`
`I, Scott Andrews declare as follows,
`
`1.
`
`I hold a B.Sc. degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of
`
`California, Irvine and a M.Sc. degree in Electronic Engineering from Stanford
`
`University. I have been involved in the development of hybrid vehicle technology
`
`with a variety of organizations. For example, at Toyota, I supported the assessment
`
`of new power transistor technology and manufacturing methods for the first
`
`generation Prius hybrid vehicle powertrain controllers. Also, in 2003, I developed
`
`a hybrid vehicle design with a colleague who later co-founded the vehicle
`
`company Tesla Motors. The goal of the design was to create a high performance
`
`vehicle that would use (i) electrical power to provide high torque on demand and
`
`(ii) a conventional small internal combustion engine to power the vehicle under
`
`low power/low torque demand driving. This work also led to an overall vehicle
`
`systems engineering methodology wherein all of the vehicle sensors, actuators and
`
`processes were treated as objects in a database system that provided a fully back
`
`annotate-able connection between use case descriptions and component and
`
`process specifications. In other positions, I have been responsible for the research
`
`and development projects relating to numerous vehicle information systems, user
`
`interface systems, sensory systems, control systems, and safety systems, and I also
`
`had the opportunity to collaborate with numerous researchers and suppliers to the
`
`1
`
`VWGoA - Ex. 1002
`Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. - Petitioner
`
`1
`
`
`
`auto industry. I currently consult with the U.S. Department of Transportation,
`
`major carmakers and suppliers on vehicle information systems, safety systems, and
`
`communication systems. I am also a member of the Institute of Electrical and
`
`Electronics Engineers (IEEE), the IEEE Standards Association, the Society of
`
`Automotive Engineers (SAE), the Institute of Navigation (ION), and the
`
`International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE). My qualifications are
`
`further set forth in my curriculum vitae (Exhibit A). I have been retained by
`
`Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. in connection with its petition for inter partes
`
`review of U.S. Patent No. 7,104,347 (“the ’347 patent”). I have over 20 years of
`
`experience in fields relevant to the ’347 patent, including experience with
`
`automobile electronic control systems.
`
`2.
`
`I have reviewed the ’347 patent, as well as its prosecution history and the
`
`prior art cited during its prosecution. I have also reviewed U.S. Patent Nos.
`
`7,237,634 (“the ’634 Patent”), and 8,214,097 (“the ’097 Patent”) which share
`
`substantially the same specification as the ’347 patent, as well as the prosecution
`
`history of both patents. I have also reviewed Paefgen et al., Der Audi Duo – das
`
`erste serienmäßige Hybridfahrzeug, ATZ Automobiletechnische Zeitschrift 99
`
`(1997) (“Paefgen”), U.S. Patent No. 5,495,912 (“Gray”), GB 2318105 (“Probst”),
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,697,466 (“Moroto”), U.S. Patent No. 5,823,280 (“Lateur”), and
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,343,970 (“Severinsky ’970”).
`
`2
`
`2
`
`
`
`The ’347 Patent
`
`3.
`
`The ’347 patent describes a hybrid vehicle that includes an internal
`
`combustion engine, an electric motor, and a battery, all of which are controlled by
`
`a microprocessor in accordance with the vehicle’s instantaneous torque demands
`
`(i.e., road load). The engine is capable of operating efficiently between a lower-
`
`level setpoint (“SP”) and a maximum torque output (“MTO”). The vehicle can
`
`operate in a number of operating modes, including a “low-load mode” (also
`
`referred to as “Mode I”), in which the vehicle is propelled only by the electric
`
`motor, a “highway cruising mode” (also referred to as “Mode IV”), in which the
`
`vehicle is propelled only by the engine, and an “acceleration mode” (also referred
`
`to a “Mode V”), in which the vehicle is propelled by both the engine and the
`
`electric motor. The microprocessor determines the mode of operation based on
`
`road load. If the road load is below the setpoint (SP), the vehicle operates in Mode
`
`I (motor only); if the road load is between the setpoint (SP) and the maximum
`
`torque output (MTO) of the engine, the vehicle operates in Mode IV (engine only);
`
`if the road load is above the maximum torque output (MTO) of the engine, the
`
`vehicle operates in Mode V (motor and engine).
