`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`PATENT TRIAL & APPEAL BOARD
`
`PATENT: 8,573,374
`
`INVENTOR: HEIKO MAGERKURTH et al.
`
`TITLE: HYDRODYNAMIC TORQUE CONVERTER
`
`TRIAL NO.: IPR2017-00442
`
`DECLARATION OF DR. STEVEN SHAW
`
`1.
`
`I, Dr. Steven Shaw, make this declaration in connection with
`
`this petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 8,573,374 (“the
`
`’374 patent,” attached as Exhibit 1101 to the petition). I am over 21
`
`years of age and otherwise competent to make this declaration.
`
`Although I am being compensated for my time in preparing this
`
`declaration, the opinions herein are my own, and I have no stake in the
`
`outcome of the inter partes review proceeding.
`
`I. QUALIFICATIONS
`A detailed record of my professional qualifications, including
`2.
`
`a list of publications, awards, and professional activities, can be found
`
`1
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 1
`
`
`
`in my curriculum vitae, which is attached as Appendix A to this
`
`declaration. I have provided testimony by deposition within the last five
`
`years in IPR2016-00502, filed against U.S. Patent No. 8,161,740.
`
`3.
`
`I am currently the Harris Professor of Mechanical and
`
`Aerospace Engineering at Florida Institute of Technology. I am on
`
`leave from Michigan State University (“MSU”), where I serve as a
`
`University Distinguished Professor of Mechanical Engineering and an
`
`Adjunct Professor of Physics and Astronomy. Additionally, I am
`
`involved in a small family business that makes hand and specialty tools
`
`for Snap-On, etc. as 49% owner, Vice President, and Board Member,
`
`although I am not involved in day-to-day operations.
`
`4.
`
`Before joining the faculty at MSU in 1984, I was an
`
`Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering at Oakland University.
`
`I also served as an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical
`
`Engineering at the University of Michigan during 1991-93, and have
`
`held visiting professor appointments at Cornell University, the
`
`University of Minnesota, Caltech, the University of Michigan, the
`
`University of California-Santa Barbara, and McGill University.
`
`2
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 2
`
`
`
`5. During the past 32 years, I have performed research
`
`relevant to the subject matter of the ’374 patent, including on dampers,
`
`rotor systems, and centrifugal pendulum vibration absorbers. I have
`
`also worked on these topics with several companies, including Ford
`
`Motor Company off and on since 1984, with Teledyne Continental
`
`Motors in 1994, with Chrysler (in its various incarnations) continually
`
`since 2006, with Honda in 2013, with Valeo starting in 2015, and with
`
`Achates Power in 2016.
`
`6. My work on this topic has included various types of
`
`fundamental studies, design assistance, and the development of
`
`experimental methods for system characterization. This work been
`
`funded by the companies noted above and by the U.S. National Science
`
`Foundation. I have also published extensively, with over 150 technical
`
`publications. Of these, approximately 25 archival journal papers and
`
`numerous conference papers relate to this topic. I have also given
`
`professional presentations on the subject at many conferences and
`
`university seminars. I have graduated 7 Ph.D. students and 8 M.S.
`
`students working in this area, and currently have one Ph.D. student in
`
`progress on this subject. My 1997 SAE Arch T. Colwell Merit Award
`
`
`
`3
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 3
`
`
`
`and my 2013 ASME N. O. Myklestad Award, which is “presented in
`
`recognition of a major innovative contribution to vibration engineering,”
`
`were based on my technical contributions to this topic.
`
`7.
`
`In addition, I have consultation experience with torque
`
`converters, and regularly use torque converters as an example in my
`
`classes when I teach system dynamics and vibrations.
`
`8.
`
`I hold an A.B. degree in Physics and an M.S.E. in Applied
`
`Mechanics from the University of Michigan and a Ph.D. in Theoretical
`
`and Applied Mechanics from Cornell University.
`
`9.
`
`I have used my education and experience working in the
`
`mechanical engineering field, and my understanding of the knowledge,
`
`creativity, and experience of a person having ordinary skill in the art in
`
`forming the opinions expressed in this report, as well as any other
`
`materials discussed herein.
