HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 1
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`WEATHERFORD INTERNATIONAL, LLC; )
`WEATHERFORD/LAMB, INC., )
`WEATHERFORD US, LP; and )
`WEATHERFORD ARTIFICAL LIFT )
`SYSTEMS, LLC, )
` )
` Petitioners, ) IPR2016-01509
` ) Patent 7,861,774
`VS. ) and other patents
` )
`PACKERS PLUS ENERGY SERVICES, )
`INC., )
` Patent Owner. )
`
` -----------------------------------
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF
` HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III
` JULY 26, 2017
` VOLUME 1
` -----------------------------------
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III, produced
`as a witness at the instance of the PETITIONERS, and duly
`sworn, was taken in the above-styled and numbered cause on
`July 26, 2017, from 9:06 a.m. to 3:58 p.m., before Amanda
`Blomstrom, CLR/CRR/RMR and CSR in and for the State of Texas,
`reported by machine shorthand, at the law offices of Caldwell,
`Cassady, Curry, 2101 Cedar Springs Road, Suite 1000, Dallas,
`Texas 75201, pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and
`the provisions stated on the record or attached hereto.
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 1 of 220
`
`
`
`Page 1
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`WEATHERFORD INTERNATIONAL, LLC; )
`WEATHERFORD/LAMB, INC., )
`WEATHERFORD US, LP; and )
`WEATHERFORD ARTIFICAL LIFT )
`SYSTEMS, LLC, )
` )
` Petitioners, ) IPR2016-01509
` ) Patent 7,861,774
`VS. ) and other patents
` )
`PACKERS PLUS ENERGY SERVICES, )
`INC., )
` Patent Owner. )
`
` -----------------------------------
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF
` HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III
` JULY 26, 2017
` VOLUME 1
` -----------------------------------
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III, produced
`as a witness at the instance of the PETITIONERS, and duly
`sworn, was taken in the above-styled and numbered cause on
`July 26, 2017, from 9:06 a.m. to 3:58 p.m., before Amanda
`Blomstrom, CLR/CRR/RMR and CSR in and for the State of Texas,
`reported by machine shorthand, at the law offices of Caldwell,
`Cassady, Curry, 2101 Cedar Springs Road, Suite 1000, Dallas,
`Texas 75201, pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and
`the provisions stated on the record or attached hereto.
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 1 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 2
`
` A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`FOR THE PETITIONERS:
` DOUGLAS WILSON
` HEIM, PAYNE & CHORUSH, LLP
` 1111 Bagby Street
` Suite 2100
` Austin, Texas 77002
` 512.343.3622
` dwilson@hpcllp.com
` -and-
` JASON M. SHAPIRO
` EDELL, SHAPIRO & FINNAN, LLC
` 9801 Washingtonian Boulevard
` Suite 750
` Gaithersburg, Maryland 20878
` 301.424.3640
` js@usiplaw.com
`
`FOR THE PATENT OWNER:
` JUSTIN NEMUNAITIS
` CALDWELL, CASSADY, CURRY
` 2101 Cedar Springs Road
` Suite 1000
` Dallas, Texas 75201
` 214.888.4848
` jnemunaitis@caldwellcc.com
`
`TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE:
` MARK J. DeBOY - Edell, Shapiro & Finnan, LLC
`
`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
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 2 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 3
`
` INDEX
` PAGE
`Appearances.......................................... 2
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III
` Examination by Mr. Wilson....................... 5
`Signature and Changes................................ 177
`Reporter's Certificate............................... 179
`
` EXHIBITS
`NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE MARKED
`1040 SPE Paper 18249 63
`1041 Errata Sheet 2/28/17 176
`
` PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS
` REFERRED TO
`1001 US Patent No. 7,134,505 10
`1001 US Patent No. 7,543,634 10
`1001 US Patent No. 7,861,774 10
`1004 7th One-Day Conference on Horizontal 110
` Well Technology (viewed via iPad)
`1034 McGowen 2-28-17 Deposition Transcript 12
`1036 Drilling, Completion, Stimulation, and 112
` Testing of Hardy HW#1 Well, Putnam County
` West Virginia, Final Report
`2010 Ghiselin, Sleeves vs Shots - The Debate 157
` Ranges
`2014 Encyclopedia of Hydrocarbons, Chapter 3.1 145
`
`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
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 3 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 4
`
` PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS
` REFERRED TO
`2026 SPE 19090, Production & Stimulation 47
` Analysis, Yost II et al.