`
`The Volkswagen and Audi Development of Hybrid Vehicles
`
`4.
`
`Since the mid-1970s, Volkswagen and Audi have been developing hybrid
`
`vehicle technologies, including hybrid drive systems that control the application of
`
`3
`
`3
`
`
`
`torque from an internal combustion engine, an electric motor, or both, depending
`
`on driving parameters.
`
`5.
`
`For example, Audi developed first (1989), second (1991), and third (1996)
`
`generation Audi Duo hybrid vehicles, as Audi “consider[ed] it useful to combine
`
`the combustion engine with an electric drive,” both to reduce emissions and
`
`provide sufficient mobility for longer distances. See Paefgen, at p. 317. The third
`
`generation vehicle, described by Paefgen in June 1997, was a parallel hybrid drive
`
`using a turbo diesel direct injection engine (TDI), a lead battery, and a polyphase
`
`synchronous drive (electromotor). See Paefgen, at pp. 318-319. Both the engine
`
`and electromotor applied torque to the front wheels. See Paefgen, at p. 317; Fig. 4
`
`(below).
`
`4
`
`4
`
`
`
`6.
`
`Paefgen explains that, in hybrid operation, switching between the internal
`
`combustion engine and the electric motor, “occurs automatically depending on the
`
`requirements of the driving operation.” See Paefgen, at p. 319. The Control Drive
`
`for this system is illustrated in Figure 5 (below).
`
`
`
`5
`
`5
`
`
`
`Gray
`
`
`
`7.
`
`Gray, for example, describes a hybrid vehicle, in which the control strategy
`
`is based on “road load” in the same manner claimed in the ’347 patent. For
`
`example, Gray describes an operating mode (“mode 4”), corresponding to Paice’s
`
`“low load mode I,” in which the vehicle is propelled by only the electric motor
`
`under conditions of “small road load.” See Gray, at col. 9, lines 12 to 17. Gray also
`
`describes an operating mode (“mode 2”), corresponding to Paice’s “highway
`
`6
`
`6
`
`
`
`cruising mode IV,” in which the vehicle is propelled by only the internal
`
`combustion engine under conditions where the engine is operated “within the range
`
`of optimal efficiency.” See Gray, at col. 8, lines 52 to 63. Gray further describes an
`
`operating mode (“mode 1”), corresponding to Paice’s “acceleration mode V,” in
`
`which the vehicle is propelled by both the internal combustion engine and the
`
`electric motor under conditions where demand is “greater than that deliverable at
`
`optimum efficiency by the engine.” See Gray, at col. 8, lines 40 to 51.
`
`The Disclosures of Paefgen and Gray
`Claims 23, 28, 30, and 32
`
`Gray describes a parallel hybrid powertrain vehicle including a primary
`
`
`8.
`
`engine and a power storage device. The engine may be an internal combustion
`
`engine, and the power storage device may be a combined storage battery and
`
`electric motor. See Gray, at col. 3, lines 13 to 39. As illustrated in Figures 2A-2D,
`
`Gray describes a system for controlling which power source will drive the vehicle,
`
`based on “road load.” See Gray, at col. 8, line 35 to col. 9, line 16, Figs. 2A-2D.
`
`According to Gray, “[t]he load placed on the engine any at any given instant is
`
`directly determined by the total road load at that instant, which varies between
`
`extremely high and extremely low load.” See Gray, at col. 1, lines 31 to 34. Gray
`
`discloses that control of the hybrid propulsion system is provided for by, for
`
`example, “a torque (or power) demand sensor for sensing torque (or power)
`
`demanded of the vehicle by the driver.” See Gray, at col. 3, lines 43 to 49.
`7
`
`7
`
`
`
`Depending upon the road load, Gray switches between operating modes in the
`
`same manner as claimed in the ’347 patent, as described in more detail below.
`
`9.