`
`II. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`10.
`In forming my opinions, I read and considered the ’374
`
`patent and its prosecution history, the exhibits listed in the Exhibit List
`
`filed with the petition for inter partes review of the ’374 patent, as well
`
`as any other material referenced herein.
`
`
`
`4
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 4
`
`
`
`III. LEGAL PRINCIPLES
`11.
` For the purposes of this declaration, I have been informed
`
`about certain aspects of patent law that are relevant to my analysis and
`
`opinions, as set forth in this section of my declaration.
`
`A. A Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art
`12.
`I understand that the disclosure of patents and prior art
`
`references are to be viewed from the perspective of a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention
`
`(“PHOSITA”). Unless I state otherwise, I provide my opinion herein
`
`from the viewpoint of a PHOSITA at the earliest alleged priority date
`
`for the ’374 patent, which I have been informed is July 4, 2008.
`
`13. The ’374 patent relates to the field of hydrodynamic torque
`
`converter designs. The particular technical issue that the ’374 patent
`
`purports to address is the arrangement of components within the torque
`
`converter to decrease the assembly space while maintaining
`
`functionality. I understand from my own work experience and
`
`conversations with engineers who work in the field of hydrodynamic
`
`torque converter design that torque converter design involves three
`
`main considerations: (1) efficient transfer of torque, (2) packaging of the
`
`torque converter parts so that the torque converter fits in the space
`5
`
`
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 5
`
`
`
`specified by the customer, and (3) reduction of noise, vibration, and
`
`harshness (called “NVH” in the industry) to meet or exceed customer
`
`requirements. A PHOSITA in the field of hydrodynamic torque
`
`converter design would be skilled in each of those three areas, although
`
`practically speaking, torque converters are designed by teams of
`
`engineers.
`
`14. The references that I discuss below are informative of the
`
`level of skill of a PHOSITA and are of the type that are reasonably
`
`relied upon by experts in my field to form opinions on the subject of
`
`vibration absorbers, including vibration absorbers used in
`
`hydrodynamic torque converters.
`
`15. Long before the ’374 patent application was filed, various
`
`components used to dampen and absorb vibrations in hydrodynamic
`
`torque converters were well-known.
`
`16. The ’374 patent acknowledges that combining (i) torsional
`
`vibration dampers positioned between the lock-up clutch and the output
`
`hub with (ii) turbine dampers positioned between the turbine and the
`
`output hub to damp the torsional vibrations of an internal combustion
`
`engine was known prior to the filing date. (Ex. 1101, 1:23–42.)
`
`
`
`6
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 6
`
`
`
`17. Torsional vibration absorbers were also well-known. (See,
`
`e.g., Ex. 1110, 2:15–20 (describing cancellers known in the art). The
`
`prior art also demonstrates that companies such as DaimlerChrysler,
`
`Mannesmann Sachs/ZF Sachs, and Carl Freudenberg were already
`
`seeking patent protection on compact torque converter designs with
`
`different damper and absorber arrangements. (Ex. 1110, Figs. 1–8,
`
`2:15–20; Ex. 1111; Ex. 1112; Ex. 1113.)
`
`18.
`
`It was also well-known in the art to arrange these
`
`components so as to reduce assembly space as much as possible. (See,
`
`e.g., Ex. 1109, 5:3–34 (teaching sharing components and benefits of
`
`reducing space); Ex. 1110, 3:9–16 (describing benefits of using existing
`
`space to decrease assembly space.)
`
`19. Based on these factors, I have concluded that a PHOSITA
`
`was sufficiently skilled in the general design of hydrodynamic torque
`
`converters and experienced in arranging their layouts to most
`
`efficiently use available space in view of the numerous ways to connect
`
`torque converter components described in the prior art.
`
`
`
`7
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 7
`
`
`
`B. Claim Construction
`20.
`I understand that “claim construction” is the process of
`
`determining a patent claim’s meaning. I also have been informed and
`
`understand that the proper construction of a claim term is the meaning
`
`that a PHOSITA would have given to that term.
`
`21.
`
`I understand that claims in inter partes review proceedings
`
`are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the
`
`specification, which is what I have done when performing my analysis
`
`in this declaration. I provide comments on specific terms below.
