Petitioner’s Oral Hearing Demonstratives
`
`Crusoe Energy Systems, LLC (Petitioner)
`v.
`Upstream Data Inc. (Patent Owner)
`
`11,574,372 | PGR2023-00039
`
`Before Hon. HYUN J. JUNG, JAMES J. MAYBERRY, and MATTHEW S. MEYERS
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`1
`
`Exhibit 1102
`Crusoe v. Upstream
`PGR2023-00039
`
`1
`
`
`
`Crusoe Energy Systems, LLC (Petitioner)
`v.
`Upstream Data Inc. (Patent Owner)
`
`11,574,372 | PGR2023-00039
`
`Before Hon. HYUN J. JUNG, JAMES J. MAYBERRY, and MATTHEW S. MEYERS
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`1
`
`Exhibit 1102
`Crusoe v. Upstream
`PGR2023-00039
`
`1
`
`
`
`Instituted Grounds
`
`Ground
`Obviousness over Dickerson, CryptoKube, Szmigielski,
`Kheterpal
`Obviousness over Dickerson, CryptoKube, Belady-989,
`Szmigielski, Kheterpal
`Obviousness over Dickerson, CryptoKube, Belady-989,
`Boot, Szmigielski, Kheterpal
`Obviousness over MAGS, Polivka, Szmigielski,
`Kheterpal
`Obviousness over MAGS, Polivka, Belady-989,
`Szmigielski, Kheterpal
`Ineligible subject matter
`
`Claims Challenged
`1-4, 8, 16-30, 34
`
`1-4, 8, 10-12, 15-30, 34-37, 40
`
`1-4, 7-12, 15-30, 34-37, 40
`
`1-4, 8, 16-22, 24-30, 34
`
`1-4, 8, 10-12, 15-30, 34-37, 40
`
`1-4, 7-12, 15-30, 34-37, and 40
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`2
`
`2
`
`
`
`Table Of Contents
`
`The ’372 Patent
`Claim Construction
`Objective Indicia of Nonobviousness
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube Combination
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube-Belady-989 Combination
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube-Belady-989-Boot Combination
`The MAGS-Polivka Combination
`The MAGS-Polivka-Belady-989 Combination
`Section 101
`
`4
`8
`14
`35
`60
`68
`74
`83
`85
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`3
`
`3
`
`
`
`The ’372 Patent
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`4
`
`4
`
`4
`
`
`
`The ’372 Patent
`
`EX1001, Abstract, 1:11-13 (cited in Petition, 8, Reply, 4)
`
`EX1001, FIG. 6 (cited in POR, 47)
`
`EX1002, 222-223 (cited in Petition, 11)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`5
`
`5
`
`
`
`The ’372 Patent
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`6
`
`’372 Patent, Fig. 1 (cited in Petition, 9)
`
`6
`
`
`
`Representative claims of the ’372 patent
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`EX1001, Claims 1-3
`
`7
`
`7
`
`
`
`Claim Construction
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`8
`
`8
`
`8
`
`
`
`Claim Construction
`
`1) “blockchain mining device”
`
`2) “mining processor”
`
`3) “a continuous flow of combustible gas”
`
`4) “sales gas line”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`9
`
`9
`
`
`
`(1) “blockchain mining device”
`
`Petition, 4-5
`
`You depo
`
`EX1034, 177:9-178:11 (cited in Reply, 2)
`
`EX1034, 157:12-158:14 (cited in Reply, 2)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`10
`
`10
`
`
`
`(2) “mining processor”
`
`Petition, 6
`
`EX1022, title (cited in Petition, 6 and Reply, 2)
`
`You depo
`
`EX1034, 181:4-182:13 (cited in Reply, 2)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`11
`
`11
`
`
`
`(3) “a continuous flow of combustible gas”
`
`Petition, 6
`
`POR, 7
`
`EX1037, 1 (cited in Reply, 3)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`12
`
`12
`
`
`
`The claims broadly cover both (1) byproduct gas and (2)
`primary product gas or sales gas
`You depo
`
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1034, 103:11-104:6 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`EX1033, 146:10-17 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1033, 162:14-24 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`13
`
`13
`
`
`
`Objective Indicia of Nonobviousness
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`14
`
`14
`
`14
`
`
`
`Objective Indicia of Nonobviousness
`
`1. Commercial Success
`
`2. Unmet Need
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Industry Skepticism
`
`Industry Praise
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`15
`
`15
`
`
`
`Improper opinion testimony
`
`Barbour dec
`
`Barbour depo
`
`You dec
`
`EX2011, ¶9-10 (cited in POR, 13)
`
`EX1033, 173:4-174:12 (cited in Reply, 11)
`
`EX2010, ¶74 (cited in POR, 13)
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`16
`
`16
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus
`
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1026, 2 (cited in Reply, 13)