`
`Paefgen describes the hybrid drive Audi Duo, having an engine, an electric
`
`motor, a battery, and a controller for determining from which power source to draw
`
`power for propelling the vehicle. Paefgen describes controlling its hybrid drive
`
`“depending on to the requirements of the driving operation.”
`
`10. Gray describes a hybrid control system that relies on the determined “road
`
`load” for controlling the application of power from the engine and/or the electric
`
`motor to drive the vehicle.
`
`11. Paefgen describes the Audi Duo parallel hybrid drive vehicle having an
`
`internal combustion engine, e.g., a turbo diesel engine, a lead battery, wheels, and
`
`a polyphase synchronous drive electromotor. See Paefgen, at pp. 318-319. As
`
`illustrated in Figure 4, the engine is controllably connected to the front axle.
`
`Paefgen also describes using the engine to operate the electromotor as a generator.
`
`See Paefgen, at p. 318.
`
`12. Gray also describes a parallel hybrid drive system, having an internal
`
`combustion engine, a storage battery, and an electric motor. A first drive train
`
`connects the engine to the wheels, and a second drive train connects the engine to
`
`the motor. See Gray, at col. 3, lines 13 to 39. Gray describes an “optimum
`
`efficiency” range of speed and load for the engine 1, illustrated in Figures 2A-2D,
`
`8
`
`8
`
`
`
`between points A (constituting a lower level setpoint) and B (constituting a
`
`maximum torque output). See Gray, at col. 8, line 35 to col. 9, line 16. Further, in
`
`Figure 2C and its related description, Gray describes applying excess power from
`
`the engine to the power storage device (which may be a storage battery,
`
`generator/alternator, and electric motor). See Gray, at col. 3, lines 36 to 39, col. 8,
`
`line 64 to col. 9, line 11, Fig. 2C.
`
`13. Paefgen’s Audi Duo controls
`
`its hybrid drive “depending on
`
`the
`
`requirements of the driving operation.” See Paefgen, at p. 319; Fig. 4.
`
`14. Gray describes determining the instantaneous road load required to propel
`
`the vehicle, responsive to operator command. Gray describes that engine load is
`
`directly determined by the instantaneous road load. See Gray, at col. 1, lines 31 to
`
`35 (“The load placed on the engine at any given instant is directly determined by
`
`the total road load at that instant, which varies between extremely high and
`
`extremely low load.”). Figures 2A-2D, illustrate different modes of applying power
`
`from the engine and/or motor, according to road load.
`
`9
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`15. Paefgen describes a battery management system for monitoring battery
`
`charging and discharging, and constantly displaying the charge state of the battery.
`
`See Paefgen, at p. 318. Gray describes its power storage device as a fluid pressure
`
`accumulator or a battery, and, in the context of the fluid pressure accumulator,
`
`Gray describes monitoring the fluid pressure with a pressure sensor. See Gray, at
`
`col. 3, lines 30-39, and col. 7, lines 28 to 42.
`
`16. Paefgen describes that switching between the engine and the electric motor
`
`“occurs automatically, depending on the requirements of the driving operation.”
`
`See Paefgen, at p. 319. For example, “[i]n city driving, in particular in stop-and-go
`
`10
`
`10
`
`
`
`driving, the advantages of the electric drive fully take effect, because energy is
`
`then required only when the vehicle is actually in motion.” See Paefgen, at p. 319.
`
`17. Gray describes “mode 4,” shown in Figure 2D and corresponding to Paice’s
`
`“low-load mode I,” in which “an unusually small road load is experienced.” See
`
`Gray, at col. 9, lines 11 to 12. Under these conditions, “the engine cannot deliver
`
`such a small amount of power at acceptable efficiency,” and “the pump/motor 7
`
`(acting as a motor) provides power by itself.” See Gray, col. 9, lines 12 to 16
`
`(“[A]n unusually small road load is experienced … the pump/motor 7 (acting as a
`
`motor) provides power by itself.”), Fig. 2D.
`
`
`
`18. Paefgen describes that switching between the engine and the electric motor
`
`“occurs automatically depending on the requirements of the driving operation.” See
`
`Paefgen, at p. 319. For example, “[f]or longer distances, it is generally the diesel
`
`engine that is used exclusively.” See Paefgen, at p. 319.