`
`22. Torsional Vibration Absorber: Under its broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation in light of the specification, “torsional vibration absorber”
`
`means a component or device designed to absorb torsional vibrations.
`
`As described in the ’374 patent, this includes movable masses disposed
`
`on mounting parts. (Ex. 1101, 1:43–45.) Some examples of movable
`
`masses disposed on mounting parts are compensation flywheels,
`
`frequency-tuned mass-spring devices and centrifugal-force pendulums.
`
`23. Parallel: Under its broadest reasonable interpretation in
`
`light of the specification, “parallel” means “does not transfer torque
`
`generated by the engine along the power path but rotates with” the
`
`
`
`8
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 8
`
`
`
`other components in the power path. This is consistent with the
`
`description of parallel components in the ’374 specification and in
`
`Haller. (Ex. 1101, 5:12–16; Ex. 1110, 3:1–3.) Both documents describe
`
`absorbers that are parallel to the drivetrain such that they don’t
`
`transfer engine torque, but they do rotate with the other components in
`
`the drivetrain.
`
`24.
`
`In a pocket: Under its broadest reasonable interpretation in
`
`light of the specification, wherein the lock-up clutch is axially mounted,
`
`“in a pocket” in claim 10 means “partially in a pocket.” Claim 11
`
`specifies that the lock-up clutch is formed out of a piston, and the piston
`
`in the ’374 patent extends partially out of the pocket. Thus, in the
`
`embodiment shown, the lock-up clutch is partially in the pocket. (Ex.
`
`1101, Fig. 1.)
`
`C. Anticipation
`25.
`I understand that a patent claim is unpatentable as
`
`anticipated if a PHOSITA during the relevant timeframe would have
`
`understood a single prior art reference to teach every limitation
`
`contained in the claim. The disclosure in a reference does not have to
`
`be in the same words as the claim, but all of the requirements of the
`
`
`
`9
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 9
`
`
`
`claim must be described in enough detail, or necessarily implied by or
`
`inherent in the reference, to enable a POSITA looking at the reference
`
`to make and use at least one embodiment of the claimed invention.
`
`IV. THE ’374 PATENT
`26. The ’374 patent was filed as the national stage entry of
`
`PCT/DE2009/000819 on June 12, 2009 and issued November 5, 2013.
`
`27. The ’374 patent describes a torque converter that
`
`purportedly dampens vibrations well while taking up little assembly
`
`space. More particularly, the ’374 patent describes disposing multiple
`
`damper stages in series between a lock-up clutch and an output hub,
`
`with a torsional vibration damper between them. (Ex. 1101, 1:63–2:5.)
`
`28. By integrating “both damper stages in a single damper that
`
`concurrently features a torsional vibration absorber assigned to both
`
`damper stages,” the ’374 patent explains that multiple components can
`
`be shared, providing a lighter and narrower torque converter. (Ex. 1101,
`
`2:5–18.)
`
`29. The ’374 patent acknowledges that combining (i) torsional
`
`vibration dampers positioned between the lock-up clutch and the output
`
`hub and (ii) turbine dampers positioned between the turbine and the
`
`
`
`10
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 10
`
`
`
`output hub to damp the torsional vibrations of an internal combustion
`
`engine was known prior to the filing date. (Ex. 1101, 1:23–42.)
`
`30. The ’374 patent also acknowledges that it was known to use
`
`vibration absorbers such as centrifugal force pendulums to reduce
`
`torsional vibrations. (Ex. 1101, 1:43–50.)
`
`31. But the ’374 patent alleges that, due to restrictive assembly
`
`space specifications in motor vehicles, a torque converter that took up
`
`less assembly space while still providing sufficient vibration damping
`
`was needed. (Ex. 1101, 1:51–59.)
`
`32. The only drawing figure in the ’374 patent, reproduced below
`
`with colored annotations, depicts a hydrodynamic torque converter 1
`
`having a housing 3, an impeller 6, and a turbine 7 inside the housing 3.
`
`(Ex. 1101, 3:56–4:8.)
