UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT and
`BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC,
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`PAICE LLC & THE ABELL FOUNDATION
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`Patent 7,104,347
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF MAHDI SHAHBAKHTI PH.D.
`IN SUPPORT OF THE PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`1
`
`PAICE 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT and
`BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC,
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`PAICE LLC & THE ABELL FOUNDATION
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`Patent 7,104,347
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF MAHDI SHAHBAKHTI PH.D.
`IN SUPPORT OF THE PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`1
`
`PAICE 2016
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`
`I.
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 5
`QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE ..................................................... 7
`II.
`III. LEGAL UNDERSTANDING ....................................................................... 15
`IV. DEFINITION OF A PERSON OF SKILL IN THE ART ............................ 17
`V.
`THE ’347 PATENT ....................................................................................... 18
`VI. CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS ........................................................................ 33
`VII. ANALYSIS AND OPINIONS ...................................................................... 34
`A. Grounds 1b and 2b: The proposed combination of
`Severinsky and Ma does not render obvious claim 33 and
`the proposed combination of Severinsky, Ehsani, and Ma
`does not render obvious claim 11 ........................................................ 34
`1.
`Dr. Davis does not identify a valid reason to add
`a turbocharger to Severinsky’s parallel hybrid ................... 35
`The prior art does not disclose any reason to
`add a turbocharger to Severinsky’s parallel
`hybrid ....................................................................................... 48
`The disadvantages of adding a turbocharger to
`Severinsky would deter a person of skill in the
`art from combining Severinsky and Ma ............................... 55
`No reasonable expectation of success .................................... 68
`4.
`Grounds 3a and 3b: The proposed combination of
`Severinsky and Nii does not render obvious claim 24 and
`the proposed combination of Severinsky, Ehsani, and Nii
`does not render obvious claim 2 .......................................................... 69
`1.
`Neither Severinsky nor Nii vary a setpoint .......................... 69
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`B.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Severinsky’s parallel hybrid architecture vs.
`Nii’s series hybrid architecture ............................................. 83
`Nii’s use of vehicle patterns has no applicability
`to Severinsky’s parallel hybrid control system
`and varying the alleged “setpoint” ........................................ 94
`Ground 4b: The proposed combination of the Bumby
`References and Ma does not render obvious claims 11
`and 33 ................................................................................................114
`D. Grounds 4c: The Bumby References in view of Ehsani do
`not render obvious claim 38 ..............................................................117
`1.
`Overview of Bumby V’s “free-wheel unit” .........................118
`2.
`Bumby V’s disclosure of synchronizing output
`shafts to “within 45 rev/min” does not satisfy
`the “substantially equal” requirement ................................122
`
`C.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`DECLARATION EXHIBITS
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`Exhibit Name
`Curriculum Vitae of Mahdi Shahbakhti, Ph.D.
`Bosch Gasoline-engine Management
`Selected Pages From John Heywood, Internal
`Combustion Engines Fundamentals
`Selected Pages From Merhdad Ehsani et al, Modern
`Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles
`Matthew Cuddy et al., Analysis of the Fuel Economy
`Benefit of Drivetrain Hybridization
`Selected Pages From Draft Technical Assessment
`Report: Midterm Evaluation of Light-Duty Vehicle
`Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate
`Average Fuel Economy Standards for Model Years
`2022-2025
`Selected Pages From Assessment of Fuel Economy of
`Fuel Economy Technologies for Light Duty Vehicles
`Selected Pages From Richard Stone, Introduction to
`Internal Combustion Engines
`Heinz Heisler, Advanced Vehicle Technology, SAE
`Hitoshi Inoue et al., A Performance Improvement in
`Idle-Speed Control System with Feedforward
`Compensation for the Alternator Load Current, SAE
`Satoru Watanabe, Development of Model-Following
`Idle Speed Control System Incorporating Engine
`Torque Models, SAE
`Guzzella et al., Introduction to Modeling Control of
`Internal Combustion Engine Systems
`
`
`
`Exhibit Number
`Ex. 2017
`Ex. 2018
`
`Ex. 2019
`
`Ex. 2020
`
`Ex. 2021
`
`Ex. 2022
`
`Ex. 2023
`
`Ex. 2024
`
`Ex. 2025
`
`Ex. 2026
`
`Ex. 2027
`
`Ex. 2028
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`I, Mahdi Shahbakhti, hereby declare the following:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained by counsel for Paice LLC and the Abell
`
`Foundation (collectively, “Paice” or “Patent Owner”) to investigate and analyze
`
`certain issues relating to the validity of claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,104,347 (“the
`
`’347 patent”).