`
`11
`
`11
`
`
`
`19. Gray describes “mode 2,” shown in Fig. 2B and corresponding to Paice’s
`
`“highway cruising mode IV,” in which the road load is within the range of optimal
`
`efficiency of the engine (between levels A and B), and the engine drives the
`
`vehicle alone. See Gray, at col. 8, lines 52 to 63 (“[W]hen power demanded of
`
`engine 1 is within the range of optimum efficiency ... all of the power is provided
`
`by the engine 1.”), Fig. 2B.
`
`
`
`20. Paefgen describes that switching between the engine and the electric motor
`
`“occurs automatically, depending on the requirements of the driving operation.”
`
`See Paefgen, at p. 319.
`
`21. Gray describes “mode 1,” shown in Fig. 2A, and corresponding to Paice’s
`
`“acceleration mode V,” in which the road load is greater than the upper limit of the
`
`efficient range for the engine (above power level B), and the engine and motor
`
`12
`
`12
`
`
`
`operate together to drive the vehicle. See Gray, at col. 8, lines 41 to 46 (“[W]hen
`
`the power demanded is greater than that deliverable at optimum efficiency by the
`
`engine 1 … that portion of load which exceeds B is provided by the pump/motor 7
`
`(acting as a motor), while the engine 1 provides the rest.”), Fig. 2A.
`
`
`
`22. Paefgen describes using the engine to operate the electromotor as a
`
`generator. See Paefgen, at p. 318.
`
`23. Gray describes “mode 3,” shown in Fig. 2C, in which the road load is below
`
`the efficient range of the engine (i.e., below power level A), so that the engine
`
`operating in its efficient range provides power in excess of the road load. In such
`
`circumstances, if the power storage device is low, the power in excess of the road
`
`load is directed to the motor for storage. See Gray, at col. 8, line 64 to col. 9, line
`
`11 (“While road load demanded is represented by either of the points (a) or (b)
`
`shown in FIG. 2C, the power output of the engine is increased along the optimum
`
`13
`
`13
`
`
`
`efficiency line to a point at which sufficient excess power is generated, illustrated
`
`here by the point (c). The excess power that does not go to road load is fed into the
`
`pump/motor 7 (acting as a pump) which stores it in the accumulator 6 for future
`
`Mode 1 or Mode 4 events.”); col. 3, lines 35 to 39 (“the power storage device
`
`could be, for example, the combination of a storage battery, generator/alternator,
`
`and an electric motor”); Fig. 2C.
`
`
`
`24. Gray describes an efficient range of the engine between power levels A and
`
`B of Figures 2A-2D. Point A (corresponding to the claimed lower level setpoint) is
`
`the low end of the range of optimum efficiency and substantially less than point B
`
`(corresponding to the claimed maximum torque output). See Gray, at col. 8, lines
`
`35 to 39, Fig. 2B.
`
`25. As of the filing date of the ’347 patent, it was common for automotive
`
`engines to have a broad band of torque output in which the engine would operate
`
`14
`
`14
`
`
`
`efficiently. For example, Severinsky ’970 describes that the efficient operational
`
`point of an internal combustion engine “produces 60-90% of its maximum torque
`
`whenever operated.” See Severinsky ’970, at col. 20, lines 63 to 67. The paper
`
`“Electric Hybrid Drive Systems for Passenger Cars and Taxis” (“Kalberlah”),
`
`which was presented at the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) International
`
`Congress and Exposition in Detroit, Michigan between February 26-March 1, 1991
`
`and published by the SAE in 1991, also discloses in Figure 8 that the transition
`
`point for switching between the electric motor and the internal combustion engine
`
`is substantially less than a maximum torque output of the internal combustion
`
`engine.
`
`26. Accordingly, in view of Gray’s description of point A, the low end of the
`
`efficient operating range of the engine, torque values substantially less than the
`
`engine MTO would have been a routine adaptation to apply to a hybrid vehicle
`
`such as the Audi Duo described by Paefgen.