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 11
`
`
`
`
`
`’374 Patent Figure
`
`33. Additionally, Fig. 1 shows a lock-up clutch 13 (including
`
`piston 18 in blue) mounted on the housing 3.
`
`34. When the lock-up clutch is closed, it transmits torque from
`
`an internal combustion engine to the output hub 12 (purple) via first
`
`and second damper stages 14, 15, as follows: the input 41 (yellow) to the
`
`first damper stage receives torque from the lock-up clutch. The output of
`
`
`
`12
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 12
`
`
`
`the first damper stage is a disk part 25 (green) that also forms a portion
`
`of the input of the second damper stage. (Ex. 1101, 4:38–40.)
`
`35. The input of the second damper stage is completed by disk
`
`part 31 (red), which also forms the mounting part for the torsional
`
`vibration absorber 17. (Ex. 1101, 5:3–5.) The output (purple) of the
`
`second damper stage is part of the output hub (purple).
`
`36.
`
` When the lock-up clutch is open, torque flows via impeller 6
`
`to the turbine 7 which is fastened to disk part 25 (green). Because disk
`
`part 25 is the input of the second damper stage, torque is transmitted
`
`through the second damper stage 15 to the output hub (purple). (Ex.
`
`1101, 4:8–16.)
`
`37. The two damper stages 14, 15 are connected by a single disk
`
`part 25 (green). (Ex. 1101, 4:38–40.) The disk part 25 forms the
`
`complete output part 34 of damper stage 14 and part of the input part
`
`35 of damper stage 15, completed by a second disk part 31 (red). (Ex.
`
`1101, 4:53–58.) The two disk parts 25 (green) and 41 (yellow) are axially
`
`spaced relative to one another by rivets 33 and accommodate flange
`
`part 36 (purple), welded to the output hub 12. (Ex. 1101, 4:58–62.)
`
`
`
`13
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 13
`
`
`
`38. Disk part 31 (together with 32 and 37, red) forms the
`
`mounting part 37 of the torsional vibration absorber 17, shown in Fig. 1
`
`as a centrifugal force pendulum 38. (Ex. 1101, 5:3–5.)
`
`V. Summary of Select Prior Art
`39. All the components of the ’374 claims were well-known in the
`
`art, as detailed below. Moreover, these components were arranged in
`
`the prior art in the same space-saving fashion taught by the ’374
`
`patent.
`
`1. Degler
`40. Degler describes a force transmission device optimized to
`
`reduce or cancel rotational irregularities over the entire operating range
`
`of the engine. (Ex. 1103, 3.1) Degler’s devices include hydrodynamic
`
`torque converters with at least two dampers connectable in series and a
`
`rotational-speed-adaptive vibration absorber, preferably arranged
`
`between the dampers. (Ex. 1103, 3.)
`
`41. Degler’s torque converter includes many of the same
`
`components as the ’374 patent, highlighted below. In Fig. 3 (below),
`
`rotational-speed-adaptive vibration absorber 5 is integral with primary
`
`
`1 All citations in my declaration are to the internal page numbers of the
`references.
`
`14
`
`
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`peed-ational-sp) The rotar 4. (Ex. nd dampepart 211 of secon 1103, 14.)
`
`
`
`
`
`adaptivve vibratiion absorrber can bbe a centrrifugal peendulum aand “doess
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`not traansmit anny torque but is suuitable forr absorbinng excitattions overr a
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`very brroad rangge.” (Ex. 11103, 3.)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Deggler Fig.
`
`3
`
`
`2. Reikk
`
`
`
`
`
`
`442. Reikk is a papeer and prresentatioon distribbuted at tthe CTI
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Sympoosium in BBerlin, Geerman inn Decembeer, 2008.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The paaper incluudes a schhematic ddrawing oof a hydroodynamic
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Ex. 11066; Ex. 11007.)
`
`
`
`torque
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`converter includding the ssame commponents
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`sed
`and orienntations aas discuss
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`patent. the ’374 pand claaimed in
`
`
`
`
`
`(Ex. 11106, 512.)) A color vversion off this figuure from tthe prese
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ntation (EEx.