`
`2.
`
`For purposes of this declaration, I have been asked to analyze the
`
`arguments made by Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft and BMW of
`
`North America, LLC (“BMW” or “Petitioners”) related to Grounds 1b, 2b, 3a, 3b,
`
`4b, and 4c (claim 38) in the matter of the Inter Partes Review of the ’347 patent,
`
`Case No. IPR2020-00994, as shown in the table below.
`
`Grounds 1b, 2b
`
`Severinsky/Ma
`
`Claims 33 and 11
`
`Grounds 3a, 3b
`
`Severinsky/Nii
`
`Claims 24 and 2
`
`Ground 4b
`
`Bumby/Ma
`
`Claims 33 and 11
`
`Ground 4c
`
`Bumby/Eshani
`
`Claim 38
`
`
`
`In addition to the grounds and noted claims above, I have also reviewed the petition
`
`as well as the declaration of BMW’s expert, Dr. Davis (and the documents cited
`
`therein) pertaining to these grounds. I have also reviewed the Patent Trial and
`
`Appeal Board’s (“the Board”) decision to institute regarding these grounds, as well
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`as the Board’s claim constructions. My analysis is based on the Board’s claim
`
`constructions, unless I specifically note otherwise.
`
`3.
`
`I understand that the Board has instituted review of the following claims
`
`of the ’347 patent (the “challenged claims”): 2, 11, 17, 24, 33, and 38. I understand
`
`that Grounds 1b, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4b, and 4c relate to claims 2, 11, 24, 33, and 38.
`
`4.
`
`As to Grounds 1b, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4b, and 4c (claim 38), I understand that
`
`BMW and Dr. Davis assert that the challenged claims are obvious over various
`
`combinations of U.S. Patent No. 5,343,970 to Severinsky (Ex. 1303) (“Severinsky”),
`
`U.S. Patent 5,586,613 to Ehsani (Ex. 1019) (“Ehsani”), International Application
`
`Publication No. WO 92/15778 to Ma (Ex. 1021) (“Ma”), U.S. Patent No.
`
`5,650,931to Nii (Ex. 1022) (“Nii”), Bumby, J.R. et al., “Computer modelling of the
`
`automotive energy requirements for internal combustion engine and battery electric-
`
`powered vehicles,” IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 132, Pt. A, No. 5 (Ex. 1014)
`
`(“Bumby I”), Bumby, J.R. et al., “Optimisation and control of a hybrid electric car,”
`
`IEE PROCEEDINGS, Vol. 134, Pt. D, No. 6 (Nov. 1987), 373-87 (Ex. 1015)
`
`(“Bumby II”), Bumby, J.R. et al., “A hybrid internal combustion engine/battery
`
`electric passenger car for petroleum displacement,” Proceedings of the Institution of
`
`Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, Vol. 202, No.
`
`D1 (Jan. 1988), 51-65 (Ex. 1016) (“Bumby III”), Bumby, J.R. et al., “A test-bed
`
`facility for hybrid i c-engine/battery-electric road vehicle drive trains,” Transactions
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`of the Institute of Measurement and Control, Vol. 10, No. 2 (Apr.-June 1988), 87-
`
`97 (Ex. 1017) (“Bumby IV”), and Bumby, J.R. et al., “Integrated microprocessor
`
`control of a hybrid i.c. engine/battery-electric automotive power train,” Transactions
`
`of the Institute of Measurement and Control, Vol. 12, No. 3 (Jan. 1990), 128-46 (Ex.
`
`1018) (“Bumby V”).
`
`5.
`
`In rendering my opinions, I considered the ’347 patent in addition to
`
`the references identified in Exhibit A attached to this declaration. My opinions are
`
`also based on my experience and work in the field of hybrid electric vehicle and
`
`powertrain engineering as I detail below. For the reasons discussed herein, I disagree
`
`with BMW and Dr. Davis.
