric motor driveline.” (Ex. 1753, Vittone at 21.) Vittone discloses an
`
`electric/hybrid selector switch (Fig. 5) that allows the driver to select electric
`
`mode, so that the vehicle is restricted to ZEV operation. When the switch is set to
`
`hybrid mode, however, “the electronic control unit (ECU) manages the powertrain
`
`on the basis of the inputs of the accelerator and brake pedals” and “torque splitting
`
`between the two drivelines occurs automatically”:
`
`Management strategies of the hybrid powertrain
`
`With reference to the configuration scheme shown in Fig. 5,
`
`the
`
`electronic control unit (ECU! manages the powertrain on the basis of
`
`the inputs of the accelerator and brake pedals, discrirnjnating between
`
`the two modes, electric and hybrid, which are selected by the driver
`
`by means of a switch, also while the vehicle is running.
`
`To assure a good driveability of the vehicle:
`
`- the torgue splitting between the two drivelines occurs automatically.
`
`Therefore the driveability is totally similar to that of a conventional
`
`vehicle with manual gearbox.
`
`(Ex. 1753, Vittone at 26-27, emphasis added.)
`
`Page 28 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`mg]
`
`
`
`Case No.: IPR20l5-00‘F8?
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP01(}4IPR5
`
`53.
`
`A person of ordinary skill
`
`in the art would have understood that
`
`Vittone’s disclosure that the ECU “manages the powertrain on the basis of the
`
`inputs of the accelerator and brake pedals" means that the ECU, not the driver,
`
`selects the operating modes (power sharing) within the hybrid mode (i.e., using
`
`just the engine, just the motor, or both the engine and the motor simultaneously).
`
`Page 29 of 30
`
`FORD 1809
`
`
`
`Case N0.: IPR20l5-00?87
`
`Attorney Docket No. FPGP0l04IPR5
`
`IV. Conclusion
`
`54.
`
`In my opinion, all
`
`tl1e elements of the challenged claims are
`
`unpatentable in View of the references discussed above. For the reasons presented
`
`above, it is my opinion that
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
