Patent Owners’ Oral Hearing Demonstratives
`
`Petitioner Ford Motor Company
`v.
`Paice LLC & The Abell Foundation, Inc.
`
`Before Sally C. Medley, Jameson Lee, Kalyan K. Deshpande, and Carl
`M. DeFranco, Administrative Patent Judges
`
`1
`
`EXHIBIT 2418
`Ford v. Paice & Abell
`IPR2015-00794
`
`
`
`Petitioner Ford Motor Company
`v.
`Paice LLC & The Abell Foundation, Inc.
`
`Before Sally C. Medley, Jameson Lee, Kalyan K. Deshpande, and Carl
`M. DeFranco, Administrative Patent Judges
`
`1
`
`EXHIBIT 2418
`Ford v. Paice & Abell
`IPR2015-00794
`
`
`
`Agenda
`
`Three Groups
`
`I.
`
`IPR2015-00722, -00784, -00787, -00790, -00791,
`-00794, -00795
`
`II.
`
`IPR2015-00606, -00799
`
`III.
`
`IPR2015-00758, -00785, -00792, -00800, -00801
`
`2
`
`
`
`Patent/Technology Overview
`
`3
`
`
`
`Technology Background
`
`Starter motor
`
`Engine
`
`Traction Motor
`
`See e.g. IPR ’722, Paper No. 19, POR at 5-6.
`
`4
`
`Controller
`
`Battery
`
`
`
`Technology Background
`
`The hybrid electric vehicle of the
`Paice Patents can be operated in
`various “modes,” i.e. different
`combinations of the motor, engine,
`or both, to propel the vehicle:
`
`Mode I: motor only propulsion
`
`Mode II: motor propulsion,
`engine charges the battery
`
`Mode IV: engine propulsion
`
`Mode V: engine and motor
`propulsion
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 5-6.
`
`5
`
`
`
`Technology Background
`
`In a number of embodiments, switching between these modes depends
`on an innovative system that compares the “road load” (depicted as a
`solid line in the example from Fig. 7) to a “setpoint.”
`
`Engine + motor
`propulsion
`
`Engine propulsion
`
`Motor only propulsion
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 5.
`
`6
`
`
`
`Technology Background
`
`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;
`
`employing said engine to
`propel said vehicle when the
`torque RL required to do so
`is between said lower level
`SP and MTO;
`
`’347 Patent, Claim 23
`
`’347 Patent, Fig. 7.
`
`’347 Patent, Fig. 9.
`
`7
`
`
`
`Technology Background
`
`“The rate of change of the
`engine's torque output is
`limited, e.g., to 2% or less
`per revolution, as indicated
`by noting that the dashed
`line in FIG. 7(a), indicating
`the instantaneous engine
`output torque, lags the solid
`line indicating the vehicle's
`instantaneous torque
`requirement. Thus limiting
`the rate of change of engine
`output torque is preferred to
`limit undesirable emissions
`and improve fuel economy”
`
`’097 Patent at 38:62-39:1
`
`’097 Patent at Fig. 7.
`
`See e.g., IPR ’792, Paper No. 16, POR at 3.
`
`8
`
`
`
`Claim Construction
`
`Claim Construction
`
`9
`
`
`
`Previous Claim Constructions
`
`Claim term
`
`Board’s Construction
`
`Patent Owners’ Proposed
`Construction
`
`“road load”
`
`same
`
`“the amount of
`instantaneous torque
`required to propel the
`vehicle, be it positive or
`negative.”
`
`“setpoint (SP)”
`
`“predetermined torque
`value that may or may
`not be reset.”
`
`“a definite, but potentially
`variable value at which a
`transition between operating
`modes may occur.”
`
`10
`
`
`
`New Claim Constructions
`
`Claim term
`
`Patent Owners’ Proposed Construction
`
`“operating at least one
`electric motor to propel
`the hybrid vehicle when
`the RL required to do so
`is less than a setpoint
`(SP)” and like terms
`
`“operating at least one [first] electric motor to
`propel the hybrid vehicle when a comparison of
`the RL to a setpoint (SP) results in a
`determination that the RL required to do so is less
`than a SP.”
`
`See, e.g., IPR 722, Paper No. 18, POR at 11-17.