`2036 1st Expert Report of Harold McGowen III 9
` Baker Hughes v. Packers Plus
`2051 Harold McGowen III Expert Report 11
`2075 SPE 17759, Hydraulic Fracturing of a 64
` Horizontal Well, Yost, et al.
`2076 SPE 18255, Insights Into Hydraulic 61
` Fracturing, Layne, et al.
`2077 SPE 21264, Air Drilling & Multiple 63
` Hydraulic Fracturing
`2078 SPE 29443, A Case History of Completing 123
` & Fracture Stimulating
`2079 SPE 19282, A Unique Method for 127
` Perforating, Fracturing & Completing
` Horizontal Wells
`2081 Harold McGowen Declaration (SEALED) 9
`2098 SPE 18263, Simultaneous Multiple Entry 129
` Hydraulic Fracture Treatments of Horizontally
` Drilled Wells
`2099 SPE 25058, Practical Considerations of 142
` Horizontal Well Fracturing in the "Danish Chalk"
`2100 SPE 37354, A Case Study for Drilling & 137
` Completing
`
`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
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 4 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 5
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III,
`having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. WILSON:
` Q. Good morning, Mr. McGowen.
` A. Good morning.
` Q. I'm Doug Wilson, counsel for Halli- -- or I was going
`to say "Halliburton" -- counsel for Weatherford.
` You've been deposed before, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And how many times?
` A. I've kind of lost count.
` Q. A lot?
` A. Maybe at least a half dozen times, I think.
` Q. Okay. So was your previous deposition in an IPR for
`Rapid Completions, was that your last deposition before today?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. When was the deposition most recent before
`that one?
` A. There was a case involving an oil and gas company
`that was -- had a well that went down that they -- there was a
`debate as to whether they still held the lease or not, and that
`was in Tyler.
` Q. Okay. Were you an expert witness in that case?
` A. I was.
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 5 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 6
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Q. About how many years ago?
` A. That was this -- that was this year.
` Q. 2017?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Prior to that deposition, when was the next most
`recent one?
` A. Taxing my memory here. Let's see. I'm not totally
`sure.
` Q. Like, several years before?
` A. Let me think. Let's see, I had depositions starting
`in 2013 related to some cases when I was at Navidad Resources.
`And then there was, after -- was it 2014? -- there was a case
`involving hydraulic fracturing where I was an expert witness.
`I was -- was deposed on that. And I don't recall anything
`between the two, so, I'd have to go back and check my records
`to be sure.
` Q. Okay. So you're familiar with the rules for
`depositions. If you need a break, you just ask for one. We'll
`try not to talk over each other so the court reporter can
`capture everything.
` If you don't understand the question, please ask
`for clarification. If you answer my question, I'll assume you
`understood it. Okay?
` A. Okay.
` Q. Is there any reason, as you sit here today -- medical
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 6 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 7
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`or otherwise -- why you cannot testify fully, truthfully, and
`accurately?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay. The case that you testified on in 2014, you
`said, related to hydraulic fracturing?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you were an expert witness in that case?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And what was the -- was it a patent case?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay. What was the nature of your testimony in that
`case?
` A. There was a oil and gas service company that had
`rented a tubing string to an operator, and the -- there was a
`failure related to the tubing string, and then the -- the
`defendant was the -- I was working for the defendant, which was
`the pipe company, and they were sued by the operator.
` And they had an expert that created a reserves
`projection for the hydraulic fracture treatment that would have
`happened if the tubing string had not failed. And then I
`opined about -- basically rebutted that opinion regarding the
`reserves that would have been brought from that frac if it had
`been done at the volume that they wanted to do.