`
`6. WIT Legal, LLC charges $500 for each hour of service that I provide
`
`in connection with this matter. My compensation is not contingent upon my
`
`performance, upon the outcome of this matter, or upon any issues involved in or
`
`related to this matter.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
`
`7.
`
`I am an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the
`
`University of Alberta and an Adjunct Associate Professor of Mechanical
`
`Engineering at Michigan Technological University. At these two universities, I
`
`serve as the Director of Energy Mechatronics Laboratory that conducts research in
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`a multidisciplinary area of engineering that includes electrical and mechanical
`
`systems, and control engineering.
`
`8.
`
`Before joining Michigan Technological University in August of 2012,
`
`I spent two years as a post-doctoral scholar at the Mechanical Engineering
`
`Department at the University of California, Berkeley. My post-doctorate work
`
`focused on developing control systems for automotive applications, including
`
`powertrains and others.
`
`9.
`
`I earned a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of
`
`Alberta in 2009 and a Master’s degree from KNT University of Technology in 2003.
`
`A large portion of my research activities in the past 20 years have centered on design,
`
`modeling, and control of automotive propulsion systems, including conventional,
`
`hybrid electric, and electric vehicles.
`
`10.
`
`I also have direct industry experience related to the control of
`
`automotive propulsion systems. From 2001 to 2004, I worked as a researcher in the
`
`automotive industry. During this time, I was involved in research and development
`
`work on powertrain management systems for gasoline and natural gas vehicles. In
`
`the past ten years, I, along with my research group, have performed a number of
`
`research projects sponsored by various automotive companies such as Ford Motor
`
`Company, Toyota Motor Corporation, General Motors Corporation, Hyundai,
`
`Cummins, Westport, IAV GmbH, Hitachi, and Denso.
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`11. For example, I, along with my research group at Michigan Tech, built
`
`a hybrid electric powertrain test platform including a 100-kW AC electric motor and
`
`a 201-kW GM Ecotec engine. The testbed was used for testing various aspects of
`
`powertrain performance including real-time torque control during transient and
`
`steady state operations. In addition, I, along with my research group at Michigan
`
`Tech, tested and evaluated different hybrid electric vehicle platforms in the past
`
`eight years. For instance, my research group in partnership with GM, worked on the
`
`Chevy Volt Gen II hybrid electric vehicle for powertrain modeling and control to
`
`maximize energy saving via utilization of vehicle connectivity data and automation.
`
`This was part of a $2.8M funded project by the US Department of Energy Advanced
`
`Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) program that took place from 2017 to
`
`2020. A number of peer-reviewed journal and conference publications from my
`
`research group documented our research studies covering different hybrid electric
`
`vehicle architectures including series, parallel, and powersplit powertrains ranging
`
`from mild to full hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and extended range electric vehicles.
`
`12.
`
`I have also worked on various aspects of internal combustion engines
`
`including design, modeling, benchmarking, experimental studies, calibration, and
`
`electronic control unit (ECU) design and implementation since 2000. This work
`
`covers various engine types including spark ignition (e.g., gasoline), compression
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`ignition (e.g., diesel), lean burn, low temperature combustion (HCCI, PPCI, RCCI)
`
`engines, and their exhaust aftertreatment systems.
`
`13.
`
`I also have experience with automotive control systems including
`
`modeling, design, and implementation. This work encompasses numerous projects
`
`in the past 20 years for vehicles including conventional, hybrid electric, electric, and
`
`connected and automated vehicles. Many of these projects include the design of
`
`prototype systems for collecting required vehicle/powertrain data and implementing
`
`and testing designed real-time automotive controllers.
`
`14.
`
`In addition, I have frequently taught graduate courses in the areas of
`
`Internal Combustion Engines, and Advanced Propulsion Systems for Hybrid
`
`Electric Vehicles in the past 12 years. In this academic semester, I am teaching a
`
`graduate course on internal combustion engines and alternative fuels at the
`
`University of Alberta. Other relevant courses include a graduate course in the area
`
`of Model Predictive Control and undergraduate courses in the area of Applied
`
`Thermodynamics.
`
`15.