`
`11
`
`
`
`Claim Construction Standards
`
`Claims must be read in light of the specification as it
`would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`In re Suitco Surface, Inc., 603 F.3d 1255, 1260 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
`
`The construction must not be “divorced from the
`specification and the record evidence” and
`inconsistent with “the one that those skilled in the art
`would reach.”
`
`Microsoft Corp. v. Proxyconn, Inc., 789 F.3d 1292, 1298
`(Fed. Cir. 2015).
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 6-7.
`
`12
`
`
`
`Comparison Terms
`
`‘634 Patent, claim 16
`
`‘347 Patent, claim 23
`
`13
`
`
`
`Comparison Terms
`
`FIG. 9 thus shows the main decision
`points of the control program run by the
`microprocessor, with the transition point
`between mode I, low-speed operation, and
`mode IV highway cruising, set at a road
`load equal to 30% of MTO.
`
`‘634 Patent at col. 41:59-62
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 14-15.
`
`14
`
`
`
`Comparison Terms
`
`The Board acknowledges that the Paice Patents compare road load to
`setpoint.
`
`See, e.g., IPR 722, Paper No. 13, Inst. Dec. at 3.
`
`15
`
`
`
`Comparison Terms
`
`Ford admits that the claims of the Paice Patents require a comparison of
`road load to setpoint.
`
`See, e.g., IPR 722, Paper No. 1, Pet. at 11.
`
`16
`
`
`
`Group 1: IPR2015-00722, -00784, -00787, -00790,
`-00791, -00794, -00795
`
`17
`
`
`
`Introduction
`
`Two Paice Patents: the ’634 and ’347 patents
`
`One primary prior art reference: U.S. Patent
`No. 5,789,882 (“Ibaraki '882”)
`
`18
`
`
`
`Introduction to the ’634 Patent
`
`See, e.g., IPR 784, Paper No. 17, POR at 15.
`
`19
`
`‘634 Patent, claim 16
`
`
`
`Introduction to the ’347 Patent
`
`See, e.g., IPR 794, Paper No. 16, POR at 9.
`
`20
`
`‘347 Patent, claim 23
`
`
`
`Introduction to Ibaraki '882
`
`Discloses three primary
`modes:
`
`Motor only
`Engine only
`Motor + Engine
`
`Switches modes based on
`power-based comparisons.
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 19-22.
`
`21
`
`
`
`Paice Patents
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 9, 14.
`
`22
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 19-22.
`
`23
`
`
`
`Power and torque are different
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`Q: That's my point. The passage you cite
`talks about 60 to 90 percent of its maximum
`power over a wide range of vehicle speeds,
`right?
`
`Dr. Davis: Correct.
`
`Q: And that is a different concept than
`percent of its maximum torque, correct?
`
`Dr. Davis: Depends how you do the
`calculation.
`
`Q: But it is different.
`
`Dr. Davis: Well, power and torque are
`different.
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 21 (citing Ex. 2262, Davis Tr. at 184:14-24).
`
`24
`
`
`
`Power and torque are different
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`Dr. Davis: Well, torque and power are
`related, as we've discussed before.
`
`Q. But they're not the same thing,
`right?
`
`Dr. Davis: Definitely not, they're not
`the same thing.
`
`Q. But torque and power are different
`correct?
`
`Dr. Davis: Yes, they are.
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 21 (citing Ex. 2262, Davis Tr. at 155:11-23, 166:3-17).
`
`25
`
`
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`10.5 kw of power
`
`Speed (RPMs)
`
`Torque (Nm)
`
`1000
`
`2000
`
`3000
`
`4000
`
`5000
`
`100
`
`50
`
`33.33333
`
`25
`
`20
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 22.
`
`26
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`Ibaraki '882 at Fig. 11 (annotated).
`
`27
`
`
`
`Paice Patents
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`Engine + motor
`propulsion
`
`Engine propulsion
`
`Motor only propulsion
`
`’634 Patent at Fig. 7.
`
`28
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 24.
`
`29
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`Q. There's no comparison of a speed, of a vehicle speed
`to a speed threshold?
`
`A. I don't believe so, there is [sic] a speed threshold
`there. I think later on, you know, obviously over the full
`operating range of the vehicle, speed is a concern.
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 25 (citing Ex. 2259, Davis Tr. at 17:16-20).