` Q. Okay. So we are here today to discuss three IPRs.and
`you're familiar with the IPRs?
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 7 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 8
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. I am. I don't have all the numbers --
` Q. Okay. So just --
` A. -- memorized but --
` Q. -- just for the record, it's IPR2016-01509, which
`relates to the '774 patent.
` And you're familiar with the '774 patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. We're here to discuss IRP2016-01514, which relates to
`the '634 patent.
` You're familiar with the '634 patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And IPR2016-01517, which relates to the
`'505 patent, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And it's your understanding that those are the three
`IPRs that you're here to testify about today?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Now, if I refer to these as the "Weatherford
`IPRs," you'll know what I mean?
` A. I'm really more familiar with the patent numbers --
` Q. Okay.
` A. -- so that --
` Q. Fine.
` A. -- might be helpful.
` Q. Okay. All right. Fair enough.
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 8 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 9
`
` Now, you have in front of you -- let me see
`your -- what you have in front of you there.
` A. Go ahead.
` Q. You have -- so you have --
` (Brief interruption.)
` MR. WILSON: Did somebody join?
` MR. DeBOY: Mark DeBoy from Edell, Shapiro &
`Finnan.
` MR. WILSON: All right.
` MR. DeBOY: Is that Doug?
` MR. WILSON: Yeah.
` MR. DeBOY: Sorry. I hope I didn't interrupt
`anything.
` MR. WILSON: No, no, no. We're -- we're good.
`BY MR. WILSON:
` Q. Okay. So one of the exhibits you have in front of
`you is Exhibit 2081 from IPR2016-01509, right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And that copy was provided by your counsel,
`right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Now --
` MR. NEMUNAITIS: If you have copies, we can use
`yours. I didn't mean to -- I just --
` MR. WILSON: Yeah, the --
`
`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
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 9 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 10
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` MR. NEMUNAITIS: -- thought they were handy.
` MR. WILSON: So this is marked as Exhibit 2036,
`his first Declaration.
` MR. NEMUNAITIS: I -- yeah, that was the one
`from the Baker IPR, which we should -- shouldn't have printed
`out that version. I just wanted one in color because there are
`some color pictures in here.
` MR. WILSON: Okay, yeah, so he can keep that as
`a reference, but -- but I'm going to go ahead and give him this
`one --
` MR. NEMUNAITIS: Yeah.
` MR. WILSON: -- which is Exhibit 2051, which is
`a copy of your first Declaration, I think.
` And I -- I don't care which one of these you
`use, but here's a copy of Exhibit 2081, which is a copy of your
`second Declaration.
` THE WITNESS: Looks like that's the same
`version.
` MR. WILSON: All right. And the patents
`themselves.
`BY MR. WILSON:
` Q. So, and just for the record, you have a copy of
`Exhibit 1001, which is the '774 patent; Exhibit 1001 in a
`separate IPR, which is the '505 patent; Exhibit 1001 in the
`third IPR, which is the '634 patent.
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 10 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 11
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` So you have a copy of all three patents in front
`of you, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. All right. And if you want to refer to the color
`copies, feel free. Sorry, those -- the copies I provided are
`not, or are black and white.
` A. I understand.
` Q. All right. So the two Declarations you have in front
`of you, Exhibits 2051 and 2081, are the sum total of the expert
`testimony you've offered in these three IPRs, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. All right. And these two Declarations represent all
`of your expert opinions with respect to these three Weatherford
`IPRs, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. All right. And you haven't relied on anything in
`forming your expert opinions expressed in those two
`Declarations other than what's disclosed in those Declarations,
`correct?
` A. Could you maybe restate that? I'm not sure I
`understand.
` Q. So what I'm trying to get at is, your Declarations,
`Exhibits 2051 and 2081, disclose all of the bases for the
`opinions that you've offered in those Declarations, correct?