`
`
`
`1115) rrather thaan the blaack and wwhite verrsion fromm the bookk (Ex. 11006)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`is provvided for eease:
`
`
`
`
`
`As is aapparent, the figurres in Ex. 1106 andd 1115 arre identic
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`al. I use tthe
`
`
`
`coloredd figure frrom Ex. 11115 for rreference
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`in my de
`
`
`
`. clarationn for ease.
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 16
`
`
`
`VI. ANALYSIS
`43.
`It is my opinion that claims 1, 3–5, 8, 10, and 14–16 of the
`
`’374 patent are anticipated over the prior art, as detailed below. At the
`
`request of counsel, I have divided the claims into elements denoted as
`
`[a], [b], [c], etc. to correspond to the discussion of the same elements in
`
`the petition for inter partes review, as follows:
`
`Claim 1:
`
`[a] A hydrodynamic torque converter (1)
`[b] with a turbine (7) driven by an impeller (6) as well as
`housing (3)
`[c] in which a torsional vibration damper (16) with multiple
`of damper stages (14, 15),
`[d] a torsional vibration absorber (17) and
`[e] a lock-up clutch (13) are additionally installed,
`[f] wherein a first damper stage (14) and a second damper
`stage (15) are disposed between the lock-up clutch (13) and an
`output hub (12),
`[g] the second damper stage (15) is disposed between the
`turbine (7) and the output hub (12)
`[h] and the torsional vibration absorber (17) is parallel to
`both damper stages (14, 15).
`
`
`
`17
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 17
`
`
`
`Claim 2:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to claim 1,
`wherein an input part (41) of the first damper stage (14) and an
`output part (48) of the second damper stage (15) are centered on
`one another.
`Claim 3:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to claim 1,
`wherein a disk part (25) is allocated to two damper stages (14, 15)
`as one piece.
`Claim 4:
`
`[a] The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to
`claim 1, wherein the torsional vibration absorber (17) comprises a
`plurality of absorber masses (39), and
`[b] a mounting part (37) of the torsional vibration absorber
`(17) forms a disk part (31) of an input part (35) of the second
`damper stage (15).
`Claim 5:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to claim 1,
`wherein absorber masses (39) of the torsional vibration absorber
`(17) and energy accumulators (29) of the first damper stage (14)
`disposed over the circumference are radially at the same height
`but axially spaced apart.
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 18
`
`
`
`Claim 6:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to claim 5,
`wherein a middle mounting diameter of the energy accumulators
`(29) is disposed radially outside the turbine (7).
`Claim 7:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to claim 5,
`wherein the energy accumulators (29) overlap the turbine (7) at
`least partially and axially.
`Claim 8:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to claim 1,
`wherein energy accumulators (27) are distributed over the
`circumference of the second damper stage (15) based on a middle
`mounting diameter radially within turbine blades (8) of the
`turbine (7).
`Claim 9:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to claim 8,
`wherein the energy accumulators (27) of the second damper stage
`(15) and the turbine (7) at least partially and axially overlap.
`Claim 10:
`
` The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to claim 1,
`wherein the lock-up clutch (13) in a closed state is axially mounted
`in a pocket (24) formed in a housing wall (23) radially inward of
`
`
`
`19
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 19
`
`
`
`fastening means (9) provided on external part of the torque
`converter (1).
`Claim 11:
`
`[a] The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to
`claim 10, wherein the lock-up clutch (13) is formed out of a piston
`(18) centered on the output hub (12) and
`[b] mounted non-rotatably and axially displacably on the
`housing (3), and axially pressurizes a friction plate (22) that can
`be clamped between said piston and said housing (3) to develop a
`frictional engagement.
`Claim 12:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to claim
`11, wherein a mounting part (37) of the torsional vibration
`absorber (17) is disposed axially between lock-up clutch (13) and
`the first damper stage (14).
`Claim 13:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according to claim
`12, wherein between the friction plate (22) and an input part (41)
`of the first damper stage (14) transition connections (44) are
`formed, which reach through circular segment-shaped openings
`(47) of the mounting part (37).
`
`20
`
`
`
`
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 20
`
`
`
`Claim 14:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter according to claim 1,
`wherein in the closed state of the lock-up clutch (13) the torsional
`vibration absorber (17) acts between both damper stages (14, 15).