`
`EX1033, 233:16-234:8 (cited in Reply, 13)
`
`POR, 15
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`17
`
`17
`
`
`
`Electric grid/sales gas deployments do not count
`
`You depo
`
`EX1034, 104:21-106:8 (cited in Reply, 15)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`18
`
`18
`
`
`
`Single deployments do not embody the claims
`
`POR
`
`You depo
`
`POR, 22
`
`EX1034, 153:10-154:7 (cited in Reply, 15)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`19
`
`EX2010, ¶76
`
`19
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus even for the 284 systems
`Barbour depo
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`EX1033, 156:9-160:4 (cited in Sur-reply, 18)
`
`20
`
`20
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus even for the 284 systems
`
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1033, 162:15-20 (cited in Reply, 4)
`
`EX1033, 139:2-13 (cited in Sur-reply, 18)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`21
`
`21
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus even for the 284 systems
`
`Barbour depo
`
`You depo
`
`EX1033, 146:10-17 (cited in Reply, 18)
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1034, 106:2-8 (cited in Reply, 15)
`
`You depo
`
`EX1033, 168:20-169:3 (cited in Reply, 15)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`22
`
`EX1034, 153:10-154:7 (cited in Reply, 15)
`
`22
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus
`
`Kasdorf dec
`
`EX1036, ¶26 (cited in Reply, 16)
`
`EX1034, 57:14-22 (cited in Reply, 16)
`
`
`2017:
`
`2018:
`
`2019:
`
`2020:
`2021-2024:
`
`1
`2
`10
`32
`284
`POR, 20-22
`
`EX1038, 3 (cited in Reply, 16)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`23
`
`23
`
`
`
`Objective Indicia of Nonobviousness
`
`1. Commercial Success
`
`2. Unmet Need
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Industry Skepticism
`
`Industry Praise
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`24
`
`24
`
`
`
`There were multiple prior art solutions
`
`Barbour Deposition
`
`You depo
`
`EX1033, 25:9-26:16 (cited in Reply, 17)
`
`EX1013, 2 (cited in Petition, 78)
`
`EX1034, 244:4-250:24 (cited in Reply, 17)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`25
`
`25
`
`
`
`The ’372 patent only discloses a specific use of Belady
`
`Belady-989
`
`You depo
`
`EX1011, Title, [0004] (cited in Reply, 5)
`
`EX1034, 39:4-9 (cited in Reply, 5)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`26
`
`26
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus
`
`Barbour depo
`
`You depo
`
`EX1033, 162:14-24 (cited in Reply, 18)
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1034, 103:11-104:6 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`EX1033, 146:10-17 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`27
`
`27
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus
`
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1033, 96:15-97:2 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`28
`
`28
`
`
`
`Objective Indicia of Nonobviousness
`
`1. Commercial Success
`
`2. Unmet Need
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Industry Skepticism
`
`Industry Praise
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`29
`
`29
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus
`
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1033, 243:12-245:25 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`30
`
`EX2016, 6 (cited in POR, 26)
`
`30
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus
`
`CNBC article
`
`WSJ article
`
`EX2016, 2-3 (cited in POR, 26)
`
`EX2017, 6 (cited in POR, 26)
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`31
`
`31
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus
`
`CNN article
`
`TED talk
`
`EX2018, 4 (cited in POR, 27)
`
`EX2019, 15:36 (cited in POR, 28)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`32
`
`32
`
`
`
`Objective Indicia of Nonobviousness
`
`1. Commercial Success
`
`2. Unmet Need
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Industry Skepticism
`
`Industry Praise
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`33
`
`33
`
`
`
`Upstream failed to show nexus
`
`K33 Report
`
`EX2020, 7 (cited in POR, 29; Sur-reply, 23)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`34
`
`34
`
`
`
`Ground 1: The Dickerson-CryptoKube
`Combination
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`35
`