` A. I -- I believe so, but as we -- as you ask me
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 11 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 12
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`questions, I'm going to answer the questions based on what I
`know. So, you know, I have other information in my head that I
`may provide you. So to that extent, there may be some other
`opinions that I have or some things that aren't fully reflected
`in the report.
` Q. All right. Now, I'm going to hand you -- so this
`was -- well, this has been newly marked as Exhibit 1034. Okay?
` Now, Exhibit 1034 is a copy of your deposition
`transcript from February 28th, 2017.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Have you seen this document before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And this document reflects your testimony in
`IPR2016-00596, correct?
` A. Yes. This is 0596, yes.
` Q. All right. And you gave testimony in that proceeding
`on February 28th, 2017?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And your testimony was given in this same Dallas
`office?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And your testimony was under oath in that proceeding?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you testified truthfully on February 28th, 2017,
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 12 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 13
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`in your deposition, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Have you -- you've reviewed this deposition
`transcript?
` A. Well, this particular copy might have some
`typographical errors in it, but I haven't reviewed this entire
`document you just handed me, but I did review the original
`version and tried to provide some corrections on some typos and
`items like that.
` Q. Okay. So with the exception of some typos and the
`corrections you've provided, this document, Exhibit 1034,
`accurately reflects your testimony given on February 28th,
`2017?
` A. If it -- if it is indeed that document. I haven't
`read the whole thing, so ...
` Q. And you testified on February 28th, 2017, on behalf
`of Rapid Completions, correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. All right. You can set -- well, one -- one last
`question.
` So the -- this testimony reflected your -- or
`was relating -- let me strike that.
` This testimony reflected in Exhibit 1034 was
`relating to the '505, '634, and '774 patents, correct?
` A. Yes.
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 13 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 14
`
` Q. Okay. You can set that aside.
` Have you ever run a Packers Plus StackFRAC
`system?
` A. No.
` Q. Have you ever -- ever run any open-hole multistage
`ball-drop system?
` A. No.
` Q. Why not?
` A. Just didn't seem like that it was the right
`application for what we were doing.
` Q. Have you ever done any fracturing work in shales?
` A. No.
` Q. Have you ever done any horizontal fracturing work?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Did you, as part of your horizontal fracturing work
`that you did, did you ever evaluate or consider the use of an
`open-hole multistage ball-drop system?
` A. Yes.
` Q. But you decided it wasn't the right system for your
`application?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And when you decided that it wasn't the right system
`for your application, what were the factors that led you to
`conclude that it wasn't the right system for your application?
` A. Mainly the various risk factors with running a
`
`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
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 14 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 15
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`system.
` Q. Which specific risk factors?
` A. Well, there's -- there's cumulative risk in
`completion design. So you've got a number of risk factors that
`stack up, and there's actually a multiplication of risk, if you
`will, to determine the overall risk of the system. So there's
`a risk that you can't get the tools to bottom; there's a risk
`that the packers won't set; there's a risk that you may only
`get the string halfway to bottom; there's a risk that -- that
`you'll have one or more of the sleeves that won't operate
`properly; there's a risk that the packers will leak and
`you'll -- you won't have isolation on the stages; there's a
`risk, on the front end of that, there's a risk that your
`initial pump-out plug that allows you to circulate the -- the
`remaining balls down won't operate as -- as designed; there's
`the, of course, the fact that you can't get it back out of the
`hole once you run it, more than likely, it's -- it's a one-way
`trip; there's a risk that you, I guess I'd say there's a risk
`factor that you may not have the stages exactly where you want
`them so you don't have the flexibility that you have in -- in
`plug and perf, for example, where you can -- you can change
`your mind about the spacing between stages as you progress in
`the job.
` And I think there may be some other factors, but
`I haven't -- that's what comes to my mind right now.
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 15 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 16
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Q. Now, when was the last time you considered using a
`ball -- an open-hole multistage ball-drop system on a
`horizontal fracturing operation?
` A. 2012, 2013. We looked at it on -- we looked at it on
`our vertical completions as well as our horizontal completions.