`
`27. As described above, Paefgen’s Audi Duo controls its hybrid drive
`
`“depending on the requirements of the driving operation”. See Paefgen, at p. 319.
`
`28. Gray describes “mode 4” (Fig. 2D), “mode 2” (Fig. 2B), and “mode 1” (Fig.
`
`2A), corresponding to the claimed low-load mode I, highway cruising mode IV,
`
`and acceleration mode V, respectively. See Gray, at col. 8, line 41 to col. 9, line 17.
`
`15
`
`15
`
`
`
`29. Gray describes a clutch for disengaging the wheels from the first drive train
`
`when the power demand is zero, i.e., in claimed low-load mode I. See Gray, at col.
`
`4, lines 21 to 26, col. 8, lines 15 to 23. In particular, Gray describes that the clutch
`
`is normally engaged, and is only disengaged when zero power is demanded. See
`
`Gray, at col. 8, lines 15 to 23. Thus, Gray describes the clutch engaging the wheels
`
`and the first drive train when the road load is non-zero, as in claimed modes IV and
`
`V.
`
`30. As described above, Paefgen’s Audi Duo controls its hybrid drive
`
`“depending on the requirements of the driving operation.” See Paefgen, at p. 319.
`
`For example, Paefgen describes switching between operating modes at the “kick-
`
`down point.” See Paefgen, at p. 319.
`
`31. Gray describes acceleration from a stop (i.e., Paice's low-load mode I) in
`
`which more power is needed that the engine can provide, so that the motor supplies
`
`additional power (i.e., acceleration mode V). See Gray, at col. 5, lines 33 to 36.
`
`Following the flowchart for control by the microprocessor shown in Figure 6, it
`
`can be seen that the control processing cycle determines whether to utilize the
`
`engine, the motor, or both to propel the vehicle and that it is possible to switch
`
`from “mode 4,” corresponding to Paice’s “low-load mode I,” directly to “mode 1,”
`
`corresponding to Paice’s “acceleration mode V.”
`
`16
`
`16
`
`
`
`32. Paefgen describes that it is beneficial “to combine the combustion engine
`
`with an electric drive.” See Paefgen, at p. 317. Among the benefits of providing a
`
`hybrid drive that includes the combustion engine and the electric drive are (1) that
`
`it “is possible to drive in cities and populated areas in an emission-free manner”
`
`and (2) that “the mobility when driving long distances is ensured.” See Paefgen, at
`
`p. 317. The hybrid drive also provides improved fuel economy and carbon dioxide
`
`(CO2) emissions, when compared to traditional engine-only vehicles. See Paefgen,
`
`at p. 320. Gray recognizes problems associated with traditional engine-only
`
`vehicles. For example, Gray acknowledges that engine-only vehicles “greatly add[]
`
`to the atmospheric presence of various pollutants including greenhouse gases such
`
`as carbon dioxide.” See Gray, at col. 1, lines 12 to 14. Gray also identifies the
`
`desire to improve efficiency and fuel economy (“there has been a quest for
`
`approaches
`
`to
`
`improve
`
`the efficiency of fuel utilization for automotive
`
`powertrains.”). See Gray, at col. 1, lines 14 to 16. Improving efficiency and fuel
`
`economy are common goals of Gray and Paefgen, and are among the same goals
`
`purportedly achieved by the ’347 patent. See ’347 patent, at col. 1, lines 21 to 26
`
`(referring to “improved fuel economy and reduced pollutant emissions”).
`
`33. To address the “quest for approaches to improve the efficiency of fuel
`
`utilization for automotive powertrains,” Gray describes a hybrid control strategy in
`
`which the controlling variable is road load. According to Gray, approximately 85%
`
`17
`
`17
`
`
`
`to 90% of fuel energy consumed in conventional engine-only powertrains is wasted
`
`as heat. See Gray, at col. 1, lines 25 to 27. Thus, only 10% to 15% of the energy is
`
`available to propel the vehicle, and even much of that energy is dissipated as heat
`
`in braking. See Gray, at col. 1, lines 27 to 29. In Gray’s system, the operating mode
`
`is determined based on road load to maintain high efficiency by operating the
`
`internal combustion engine at near peak efficiency. See Gray, at col. 1, line 60 to
`
`col. 2, line 12. By operating the engine in the peak efficiency range, an efficiency
`
`in the range of 35% to 40% can be achieved, see Gray, at col. 1, lines 39 to 43,
`
`which is a vast improvement over the 10% to 15% efficiency achieved in
`
`traditional engine-only vehicles, see Gray, at col. 1, lines 27 to 29.