`Claim 15:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter according to claim 1,
`wherein the torsional vibration absorber (17) is connected non-
`rotatably with the turbine (7).
`Claim 16:
`
`The hydrodynamic torque converter according to claim 15,
`wherein in the opened state of the lock-up clutch (13) the torsional
`vibration absorber (17) is connected non-rotatably with the
`turbine (7).
`
`A. Ground 1: Claims 1, 3–5, 8, 10, and 14–16 Are
`Anticipated By Degler
`I have been asked to assume that Degler constitutes prior
`
`44.
`
`art against the ’374 patent. With that assumption, it is my opinion that
`
`Degler anticipates claims 1, 3–5, 8, 10, and 14–16.
`
`Claim 1[a]: A hydrodynamic torque converter (1):
`45. Degler discloses hydrodynamic torque converters. (Ex. 1103,
`
`9 (“Hydrodynamic component 6 can be constructed as a hydrodynamic
`
`clutch…in a particularly advantageous embodiment, as a hydrodynamic
`
`
`
`21
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 21
`
`
`
`rotational-speed/torque converter…”).) Thus, it is my opinion that
`
`Degler anticipates element 1[a].
`
`Claim 1[b]: with a turbine (7) driven by an impeller (6) as
`well as housing (3)
`46. The hydrodynamic torque converter in Degler includes a
`
`turbine driven by an impeller in a housing. (Ex. 1103, 9
`
`(“Hydrodynamic component 6 comprises at least one primary wheel
`
`functioning as pump impeller P…and one secondary wheel functioning
`
`as turbine wheel T…”).) The housing is visible in the drawing figures.
`
`(Ex. 1103, Fig. 2.) Thus, it is my opinion that Degler anticipates
`
`element 1[b].
`
`Claim 1[c]: in which a torsional vibration damper (16) with
`multiple of damper stages (14, 15)
`47. Degler discloses several examples of torsional vibration
`
`dampers with multiple stages. Degler’s two damper stages (first damper
`
`3 (green) and second damper 4 (red) in Fig. 2 or Fig. 3 correspond with
`
`the first 14 and second 15 damper stages of the ’374 patent (Fig. 2
`
`shown below):
`
`
`
`22
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 22
`
`
`
`
`
`’374 Patentt
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Degller Fig. 22
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`48. Thuss, it is myy opinion that Deggler anticiipates eleement 1[cc].
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 1[dd]: a torssional viibration
`
`absorbeer (17)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`49. Degller teachees rotational-speedd-adaptivve vibratioon absorbbers
`
`
`
`such ass the centtrifugal ppendulumm absorbe
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(“A force-transmmission deevice con
`structed
`
`
`
`r shown iin Fig. 4.
`
`(Ex. 110
`
`3, 3
`
`
`
`accordingg to the
`
`
`
`ion ve vibratid-adaptivonal-speed…a rotatiomprising…inventiion…com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`absorber”); Fig. 4.) Thus, it is my opinion tthat Degller anticippates
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`elemennt 1[d].
`
`
`
`23
`
`4 C 4
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 23
`
`
`
`Claim 1[e]: and a lock-up clutch (13) are additionally
`installed
`50. Degler’s torque converters include a lock-up clutch. (Ex.
`
`1103, 9 (“Device 7 for bypassing hydrodynamic component 6 preferably
`
`has the form of a so-called lockup clutch…”).) Thus, it is my opinion that
`
`Degler anticipates element 1[e].
`
`Claim 1[f]: wherein a first damper stage (14) and a second
`damper stage (15) are disposed between the lock-up clutch
`(14) and an output hub (12),
`51. The ’374 patent describes two torque paths. Claim 1[f]
`
`describes the first torque path, i.e., where torque passes through both
`
`damper stages when transferred from the lock-up clutch 14 to the
`
`output hub 12.