` Q. So even as recently as 2012 to 2013, you thought the
`risks of open-hole multistage ball-drop fracturing didn't
`justify its use?
` A. Well, it's just a relative indicator. I mean,
`there's -- at that time, we had a lot more information about
`those systems. It was -- we were kind of on the fence at that
`time as to whether -- which way we should go.
` Q. And what did you use instead of open-hole multistage
`ball-drop?
` A. We did plug and perf.
` Q. So how many times would you say over your career
`you've had to consider or you've had the opportunity to
`consider using an open-hole multistage ball-drop system and
`elected not to use it?
` A. Well, we drilled about 50 wells at Navidad Resources.
`So we thought about it, like I said, even on the vertical
`completions, so maybe half that many wells.
` Q. So maybe 25 times?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And what time period did that cover, those 25
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 16 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 17
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`considerations?
` A. Well, we -- we started the drilling program in 2008,
`2009 and through 2013.
` Q. Now, when you looked at open-hole multistage
`ball-drop systems back in the beginning, 2008, 2009, do you
`remember whose systems were available at that time?
` A. I don't recall. I'm sure we looked at the Packers
`Plus system because it was the most widely known.
` Q. All right. Let's take a look at your expert
`Declaration, which is Exhibit 2051.
` Now take a look at Page 3 of 49 there. And do
`you see Section 2 entitled "Compensation"?
` A. I guess -- oh.
` Q. Are you looking at 2051?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Page 3? 3 of 49.
` A. Well, it's actually 94.
` Q. Oh, okay.
` MR. NEMUNAITIS: The little -- go past the Table
`of Contents.
`BY MR. WILSON:
` Q. Oh, so Page 7 of 94. How about that?
` A. My number or your number? There's two different page
`numbers.
` Q. I think those are both your numbers actually, but
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 17 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 18
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`let's use 7 of 94.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Well, I say "yours." They may not be yours
`personally, but your side's.
` A. Somebody put the number there.
` Q. Yeah. So we'll use the "of 94" pages.
` So Page 7 of 94, do you see "Compensation"
`there?
` A. Yes.
` Q. It says you're paid there an hourly rate of $350 per
`hour?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is that your normally hourly rate -- strike that.
` Is that your normal hourly rate for
`compensation?
` A. I've gone up on my rates since then, so I'm at 450 an
`hour now.
` Q. So your normal hourly rate for consulting is 450 an
`hour?
` A. Well, I'm primarily doing expert witness work, and
`then I also do management consulting, and my management
`consulting was a long-term contract, so I do that at 275 an
`hour on a -- on a long-term basis.
` Q. So are you still, as part of this work you're doing
`for Rapid Completions, billing them at 350 an hour, or are you
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 18 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 19
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`now billing them at 450 an hour?
` A. No, 350.
` Q. Okay. All right.
` Now, if you look down at Lines 18 to 19 on that
`same page --
` A. Yes.
` Q. -- it says "I've been engaged by counsel for the
`owner of U.S. Patent No. 7,861,774," the '774 patent, "to
`provide engineering, consulting, and expert witness services as
`required."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So are you doing any consulting work, engineering
`consulting, other than the expert witness work that is
`reflected in these Declarations?
` A. I have done, in the past three years, or since 2013,
`I guess that would be four years, I have --
` Q. Not --
` A. -- done engineering consulting.
` Q. Have you done engineering consulting work for Packers
`Plus or Rapid Completions?
` A. No.
` Q. So have you received, other than the time you spent
`working on the expert Declarations here, 2051 and 2081, or as a
`consulting expert in these IPRs, have you received any
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 19 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 20
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`compensation from Rapid Completions or Packers Plus for
`anything?
` A. No.
` Q. All right. Do you know how much you've been paid
`cumulative up to this point for your work on these IPRs?
`The --
` A. I actually don't have that figure in my head right
`now.
` Q. Do you have an estimate?
` A. I hesitate to estimate. I would just be speculating
`without data.