`
`34.
`
`In addition to vastly improving efficiency and fuel economy, Gray’s system,
`
`in which the controlling variable is road load, improves emission control. For
`
`example, Gray describes that “broad variation in speed and load experienced by the
`
`engine in a conventional powertrain makes it difficult to effectively control
`
`emissions because it requires the engine to operate at many different conditions of
`
`combustion.” See Gray, at col. 1, lines 54 to 57. By utilizing road load as the
`
`controlling variable to operate the engine at more constant load allows “much
`
`better optimization of any emission control devices, and the overall more efficient
`
`settings of the engine would allow less fuel to be combusted per mile traveled.”
`
`See Gray, at col. 1, lines 58 to 61.
`
`18
`
`18
`
`
`
`35. Gray is assigned on its face to “The United States of America as represented
`
`by the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.” A person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art seeking to address issues of fuel efficiency and pollutant
`
`emissions, would immediately turn to the EPA as a source of pertinent
`
`information. Thus, by the very fact that Gray is an EPA patent would motivate a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize its road-load-based control strategy in
`
`the hybrid vehicles disclosed by Paefgen.
`
`36.
`
`In view of the foregoing, Gray expressly describes reasons for utilizing a
`
`hybrid control strategy in which the controlling variable is road load, including
`
`improved efficiency, reduced emissions, etc.
`
`The Disclosures of Paefgen, Gray, and Probst
`Claim 24
`
`
`37. Probst describes a drive train control for a motor vehicle using operating
`
`parameters of the vehicle, and accelerator pedal position, to determine engine
`
`output, to minimize the discharge of harmful substances. See Probst, at Abstract,
`
`col. 2, lines 3 to 30. In an effort to minimize vehicle emissions, Probst describes
`
`monitoring the driver’s operation of the vehicle to classify operating parameters of
`
`the vehicle, and using the operating parameters to control the drive sources and
`
`decelerating units of the drive train. See Probst, at col. 2, lines 3 to 30. The driver
`
`type or driving strategy, such as driving performance-orientated mode and
`
`economical mode, is set based on the detection of the driver’s individual driving
`19
`
`19
`
`
`
`maneuvers. See Probst, at col. 8, line 20 to col. 9, line 4. Parameters describing the
`
`exterior conditions, such as traction, can also be taken into consideration. See
`
`Probst, at col. 12, line 31 to col. 13, line 5. Given these inputs, the controlled
`
`engine output in response to a driver’s actuation of the accelerator pedal is
`
`adjusted. For example, in the case of poor traction (“winter operation, split
`
`subsoil”), the sensitivity of the system in response to the accelerator pedal may be
`
`reduced. See Probst, at col. 12, line 26 to col. 13, line 5 (“[G]iven the same
`
`accelerator pedal produce less wheel torque.”). That is, the system monitors
`
`patterns of vehicle operation over time, and varies the setpoint of the accelerator
`
`pedal accordingly. See also Probst, at col. 16, lines 22 to 25 (“[I]ndividual
`
`operating points of this hybrid drive are set by the calculating device.”).
`
`38.