`35
`
`35
`
`
`
`Dickerson (PCT Publication No. 2015/123,257)
`
`EX1005, FIG. 1 (cited in Petition, 14)
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`36
`
`36
`
`
`
`CryptoKube is a mobile miner
`
`CryptoKube
`
`EX1006, 1 (cited in Petition, 15, 20-21, 24-25, 30-34, 36-37, 68)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`37
`
`37
`
`
`
`CryptoKube requires cheap electricity
`
`Szmigielski
`
`EX1009, 88 (cited in Petition, 17, 123)
`
`EX1009, 90 (cited in Petition, 17, 20, 82)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`38
`
`38
`
`
`
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube Combination
`
`Dickerson
`
`Cheap/free
`excess electricity
`
`CryptoKube
`
`EX1005, [0039] (cited in Petition, 14)
`
`Need for electricity
`
`EX1006, 4 (cited in Petition, 15)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`39
`
`39
`
`
`
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube Combination
`
`Dickerson
`
`CryptoKube
`
`EX1005, [0014] (cited in Petition 20)
`
`EX1006, 4 (cited in Petition, 20)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`40
`
`40
`
`
`
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube Combination
`
`Upstream does not challenge the motivation of utilizing Dickerson’s cheap/free
`excess electricity, but alleges:
`
`• Motivation to combine is based on hindsight (POR, 9-11)
`
`•
`
`Secondary considerations (POR, 11-30)
`
`• Equipment cost is high and there is no excess electricity (POR, 30-33)
`
`• Electricity from a gas generator is not “reliable” (POR, 34-39)
`
`• The Petition did not address reasonable expectation of success (POR, 39-41)
`
`• The combination does not disclose “connected to the network interface and
`adapted to…communicate with the blockchain database” (POR, 41-50)
`
`Reply, 5-8; POR, 9-50
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`41
`
`41
`
`
`
`People had proposed such a combination
`
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1016, 1 (cited in Reply, 5)
`
`Kasdorf depo
`
`EX1033, 246:18-247:11 (cited in Reply, 5)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`42
`
`EX2022, 18:4-18 (cited in Reply, 5)
`
`42
`
`
`
`Petition addressed reasonable expectation of success
`
`Petition
`
`Petition, 1-2
`
`Petition, 20
`“evidence of a reasonable expectation of success … may flow from the prior art
`references themselves, the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art, or, in some
`cases, from the nature of the problem to be solved.” Elekta Ltd. v. ZAP Surgical Sys.,
`Inc., 81 F.4th 1368, 1377-78 (Fed. Cir. 2023).
`
`Reply, 9
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`43
`
`Reply 8 9
`
`43
`
`
`
`Petition addressed reasonable expectation of success
`
`Kasdorf dec
`
`CryptoKube
`
`EX1036, ¶17 (cited in Reply, 9)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`44
`
`EX1006, 1 (cited in Petition, 15)
`
`44
`
`
`
`No additional equipment cost needed
`
`Dickerson
`
`EX1005, [0024] (cited in Petition,19)
`
`EX1005, [0039] (cited in Petition, 19)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`45
`
`45
`
`
`
`No additional equipment cost is needed
`
`Kasdorf dec
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`46
`
`EX1036, ¶42 (cited in Reply, 22)
`
`46
`
`
`
`Gas generators provide “reliable” energy
`
`Kasdorf dec
`
`EX1036, 14 (cited in Reply, 7)
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`47
`
`47
`
`
`
`Gas generators provide “reliable” energy
`
`Dickerson
`
`EX1005, [0032] (cited in Reply, 7)
`
`EX1005, [0021] (cited in Reply, 7)
`
`EX1005, [0039] (cited in Petition, 19)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`48
`
`48
`
`
`
`Gas generators provide “reliable” energy
`
`You Deposition
`
`Belady-989
`
`EX1034, 23:11-24 (cited in Reply, 7)
`
`Barbour Deposition
`
`EX1011, Abstract (cited in Reply, 7)
`
`EX1033, 216:17-217:5 (cited in Reply, 8)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`49
`
`49
`
`
`
`“connected to the network interface and adapted
`to…communicate with the blockchain database”
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`EX1001, Claim 1
`
`50
`
`50
`
`
`
`Petition addressed “mining processor”
`
`Petition
`
`Petition, 23-24
`
`Sur-reply, 1
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`51
`
`51
`
`
`
`Petition addressed “mining processor”
`
`Kasdorf dec
`
`EX1004, ¶104 (cited in Petition, 24)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`52