`
`I have led international workshops in the areas of controls and data
`
`systems including “Methods of Easily verifiable Control Design,” “Connected and
`
`Automated Vehicles (CAVs),” and “From Data to Models and Decisions in
`
`Engineering Systems” at conferences such as the American Control Conference and
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) Dynamic Systems and
`
`Controls conference.
`
`16.
`
`I have supervised/mentored 127 graduate and undergraduate students,
`
`including 29 PhD, 69 MS and 29 BS students in Mechanical Engineering and
`
`Electrical Engineering Departments in four academic institutions during 2010-2020.
`
`These mentorships have been in the areas of powertrain design, modeling,
`
`experimental studies, and control of automotive, HVAC, and energy systems. The
`
`majority of the graduated students from my research group have joined the
`
`automotive industry after graduation. These companies include Ford Motor
`
`Company, General Motors, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, Toyota Motor Company,
`
`Karma Automotive, Tesla, Rivian, Cummins, Electra Vehicles, Bosch, APTIV,
`
`GKN Driveline, etc.
`
`17.
`
`I am an Associate editor (2017- ) for American Society of Mechanical
`
`Engineers (ASME) Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Controls and
`
`former Associate Editor (2014-2020) for the International Journal of Powertrains
`
`(Inderscience Publishers). In these roles, I have regularly evaluated research work
`
`in the field of hybrid electric vehicles. I am currently serving as a guest editor for
`
`two specials issues including a special issue on “Optimal Design and Operation of
`
`Energy Systems” in Int. Journal of Optimal Control Applications and Methods
`
`(Wiley Publisher), and a special Issue on “Connected and Automated Vehicles” in
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control. In addition, I serve
`
`as an Editorial Board Member in the International Journal of Vehicle Autonomous
`
`Systems, International Journal of Automobiles and Automobile Technologies,
`
`International Journal of Powertrains.
`
`18.
`
`I have served on the US Department of Energy (DOE) Vehicle
`
`Technology Program, and United States’ National Science Foundation (NSF) review
`
`panels for evaluating projects and proposals in the areas of automotive propulsion
`
`systems, controls, and energy systems in the past seven years. I have also been
`
`reviewer for (i) international grant proposals from funding agencies from Croatia,
`
`France, Germany, Poland, and the Netherlands, (ii) US Academy of Engineering for
`
`the Research Program of the US DRIVE Partnership, (iii) 24 international journals
`
`mostly in the area of controls and energy systems, and (iv) Springer International
`
`Publishing for books in the area of controls and automotive systems.
`
`19.
`
`I am an active member of ASME Dynamic Systems & Control Division
`
`(DSCD), serving as chair of the Automotive and Transportation Systems (ATS)
`
`technical committee (181 international members), former chair (2018-2020) of the
`
`Energy Systems (ES) technical committee (141 international members), and chairing
`
`(32 sessions) and co-organizing sessions (> 60 sessions) in the areas of design,
`
`modeling, fault diagnosis, and control of automotive systems, and energy/HVAC
`
`systems in American Control Conference, SAE World Congress, and ASME
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`Dynamic Systems Control Conferences. I am currently co-organizing sessions in
`
`the area of Powertrain Actuators and Sensors for 2021 SAE World Congress.
`
`20.
`
`I have won the following awards for my work relating to design,
`
`modeling, and control of automotive systems:
`
`• Awarded over $2.1M grants/support as a Principle Investigator (PI) and
`
`over $6.6M as a co-PI from international, federal, provincial, and industry
`
`sources for conducting research in the areas of modeling, design, and
`
`implementation of novel control systems for automotive systems, HVAC,
`
`and energy systems.
`
`• Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International Ralph R. Teetor
`
`Educational Award, 2016. This international award “recognizes top
`
`engineering educators for outstanding contributions.”
`
`• 2018 MARQUIS Who’s Who in the World (“top 3% of the professionals in
`
`the world”).
`
`• Best Paper Award, ASME Automotive and Transportation Systems
`
`Technical Committee – ASME Dynamic Systems Control Conference,
`
`2015.
`
`• Best Paper Award, ASME Automotive and Transportation Systems
`
`Technical Committee – ASME Dynamic Systems Control Conference,
`
`2012.
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`• Best Presentation in the Session, American Control Conference (ACC),
`
`2012, 2015, 2016.