`
`It would have been a routine adaptation to utilize road load as the controlling
`
`variable in a hybrid control strategy to control the power source used to drive the
`
`vehicle, as described by Gray, in the Audi Duo hybrid drive described by Paefgen,
`
`to provide for improved efficiency and fuel economy and to provide for reduced
`
`emissions. Similarly, it would have been a routine adaptation to monitor patterns of
`
`vehicle operation over time, and to vary the setpoints accordingly, because Probst
`
`describes that controlling the engine output strategy in this manner “improve[s] the
`
`overall operation of a motor vehicle,” “the emissions (hydrocarbons, nitrogen
`
`oxides etc.) are minimized,” and “the discharge of harmful substances, in particular
`
`20
`
`20
`
`
`
`in an urban area, is minimized.” See Probst, at col. 2, lines 3 to 11. Paefgen and
`
`Gray describe the same goals, reducing emissions in vehicle drives by increasing
`
`efficiency. See Paefgen, at p. 316 (“[T]he hybrid automobile ... allows emission-
`
`free and low noise driving within cities and populated areas.”); Gray, at Abstract
`
`(“Engine output speed is controlled for optimum efficiency.”).
`
`The Disclosures of Paefgen, Gray, and Moroto
`Claim 25
`
`39. Moroto describes a hybrid vehicle having an internal combustion engine and
`
`an electric motor, and a drive power share computer to apportion needed drive
`
`power between the engine and electric motor. See Moroto, at Abstract. Moroto
`
`describes drive mode maps for indicating which drive mode to propel the vehicle,
`
`according to the acceleration pedal operation degree and vehicle traveling speed.
`
`For example, Figure 10 (reproduced below) illustrates that, at low pedal operation
`
`degree, and at low traveling speed, the drive mode map indicates a motor drive
`
`mode, in which only the motor drives the vehicle. At increased pedal operation
`
`degree (i.e., great acceleration), the drive map indicates an engine/motor drive
`
`mode, in which the engine and motor drive the vehicle together. At increased
`
`vehicle speed, the drive mode map indicates an engine drive mode, in which only
`
`the engine drives the vehicle. See Moroto, at col. 4, lines 13 to 21, col. 8, line 61 to
`
`col. 9, line 21. More specifically, however, Moroto describes changeover values
`
`for the accelerator pedal operation degree, and vehicle traveling speed, reflecting a
`21
`
`21
`
`
`
`“learned hysteresis.” See Moroto, at col. 8, line 61 to col. 9, line 21. That is, for
`
`example, the system only changes from motor drive mode to engine drive mode
`
`when the vehicle speed exceeds vA1, which is higher than vA2. Should the vehicle
`
`speed drop below vA1 again, the vehicle remains in engine drive mode; only when
`
`the vehicle speed drops below vA2 would the vehicle switch to motor drive mode.
`
`Similarly, accelerator pedal operation degree θ includes changeover values θA1
`
`and θA2, for changing between motor drive mode and engine/motor drive mode.
`
`See Moroto, at col. 8, line 61 to col. 9, line 21, Fig. 10.
`
`
`
`40. Moroto also notes that this "learned hysteresis" includes monitoring the
`
`changeover parameters (in this case, speed and accelerator position) over time. See
`
`
`
`Moroto Col. 7, ll. 20-24.
`
`22
`
`22
`
`
`
`41.
`
`It was also well-known at the time the ’347 patent was filed to evaluate a
`
`signal over a predetermined time to determine if it was above a detection threshold.
`
`For example, in radar detection systems the “binary integrator” sets a detection
`
`threshold (for example SP), and then assigns a value of one or zero to each
`
`incoming signal pulse to determine if the pulse amplitude is above or below the
`
`threshold. After a predetermined number of pulses have been detected (which in a
`
`periodic pulse system would also correspond to a predetermined time interval), the
`
`number of detected pulses is counted and compared to the total number of pulses.
`
`If the number of pulses above the threshold is sufficiently high, then the system
`
`makes an “alarm” decision. That is, over a pre-determined time interval, if the
`
`received pulses have exceeded the threshold for more than a predefined amount of
`
`time, the system responds with a detection event or alarm.
`
`42. As discussed in more detail above, it would have been a routine adaptation
`
`to use road load as the controlling variable in a hybrid control strategy to control
`
`the power source (engine, motor, or both) used to drive the vehicle, as described by
`
`Gray, in the Audi Duo hybrid drive described by Paefgen to, for example, provide
`
`for improved efficiency and fuel economy and to provide for reduced emissions.