`
`52
`
`
`
`The ASIC chip is (1) connected to the network interface and
`(2) adapted to communicate with the blockchain database
`You Depo
`You Depo
`
`EX1034, 87:1-4 (cited in Reply, 10)
`
`EX1034, 34:6-9 (cited in Reply, 10)
`
`EX1034, 197:1-10 (cited in Reply, 10)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`53
`
`EX1034, 198:23-199:6 (cited in Reply, 10; Sur-reply,3)
`
`53
`
`
`
`The ASIC chip is (1) connected to the network interface and
`(2) adapted to communicate with the blockchain database
`
`Barbour Depo
`
`Barbour Depo
`
`EX1033, 207:1-5 (cited in Reply, 10)
`
`EX1033, 205:9-19 (cited in Sur-reply, 2 )
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`54
`
`54
`
`
`
`The ASIC chip is (1) connected to the network interface and
`(2) adapted to communicate with the blockchain database
`
`Szmigielski
`
`Kasdorf depo
`
`EX1009, 76 (cited in POR, 49; Sur-reply, 3)
`
`EX2022, 65:6-66:3 (cited in POR, 48-49; Sur-reply, 3)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`55
`
`55
`
`
`
`Representative claims of the ’372 patent
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`EX1001, Claim 1
`
`56
`
`56
`
`
`
`A subpart of the Spondoolies meets the “mining
`processor” limitation
`Kasdorf dec
`
`EX1036, ¶21 (cited in Reply, 11)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`57
`
`57
`
`
`
`A subpart of the Spondoolies meets the “mining
`processor” limitation
`Sur-reply
`
`Sur-reply, 4
`
`Petition
`
`Petition, 23-24
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`58
`
`58
`
`
`
`A combination of an ASIC chip and a controller meets
`the “mining processor” limitation
`You depo
`
`EX1034, 211:23-213:19 (cited in Reply, 11)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`59
`
`59
`
`
`
`Ground 2: The Dickerson-CryptoKube-
`Belady-989 Combination
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`60
`
`60
`
`60
`
`
`
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube-Belady-989 Combination
`
`Belady-989
`
`EX1011, Abstract (cited in Reply, 7)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`61
`
`EX1011, FIG. 1 (cited in Petition, 49)
`
`61
`
`
`
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube-Belady-989 Combination
`
`Belady-989
`
`Dickerson
`
`EX1011, [0004] (cited in Petition, 51)
`
`EX1005, [0021] (cited in Petition, 51)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`62
`
`62
`
`
`
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube-Belady-989 Combination
`
`Upstream does not challenge the motivation of utilizing Belady-989’s gas supply
`shock absorber, but repeats the same arguments regarding Ground 1 (POR, 50-51)
`and alleges:
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`(1) the modification would involve significant changes
`
`(2) a POSITA would have been motivated to shut off all mining servers
`considering the servers may be damaged by voltage and frequency drop in the
`power supply, and cooling may fail when no power is present;
`
`(3) CryptoKube differed from Belady’s datacenter in that CryptoKube cannot
`offload processing to other data centers;
`
`(4) CryptoKube’s DCIM cannot control individual ASIC chips within
`Spondoolies; and
`
`(5) no POSITA was knowledgeable in both disciplines (oil and gas and crypto
`mining)
`Reply, 20; POR, 51-55
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`63
`
`63
`
`
`
`CryptoKube was highly customizable
`
`Kasdorf dec
`
`EX1036, ¶35 (cited in Reply, 21)
`
`EX1036, ¶37 (cited in Reply, 21)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`64
`
`64
`
`
`
`The load control claims broadly covers shutting off all
`Spondoolies (and thus all ASIC chips)
`
`The ’372 patent
`
`EX1001, claims 10-11
`
`Kasdorf dec
`
`EX1036, ¶36 (cited in Reply, 21)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`65
`
`65
`
`
`
`The load control claims broadly covers shutting off all
`Spondoolies (and thus all ASIC chips)
`
`Barbour depo
`
`You depo
`
`EX1033, 211:5-14 (cited in Reply, 21)
`
`EX1034, 225:15-23 (cited in Reply, 21))
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`66
`
`66
`
`
`
`No need for a POSITA to be knowledgeable in both
`disciplines
`
`Petition
`
`Petition, 7-8
`In cross-disciplinary cases, a POSITA “may be a composite of different types of
`individuals” (e.g., part of a multi-disciplinary research team). AstraZeneca
`Pharm. LP v. Anchen Pharm., Inc., 2012 WL 1065458, at *19-*22 (D.N.J. Mar.