`
`• Best Presentation Award, SAE Int. Powertrain, Fuels & Lubricants
`
`Conference, Baltimore, MD, USA, 2016.
`
`• Canada National Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC)
`
`Postdoctoral Fellowship (for research in the area of automotive controls),
`
`2010 - 2012.
`
`• Andrew Stewart Memorial Graduate Prize, University of Alberta, 2009.
`
`• David Morris Graduate Scholarship in Automotive Engineering, University
`
`of Alberta, 2008.
`
`• Lehigh Inland Cement Graduate Scholarship in Environmental Studies,
`
`University of Alberta, 2007.
`
`• Winning Team (first prize) of a Total of 66 Research Teams from 26
`
`Canadian Universities, Canada Automotive21 High Qualified Personnel
`
`Competition, Windsor, Canada, June 11-13, 2007.
`
`• Chevron Graduate Scholarship in Natural Gas Engineering, University of
`
`Alberta, 2005.
`
`21. My curriculum vitae has been submitted as Exhibit 2017 to this
`
`proceeding.
`
`My
`
`publications
`
`are
`
`found
`
`at
`
`https://sites.ualberta.ca/~mahdi/Shahbakhti_Publications.html. This includes 173
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`peer-reviewed publications. These research publications have been recognized and
`
`cited over 2600 times from over 45 different countries (Source: Google Scholar).
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`III. LEGAL UNDERSTANDING
`
`22.
`
`I am informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that
`
`statutory and judicially created standards must be considered to determine the
`
`validity of a patent claim. I have reproduced standards relevant to this declaration
`
`below, as provided to me by counsel for Patent Owner and as I understand them.
`
`23.
`
`I am informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that a
`
`patent claim is unpatentable as “anticipated” under 35 U.S.C. § 102 if it is
`
`determined that the claimed invention was previously known, and that all the
`
`limitations of the claim are described in a single prior art reference. I am informed
`
`by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that, to anticipate a claim, a prior
`
`art reference must disclose, either expressly or inherently, each and every limitation
`
`of that claim and enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the invention.
`
`24.
`
`I am informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that a
`
`claim is unpatentable for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 “if the differences
`
`between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the
`
`subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was
`
`made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter
`
`pertains.” 35 U.S.C. § 103. I am informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`understand that obviousness may be based upon a combination of references. I am
`
`informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that the combination of
`
`familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does
`
`no more than yield predictable results. However, I am informed by counsel for the
`
`Patent Owner and understand that a patent claim composed of several elements is
`
`not proved obvious merely by demonstrating that each of its elements was,
`
`independently, known in the prior art.
`
`25.
`
`I am informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that
`
`when a patented invention is a combination of known elements, a court must
`
`determine whether there was an apparent reason to combine the known elements in
`
`the fashion claimed by the patent at issue by considering the teachings of prior art
`
`references, the effects of demands known to people working in the field or present
`
`in the marketplace, and the background knowledge possessed by a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art.
`
`26.
`
`I am informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that a
`
`patent claim composed of several limitations is not proved obvious merely by
`
`demonstrating that each of its limitations was independently known in the prior art. I
`
`am informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that identifying a
`
`reason those elements would be combined can be important because inventions in
`
`many instances rely upon building blocks long since uncovered, and claimed
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`discoveries almost of necessity will be combinations of what, in some sense, is
`
`already known. I am informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that
`
`it is improper to use hindsight in an obviousness analysis, and that a patent's claims
`
`should not be used as a “roadmap.”
`
`27.
`
`I am informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that an
`
`obviousness inquiry requires consideration of the following factors: (1) the scope
`
`and content of the prior art; (2) the differences between the claims and the prior art;
`
`(3) the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and (4) any objective indicia of
`
`non-obviousness, such as commercial success, long-felt but unresolved need, failure
`
`of others, industry recognition, copying, and unexpected results.
`
`28.
`
`I am informed by counsel for the Patent Owner and understand that all
`
`prior art references are to be looked at from the viewpoint of a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art. Furthermore, obviousness is analyzed from the perspective of one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made.