`
`Similarly, it would have been a routine adaptation to apply hysteresis to the
`
`transition from motor propulsion to engine propulsion, to provide “an improved
`
`23
`
`23
`
`
`
`hybrid vehicle which continues travelling comfortably.” See Moroto, at col. 1, lines
`
`47 to 49.
`
`The Disclosures of Paefgen, Gray, and Lateur
`Claim 27
`
`
`43. Lateur describes a hybrid vehicle having a heat engine and two electric
`
`motors, and a control arrangement to operate the driving of the vehicle. See Lateur,
`
`at Abstract. Lateur describes a cruise control feature, in which a microprocessor 26
`
`receives a “cruise control on” signal, and identifies the present speed and road. See
`
`Lateur, at col. 9, lines 46 to 54. In the cruise control process, if the vehicle speed is
`
`to be maintain through changing loads, the torque applied to output shaft 62 is
`
`changed via the motor/generators 12,14, and the desired speed is maintained. See
`
`Lateur, at col. 10, lines 36 to 43; see also Lateur, at col. 10, lines 52 to 54.
`
`44. As discussed in more detail above, it would have been a routine adaptation
`
`to use road load as the controlling variable in a hybrid control strategy to control
`
`the power source (engine, motor, or both) used to drive the vehicle, as described by
`
`Gray, in the Audi Duo hybrid drive described by Paefgen to, for example, provide
`
`for improved efficiency and fuel economy and to provide for reduced emissions.
`
`Similarly, it would have been a routine adaptation to apply the cruise control
`
`feature of Lateur to adjust the torque applied to the output shaft in response to
`
`changes in road load, as described by Lateur, so that the driver’s desired vehicle
`
`speed is maintained. See Lateur, at col. 10, lines 36 to 43.
`24
`
`24
`
`
`
`The Disclosures of Paefgen, Gray, and Severinsky ’970
`Claim 41
`
`45. Severinsky ’970 describes a hybrid vehicle having an internal combustion
`
`engine and an electric motor, and a controllable torque transfer unit. See
`
`Severinsky ’970, at Abstract. Severinsky ’970 notes that, in certain circumstances,
`
`the engine 40 must be run at low power, below its efficient operating range, such
`
`as when the vehicle is operated in traffic and the battery is being charged. In such
`
`circumstances, the engine will still be used, to prevent the batteries from being
`
`excessively discharged. See Severinsky ’970, at col. 18, lines 23 to 33.
`
`46. As discussed in more detail above, it would have been a routine adaptation
`
`to use road load as the controlling variable in a hybrid control strategy to control
`
`the power source (engine, motor, or both) used to drive the vehicle, as described by
`
`Gray, in the Audi Duo hybrid drive described by Paefgen to, for example, provide
`
`for improved efficiency and fuel economy and to provide for reduced emissions.
`
`Similarly, it would have been a routine adaptation to operate the engine at low
`
`output levels, below the engine’s efficiency range, as described by Severinsky
`
`’970, so that the batteries that would power the electric motor are not excessively
`
`discharged, “which would substantially reduce
`
`the battery
`
`lifetime.” See
`
`Severinsky ’970, at col. 18, lines 23 to 33.
`
`
`
`25
`
`25
`
`
`
`I declare that all statements made herein of my own knowledge are true and that all
`
`statements made on information and belief are believed to be true, and further that
`
`these statements were made with the knowledge that willful false statements and
`
`the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under §1001 of
`
`Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`
`
`Dated: 11/11/2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`____________________________
`Scott Andrews
`
`
`
`26
`
`26
`
`
`
`EXHIBITA
`
`27
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`27
`
`
`
`
`(650) 279-0242
`
`
`Scott Andrews
`scott@cogenia.com
`
`Petaluma, CA
`
`Summary
`Creative, energetic, and innovative internationally recognized technical executive
`experienced
`in general management, systems engineering, advanced product
`development, advanced technology, business development, strategic planning, and
`program management
`
`• Enterprise Software
`• Multimedia/Internet Computing
`• Vehicle Safety and Control Systems
`• Spacecraft Electronics
`• Mo