`29, 2012), aff’d, 498 F. App’x 999 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (collecting cases); Apotex
`Inc. v. Novartis AG, IPR2017-00854, Paper 109 at 10–11 (PTAB July 11, 2018)
`(collecting cases).
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`67
`
`Reply, 6
`
`67
`
`
`
`Ground 3: The Dickerson-CryptoKube-
`Belady-989-Boot Combination
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`68
`
`68
`
`68
`
`
`
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube-Belady-989-Boot Combination
`
`Boot
`
`EX1012, Abstract (cited in Petition, 64)
`
`EX1012, 2:35-41 (cited in Petition, 65)
`
`EX1012, 3:8-14 (cited in Petition, 65)
`
`EX1012, FIG. 1 (cited in Petition, 65)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`69
`
`69
`
`
`
`The Dickerson-CryptoKube-Belady-989-Boot Combination
`
`Upstream does not challenge the motivation of utilizing Boot’s load bank, but
`alleges:
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`(1) the Petition did not identify with particularity whether Boot’s engine or
`Dickerson’s engine is used in this combination
`
`(2) while Dickerson is a “full-facility generator,” Boot is a “pump-related
`generator”
`
`(3) Dickerson uses a chiller, which eliminates the need for a loadbank
`
`Reply, 23; POR, 55-58
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`70
`
`70
`
`
`
`Dickerson’s engine is used in this combination
`
`Petition
`
`Petition, 67 (cited in Reply, 23)
`
`Petition, 69 (cited in Sur-reply, 7)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`71
`
`71
`
`
`
`Similar to Dickerson, Boot is also a full-facility generator
`
`Boot
`
`EX1012, 2:35-39 (cited in Reply, 24)
`
`EX1012, claim 2 (cited in Reply, 24)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`72
`
`72
`
`
`
`Dickerson’s chiller does not eliminate the need for load
`bank
`
`Dickerson
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`73
`
`EX1005, [0022] (cited in Reply, 24)
`
`73
`
`
`
`Ground 4: The MAGS-Polivka
`Combination
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`74
`
`74
`
`74
`
`
`
`MAGS produces cheap/free excess electricity
`
`MAGS
`
`MAGS separate the natural gas mixture
`into three streams:
`(1) Methane (to generate electricity for
`“either local use or sale to the
`grid”)
`(2) Ethane (to power the MAGS itself)
`(3) NGL (to be transported for sale)
`
`EX1013, 2 (cited in Petition, 78)
`
`EX1014, [0134] (cited in Reply, 25)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`75
`
`75
`
`
`
`Polivka is a mobile miner
`
`Polivka
`
`EX1015, 31 (cited in Petition, 81)
`
`EX1015, 1 (cited in Petition, 80)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`76
`
`76
`
`
`
`Polivka requires cheap electricity
`
`Polivka
`
`EX1015, 15 (cited in Petition, 81)
`
`EX1015, 21 (cited in Petition, 81)
`
`EX1015, 17 (cited in Petition, 81)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`77
`
`EX1015, 18 (cited in Petition, 81)
`
`77
`
`
`
`The MAGS-Polivka Combination
`
`Cheap/free
`excess electricity
`
`Need for electricity
`
`MAGS
`
`Polivka
`
`EX1014, [0134] (cited in Reply, 25)
`
`EX1015, 15 (cited in Petition, 81)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`78
`
`78
`
`
`
`The MAGS-Polivka Combination
`
`Upstream repeats the Ground 1 arguments, and alleges:
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`(1) unlike Dickerson, MAGS does not produce excess power even
`occasionally because all the energy produced by MAGS was already spoken
`for
`
`(2) MAGS only produces 450kWh, which is not enough to satisfy Polivka’s
`requirement of 120.3kW
`
`(3) in Young, the engine is rated for 150kW, but only “about 100kW” is
`required and thus 50kW would be left over for this engine