`
`IV. DEFINITION OF A PERSON OF SKILL IN THE ART
`
`29. Based on my review of the ’347 patent, the documents cited by BMW
`
`and Dr. Davis, and my own knowledge and skill based on my experience with the
`
`design and control of hybrid electric vehicles, it is my opinion that a person of
`
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`ordinary skill in the art in September of 19981 is someone with at least a Bachelor’s
`
`of Science degree in electrical engineering or mechanical engineering and at least
`
`three years of technical experience in designing, implementing, testing, or otherwise
`
`working with, automotive powertrains, control system logic, or a related field.
`
`Extensive experience and technical training might substitute for educational
`
`requirements, while advanced degrees might substitute for experience. I note that
`
`the differences between the level of skill above and the level of skill defined by Dr.
`
`Davis are minor and do not affect my opinions set forth below.
`
`V. THE ’347 PATENT
`
`30. The ’347 patent (Ex. 1001), entitled “Hybrid Vehicles,” issued on July
`
`3, 2007 from an application that claims priority to a provisional application filed on
`
`September 14, 1998. The ’347 patent discloses and claims a hybrid electric vehicle
`
`including an internal combustion engine and one or two electric motors. The motors
`
`may be operated as generators to recharge the battery. Additionally, a
`
`microprocessor is employed to arbitrate between operating modes based on the
`
`vehicle’s instantaneous torque requirements for propelling the vehicle (also called
`
`
`1 I understand that the ’347 patent claims priority to a provisional application filed
`
`on September 14, 1998. I understand that in analyzing the validity of the ’347 patent,
`
`that date should be used to gauge the skill of those in the art.
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`“road load”), state of charge of the battery bank, and other variables. Ex. 1001 (’347
`
`patent) at 35:21-35.
`
`31. The ’347 patent describes employing a system topology incorporating
`
`two electric motors and a control strategy that makes decisions based on “road load.”
`
`Figure 4 of the ’347 patent (reproduced below) discloses one embodiment. As
`
`shown below, the hybrid vehicle includes an internal combustion engine 40, a
`
`traction motor 25, and a starter motor 21. The internal combustion engine 40 is
`
`controllably coupled to the drive wheels 34 via a clutch 51, drive shaft 16, and
`
`differential 32. Traction motor 25 also provides torque to the road wheels 34 via
`
`chain drive 54 and differential 32. The rotating shaft of starter motor 21 is coupled
`
`to the output shaft 15 of internal combustion engine 40. Both traction motor 25 and
`
`starter motor 21 can operate as motors or generators, depending on the mode of
`
`operation and the state of the corresponding inverter/charger units 27 and 23.
`
`Inverter/charger units 27 and 23 electrically couple motors 25 and 21, respectively,
`
`to battery bank 22 and perform the intermediary function of transferring current
`
`to/from battery bank 22. Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at 26:13-24; 29:12-20.
`
`
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at Fig. 4.
`
`32. These components are controlled by microprocessor 48. Ex. 1001
`
`(’347 patent) at 25:53-26:3. For example, microprocessor 48 controls the operation
`
`of engine 40 by sending signals to electronic fuel injection (EFI) unit 56 and
`
`electronic engine management (EEM) unit 55 (not shown). Microprocessor 48 also
`
`sends control signals to inverter/charger units 27 and 23 to, for example: start engine
`
`40; operate motors 21 and 25 to provide propulsive torque; or operate motors 21 and
`
`25 as generators to provide regenerative recharging of battery bank 22. Ex. 1001
`
`(’347 patent) at 28:25-49; 29:44-64.
`
`
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`33. The ’347 patent describes a number of different modes in which the
`
`hybrid vehicle may operate depending on the “road load,” the engine’s maximum
`
`torque output, the state of charge of the battery, and other operating parameters. For
`
`example, in mode I, the hybrid vehicle is operated as an electric car, with traction
`
`motor 25 providing torque to propel the vehicle. Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at 35:66-
`
`36:4; Fig. 8(a).
`
`34.
`
`In mode II, the hybrid vehicle operates as in mode I with the addition
`
`of engine 40 operably engaging starter motor 21 to generate electrical energy and
`
`recharge battery bank 22. Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at 36:8-22; Fig. 8(b). The hybrid
`
`vehicle will transition to mode II when the state of charge of battery bank 22 is low
`
`and in need of a recharge.
`
`35.