` Q. Is it less than a hundred thousand dollars?
` A. Probably not.
` Q. Okay. So you haven't received or been promised any
`other compensation from Packers Plus or Rapid Completions other
`than your hourly billings for your work as an expert witness on
`these IPRs?
` A. Of course not.
` Q. And you don't have any other financial interest in
`Packers Plus or Rapid Completions?
` A. No.
` Q. Now, let's switch to Exhibit 2081. And so I'll use
`the lower numbers to make it easier on you.
` A. Okay.
` Q. So Page 6 of 42.
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 20 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 21
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Now, you see you offer an opinion at Lines 9
`through 11 about obviousness of the '774 patent.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Now, you sign -- you have a Footnote 1 there.
` You see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And Footnote 1 at the bottom of Page 6 of 42 reads
`"To the extent petitioners assert that the same art directed to
`the '774 patent also renders obvious the open-hole claims of
`the '505 and '634 patents because they would motivate a POSITA
`to perform open-hole multistage fracturing, my opinions
`expressed herein apply to those claims as well."
` A. Yes.
` Q. That's what it says, correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Now, you understand that the open-hole claims that
`you're referring to in the '634 and '505 patents are not
`limited to fracturing?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Okay. But you're limiting your opinion on -- that
`those claims would not have been obvious to invalidity theories
`based on fracturing, correct?
` A. Can you ask that again? I'm sorry.
` Q. Yeah, I'm trying to flesh out -- the way I read this,
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 21 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 22
`
`correct me if I'm wrong, you're not offering an unequivocal
`opinion that the open-hole claims of the '634 and '505 patents
`would not have been obvious in 2001? That opinion is not in
`your Declaration, correct?
` A. I'm sorry, I'm not quite following. Maybe you can
`try it --
` Q. So --
` A. -- again.
` Q. -- yeah. Let me -- let me try it a different way.
` The way I read Footnote 1 is, you're saying, to
`the extent that the petitioners are asserting that the
`open-hole claims of the '505 and '634 patents would have been
`obvious because fracturing would have been obvious, then you
`disagree?
` A. I'm not sure if I can give you a good answer to that
`without looking at the particular patents and looking at
`particular instances.
` Q. So you can't answer that question?
` A. Well, it's -- I'm still a little confused by the
`language.
` Q. Let me ask a different question.
` You're not offering the opinion that the
`challenge claims of the '505 and '634 patents would not have
`been obvious if the obviousness theory is based on the
`assertion that it would have been obvious to matrix acidize in
`
`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
`
`DTI Court Reporting Solutions - Houston
`1-888-513-9800
`www.deposition.com
`
`Weatherford International LLC et al.
`Exhibit 1038
`Weatherford International LLC et al. v. Packers Plus Energy Services, Inc.
`IPR2016-01517
`Page 22 of 220
`
`
`
`HAROLD E. MCGOWEN III - 7/26/2017
`
`Page 23
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`open-hole, correct?
` A. There's a lot of --
` MR. NEMUNAITIS: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: -- double negatives in there.
`BY MR. WILSON:
` Q. Okay. So -- well, let me just ask you this: Perhaps
`you can elaborate on what you meant by Footnote 1 here.
` A. I think I'm really referring to the prior art and
`whether the prior art impacts the '505 and '634 patent
`obviousness, so, and it -- and it speaks to motivation, and
`that is a central theme of my report is, would a person of
`ordinary skill in the art be motivated to combine the various
`references and to create the '774 patent. So I'm -- I didn't
`word that very well, but that's kind of the gist of what I was
`trying to say.
` Q. But, for example, there are other forms of
`stimulation other than fracturing, correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. For example, there's matrix acidizing, correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. So it's -- I -- what I understand you to be saying
`here in Footnote 1, and correct me if I'm wrong, is, to the
`extent the invalidity theory for the '505 and '634 open-hole
`claims is based on the assertion that it would have been
`obvious to fracture in an open hole, then you disagree that
`
`DTI Court Re
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