`
`Reply, 24-25; POR, 59-61
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`79
`
`79
`
`
`
`MAGS produces cheap/free excess electricity
`
`MAGS separate the natural gas mixture into three streams:
`(1) Methane (to generate electricity for “either local use or sale to the grid”)
`(2) Ethane (to power the MAGS itself)
`(3) NGL (to be transported to market for sale)
`
`EX1014, [0134] (cited in Reply, 25)
`
`EX1014, [0161] (cited in Reply, 25)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`80
`
`80
`
`
`
`MAGS and Polivka are customizable
`
`EX1036, ¶51 (cited in Reply, 25)
`MAGS
`
`EX1014, [0144]-[0145] (cited in Reply, 25)
`
`EX1014, [0298] (cited in Reply, 25)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`81
`
`81
`
`
`
`MAGS and Polivka are customizable
`
`MAGS
`
`Polivka
`
`EX1014, [0242] (cited in POR, 61)
`
`EX2022, 89:15-24 (cited in POR, 61)
`
`EX1015, 1 (cited in Petition, 80)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`82
`
`82
`
`
`
`Ground 5: The MAGS-Polivka-Belady-989
`Combination
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`83
`
`83
`
`83
`
`
`
`The MAGS-Polivka-Belady-989 Combination
`
`Upstream does not challenge the motivation of utilizing Belady-989’s gas supply
`shock absorber, but alleges there is no reasonable expectation of success because
`Belady-989 taught shutting off gas flow to the generator when supply gas pressure
`rises.
`
`Reply, 26; POR, 65-67
`
`Kasdorf dec
`
`EX1036, ¶57 (cited in Reply, 26)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`84
`
`84
`
`
`
`Ground 6: Section 101
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`85
`
`85
`
`85
`
`
`
`Section 101
`
`Petition, 114
`
`EX1001, Claim 1
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`86
`
`86
`
`
`
`Upstream tries to rewrite the claims to read in “flare
`gas” and “not a residential gas line”
`
`POR
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`87
`
`POR, 71 (cited in Reply, 27)
`
`87
`
`
`
`The claims broadly cover both (1) byproduct gas and (2)
`primary product gas or sales gas
`Barbour depo
`
`You depo
`
`EX1033, 162:14-24 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1034, 103:11-104:6 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`EX1033, 146:10-17 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`88
`
`88
`
`
`
`The claims even cover electric grid power
`
`Barbour depo
`
`EX1033, 96:15-97:2 (cited in Reply, 18)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`89
`
`89
`
`
`
`Other Reference Slides
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`90
`
`90
`
`90
`
`
`
`Crusoe’s ’307 patent
`
`EX2002, 2:35-42 (cited in POR, 24)
`
`EX2002, Abstract (cited in POR, 24)
`
`EX2002, 1:55-57 (cited in POR, 24)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`91
`
`EX2022, 44:5-14(cited in POR, 24)
`
`91
`
`
`
`(1) “blockchain mining device”
`
`EX1001, 15:21-25 (cited in Reply, 2; POR, 4)
`
`EX1001, FIG. 4 (cited in POR, 4)
`
`EX1001, 16:32-39 (cited in Reply, 2; POR, 4)
`
`EX1001, 17:23-29 (cited in POR, 4)
`
`EX1001, 19:59-62 (cited in POR, 4)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`92
`
`92
`
`
`
`(2) “mining processor”
`
`Petition, 6
`
`EX1001, 17:9-15 (cited in Petition, 5, POR, 5)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`93
`
`93
`
`
`
`(4) “sales gas line”
`
`Petition, 7
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`94
`
`94
`
`
`
`The ’372 patent only discloses a specific use of Belady
`
`Szmigielski
`
`EX1009, 88 (cited in Petition, 17, 123; Reply, 5)
`
`EX1009, 90 (cited in Petition, 17; Sur-Reply, 10)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`95
`
`95
`
`
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