`
`In mode IV, engine 40 provides torque to propel the vehicle while
`
`operating in its fuel-efficient range. Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at 36:23-39; Fig. 8(c).
`
`36.
`
`If the “road load” exceeds the engine’s maximum torque output (MTO),
`
`then the vehicle will enter an acceleration or hill-climbing operation called mode V,
`
`where in combination with engine 40, traction motor 25 is powered by battery pack
`
`22 to provide additional torque to propel the vehicle beyond what is available from
`
`engine 40 alone. Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at 36:40-46; Fig. 8(d). Exemplary
`
`illustrations of Modes I, II, IV, and V are illustrated in Figs. 7 and 8 (reproduced
`
`below).
`
`
`
`
`
`21
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at Figs. 8(a) - 8(d).
`
`37. The ’347 patent uses “road load” as a factor in making mode switching
`
`determinations and addresses operating the engine above a certain “setpoint” above
`
`which engine output torque will be efficiently produced. Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at
`
`43:50-44:8. The “road load” is instantaneous torque required to propel the vehicle.
`
`An exemplary disclosure in the ’347 patent of the use of “road load” to effect mode
`
`switching is shown in Figures 6 and 7(a).
`
`38. Fig. 7(a) is reproduced below with added colors representing modes I,
`
`IV, and V.
`
`
`
`
`
`22
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at Fig. 7(a) (annotated).
`
`39. As shown above, the vehicle’s instantaneous torque requirement for
`
`propelling the vehicle, i.e., the “road load,” is expressed as a percentage of the
`
`engine’s MTO and plotted as a solid line as a function of time. On the same graph,
`
`the engine’s instantaneous torque output is plotted as a dashed line as a function of
`
`time. Where the “road load” exceeds the engine’s instantaneous torque output, there
`
`is additional torque provided by the electric motor(s); and where the “road load” is
`
`less than the engine’s instantaneous torque output and the engine is producing
`
`torque, the engine is also used to charge the batteries. In the particular embodiment
`
`of Fig. 7(a), the engine is turned on when the “road load” exceeds a value that is at
`
`least 30% of the maximum engine torque output.
`
`
`
`
`
`23
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`40. Torque can be an objective indicator of efficiency, especially in the
`
`context of the specification—engine efficiency generally increases as torque
`
`increases until the torque approaches its “sweet spot,” which is below the maximum
`
`torque output of the engine. The commonly understood relationship between torque
`
`and efficiency is confirmed by the specification: “it is well known that a gasoline or
`
`other internal combustion engine is most efficient when producing near its maximum
`
`output torque.” Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at 2:54-56. Inefficiency occurs at low torque
`
`output values when a large fraction of the total torque produced by the engine is lost
`
`due to friction and pumping of the cylinders. By increasing the torque output of the
`
`engine such that the engine operates at relatively high torque outputs (e.g., in its
`
`“sweet spot”), the fraction of torque available to propel the vehicle becomes greater.
`
`By eliminating engine operation at low torque output, that has low fuel conversion
`
`efficiency, the engine can operate more efficiently.
`
`41. Figure 9 from the ’347 patent, reproduced below, is an exemplary
`
`embodiment of a high-level flowchart containing the principal decision points in the
`
`control program used to control the various modes of vehicle operation:
`
`
`
`
`
`24
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at Fig. 9 (annotated).
`
`
`
`42. The ’347 patent further discloses how to adjust the setpoint, which
`
`serves as the transition point between electric motor and engine operation, by
`
`looking at how the hybrid vehicle was previously operated. The ’347 patent
`
`discloses altering the control system based on patterns of vehicle operation, which
`
`refers to how the operator drives the car over some period of time, i.e., how the driver
`
`actually uses the car on a day-to-day basis. Ex. 1001 (’347 patent) at 35:47-58
`
`(“Examples of this practice—amounting in many circumstances to modifying
`
`certain specific values depending on other data items not discussed in detail, or by
`
`
`
`
`
`25
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-00994
`
`
`monitoring the vehicle’s actual usage patterns over time—are given below.”). For
`
`example, the specification describes an embodiment where the controller adjusts the
`
`value of the setpoint based on the driver’s daily commute from home to work. Ex.
`
`1001 (’347 patent) at 40:56-41:9. After analyzing the driver’s “daily patterns,” such
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