`
`52. Degler Figs. 1c and 2 embody torque paths similar to those
`
`described in the ’374 patent. In Figs. 1c and 2, the first damper 3 acts as
`
`a standard damper and the second damper 4 acts as a turbine damper,
`
`as in the ’374 patent. (Ex. 1103, 10 (“According to figure 1c, this
`
`arrangement of the two dampers 3 and 4 connected in series in the force
`
`flow in the force flow direction as viewed between input E and output A
`
`is always connected downstream from mechanical power branch II”;
`
`Figs. 1c and 2).) This arrangement is depicted below in Fig. 1c:
`
`
`
`24
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 24
`
`
`
`
`53. Thus, it is my opinion that Degler anticipates element 1[f].
`
`Claim 1[g]: the second damper stage (15) is disposed
`between the turbine (7) and the output hub (12) and
`54. As noted above, the ’374 patent describes two torque paths.
`
`Claim 1[g] describes the second torque path, i.e., where torque passes
`
`through the second damper stage 15 when transferred from the turbine
`
`7 to the output hub 12.
`
`55. Degler Figs. 1c and 2 embody torque paths similar to those
`
`described in the ’374 patent. In Figs. 1c and 2, the second damper is
`
`active when the torque path is through the impeller/turbine, as in the
`
`’374 patent. (Ex. 1103, 10 (“The tie-in of hydrodynamic component 6,
`
`
`
`25
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 25
`
`
`
`especially with turbine wheel T, takes place here between the two
`
`dampers 3 and 4”; Figs. 1c and 2).) Thus, it is my opinion that Degler
`
`anticipates element 1[g].
`
`Claim 1[h]: the torsional vibration absorber (17) is parallel
`to both damper stages (14, 15).
`56.
`In Degler Figs. 1c and 2, the vibration absorber 5 is parallel
`
`to both damper stages because it is connected to second damper stage 4
`
`and does not transmit torque. (Ex. 1103, Fig. 2.) Thus, it is my opinion
`
`that Degler anticipates claim element 1[h].
`
`Claim 3: The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according
`to claim 1, wherein a disk part (25) is allocated to two
`damper stages (14, 15) as one piece.
`57. Claim 3 requires that a single disk part is shared between
`
`the first and second damper stages. As shown in ’374 Fig.1, disk part 25
`
`(green) is a single component shared between both damper stages. The
`
`same relationship is depicted in Degler Fig. 2:
`
`
`
`26
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`’3374 Pateent Fig. 11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Degleer Fig. 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`558. Moreeover, Deegler speccifically teeaches thhat “integgral
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`construuction bettween priimary pa
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`rt 21 andd seconda
`
`ry part 1
`
`6 is also
`
`
`
`possiblle.” (Ex. 11103, 13.)) Thus, it is my opiinion thaat Degler
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`claim 33.
`
`
`
`anticipattes
`
`39),
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 4[aa]: The hhydrodynnamic toorque coonverter
`(1)
`
`
`
`according to claiim 1, wheerein th
`
`
`e torsionnal vibraation
`a plural
`
`
`absorberr (17) commprises
`
`
`ity of abbsorber mmasses (
`and
`
`
`
`
`59. Degller descriibes torsioonal vibraation abssorbers wiith a
`
`
`
`
`
`Caaa 5
`
`
`
`pluraliity of absoorber masses. (Ex. 1103, 6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`are (“inertiall masses a
`
`
`
`
`
`27
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 27
`
`
`
`pendulum-mounted on the inertial-mass support device”); Fig. 4.) Thus,
`
`it is my opinion that Degler anticipates claim element 4[a].
`
`Claim 4[b]: a mounting part (37) of the torsional vibration
`absorber (17) forms a disk part (31) of an input part (35) of
`the second damper stage (15).
`60. Claim 4[b] specifies that the mounting part of the torsional
`
`vibration absorber forms an input part of the second damper stage. In
`
`Degler Fig. 3 the torsional vibration absorber is mounted on the disk
`
`input 21 of the second damper stage. (Ex. 1103, Fig. 3.) Thus, it is my
`
`opinion that Degler anticipates claim element 4[b].
`
`Claim 5: The hydrodynamic torque converter (1) according
`to claim 4, wherein absorber masses (39) of the torsional
`vibration absorber (17) and energy accumulators (29) of
`the first damper stage (14) disposed over the
`circumference are radially at the same height but axially
`spaced apart.