`
`30
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`I said boundary line B describes the variation of the setpoint as
`a function of speed. So at V1 here's the setpoint value. So
`that's the value, the number for the setpoint, if you willK. At V2
`I have a different value for that setpoint, it has varied as a
`function of speed. Boundary line B is simply a description of
`how the setpoint varies as a function of speed.
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 25 (citing Ex. 2259, Davis Tr. at 17:16-20).
`
`31
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Ex. 2265 at 48.
`
`32
`
`
`
`Power and torque are different
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 28 (citing Ex. 2257 at ¶ 61-62).
`
`33
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`Ibaraki '882 at Fig. 5.
`
`34
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`a low-load mode I,
`wherein, when the
`RL<the SP )
`
`a highway cruising mode
`IV, wherein, when the
`SP<the RL<the MTO )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 32-33 (citing Ex. 2263 (IPR2015-00790, Ex. 1661) at ¶ 293).
`
`35
`
`
`
`Paice Patents
`
`an acceleration mode V,
`wherein, when the
`RL>the MTO )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 9, 14.
`
`36
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`an acceleration mode V,
`wherein, when the
`RL>the MTO )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 36-37.
`
`37
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`an acceleration mode V,
`wherein, when the
`RL>the MTO )
`
`Ibaraki '882 at Fig. 11 (annotated).
`
`38
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`an acceleration mode V,
`wherein, when the
`RL>the MTO )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 38 (citing Ex. 2257 at ¶ 76).
`
`39
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`Ibaraki ’882 at Figs. 10 and 11 (annotated).
`
`40
`
`
`
`Paice Patents vs. Ibaraki '882
`
`an acceleration mode V,
`wherein, when the
`RL>the MTO )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 39 (citing Ex. 2257 at ¶ 77).
`
`41
`
`
`
`Paice Patents
`
`SP is substantially less
`than the maximum torque
`output (MTO) of the
`engine
`
`Engine + motor
`propulsion
`
`Engine propulsion
`
`Motor only propulsion
`
`’634 Patent at claim 7.
`
`42
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`SP is substantially less
`than the maximum
`torque output (MTO) of
`the engine
`
`Ibaraki ’882 at Fig. 11.
`
`43
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`SP is substantially less
`than the maximum
`torque output (MTO) of
`the engine
`
`Ibaraki ’882 at Fig. 5.
`
`44
`
`
`
`Ibaraki '882
`
`SP is substantially less
`than the maximum torque
`output (MTO) of the
`engine )
`
`See e.g., IPR ’722, Paper No. 18, POR at 32-33 (citing Ex. 2263 (IPR2015-00790, Ex. 1661) at ¶ 293).
`
`45
`
`
`
`Motor Sizing Claims
`
`’634 Patent, claim 25.
`
`46
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,335,429 (“Kawakatsu”)
`
`wherein total torque
`available to the one or
`more wheels from the
`engine is no greater than
`total torque available
`from the first and second
`electric motors
`combined.
`
`Vehicle speed
`(Nel)
`
`Vehicle speed
`(Neu)
`
`Kawakatsu at Fig. 2.
`
`47
`
`
`
`Kawakatsu
`
`Kawakatsu
`
`Ibaraki ’882
`
`wherein total torque
`available to the one or
`more wheels from the
`engine is no greater than
`total torque available
`from the first and second
`electric motors
`combined.
`
`Kawakatsu at Fig. 2; Ibaraki ’882 at Fig. 11.
`
`48
`
`
`
`Motor Performance Claims
`
`’634 Patent, claim 173.
`
`49
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,623,104 (“Suga”)
`
`wherein said at least one
`electric motor is
`sufficiently powerful to
`provide acceleration of
`said vehicle sufficient to
`conform to the Federal
`urban cycle driving fuel
`mileage test without use
`of torque from the engine
`to propel the vehicle.
`
`Suga at 1:6-10.
`
`50
`
`
`
`Suga
`
`wherein said at least one
`electric motor is
`sufficiently powerful to
`provide acceleration of
`said vehicle sufficient to
`conform to the Federal
`urban cycle driving fuel
`mileage test without use
`of torque from the engine
`to propel the vehicle.
`
`Suga at Abstract.
`
`51
`
`
`
`END
`
`52
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