`61. Claim 5 specifies that the absorber masses and the springs
`
`of the first damper stage be axially spaced apart but radially at the
`
`same height, as illustrated in Fig. 1 of the ’374 patent.
`
`62. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, this includes
`
`instances where there is overlap between the radial height of the
`
`absorber masses and the springs of the first damper stage, as shown in
`
`Degler Fig. 2:
`
`
`
`28
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 28
`
`
`
`
`
`’374 Patent Fig. 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Degleer Fig. 2
`
`
`
`6 Ctdsw 6
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 8: TThe hyddrodynammic torqque conv
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`o claim 1, whereein energgy accummulatorss (27) aree
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`distributted over the circumferennce of thhe secondd dampeer
`
`
`
`
`unting dddle mouon a midstage (15) based o
`iameter
`
`radiallyy
`
`
`
`
`
`within tuurbine bllades (8)) of the tturbine ((7).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`erter (1)) accordiing
`
`
`
`64. Claimm 8 requiires that the midddle mountting diammeter, i.e.,,
`
`
`
`center of the springs of tthe secondd damperr, be radiaally withiin (below
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`
`
`
`the turrbine.
`
`
`
`29
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`aim 5. ipates clagler antici63. Thuss, it is myy opinion that Deg
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 29
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`e springstion of thentral port665. As shhown in ’’374 Fig. 1, the cen
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` of
`
`
`
`the seccond dammper are mmounted bbelow thee turbine.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` The samme
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ot largely nourbine is lrelationship cann be seen in Degler (althouggh the tu
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ings f the sprie center ofating thews illustrated with shown)), annotat red arrow
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`of the ssecond daamper loccated beloow the turrbine:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`’374 Patent Fig. 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Degleer Fig. 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`aim 8. ipates clagler antici66. Thuss, it is myy opinion that Deg
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1) verter (1que convamic torqClaim 10: The hydrodyna
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`erein thim 1, wheaccording to clai
`e lock-u
`
`
`p clutchh (13) in aa
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`closed staate is axxially moounted inn a pockket (24) foformed inn a
`
`
`
`
`
`housing wwall (23)) radiallyy inwardd of fasteening m
`eans (9)
`
`
`
`providedd on exteernal parrt of the
`
`
`torque cconverteer (1).
`
`
`
`30
`
`6 Cachp
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 30
`
`
`
`67. Claim 10 specifies that, when closed, at least the mounting
`
`portion of the lock-up clutch is axially mounted in a pocket in the
`
`housing wall radially inward of the fastening means on the housing.
`
`68. The hydrodynamic torque converter in Degler Fig. 2 has a
`
`fastening bracket (indicated by green arrow) on the housing of the
`
`torque converter for attaching the housing to a drive. (Ex. 1103, Fig. 2.)
`
`
`
`And, as shown in Fig. 2, when closed, the clutch 7 is axially mounted in
`
`a pocket formed in the housing wall radially inside of the fastening
`
`bracket. Thus, it is my opinion that Degler anticipates claim 10.
`
`Claim 14: The hydrodynamic torque converter (1)
`according to claim 1, wherein in the closed state of the
`
`
`
`31
`
`Valeo Exhibit 1102, pg. 31
`
`
`
`lock-up clutch (13) the torsional vibration absorber (17)
`acts between both damper stages (14, 15).
`69. Claim 14 requires that the torsional vibration absorber act
`
`between both damper stages when the lock-up clutch is closed.
`
`70. Degler states that its embodiments are “characterized in
`
`that the rotational-speed-adaptive vibration absorber is disposed
`
`between the dampers at least in one force-flow direction over the
`
`damper arrangement.” (Ex. 1103, 3.) Thus, it is my opinion that Degler
`
`anticipates claim 14.
`
`Claim 15: The hydrodynamic torque converter (1)
`according to claim 1, wherein the torsional vibration
`absorber (17) is connected non-rotatably with the turbine
`(7).
`71.
`
`In Degler Fig. 2 the mounting part of the rotational-speed-
`
`adaptive vibration absorber is connected indirectly