Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 1 of 33 PageID #: 27271
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 1 of 33 PagelD #: 27271
`
`EXHIBIT 54
`EXHIBIT 54
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 2 of 33 PageID #: 27272
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Reissue Application Of
`Patent No
`Issued
`For
`
`Serial No
`Filed
`Attorneys Docket No
`Customer No
`
`Busley et al
`8408659
`April 2 2013
`Construction Machine In Particular Road Milling Machine
`Recyder Or Stabilizer As Well As Drive Train For
`Construction Machines Of This Type
`15934603
`March 23 2018
`017355 D1358
`23456
`
`RULE 132 DECLARATION
`
`OF PETER BUSLEY
`
`1 My name is Peter Busley and I am making this declaration in support of
`the above referenced US patent application assigned to Wirtgen GmbH
`I reside in and am a citizen of Germany
`
`2 I am currently retired I was previously employed by Wirtgen GmbH
`My title was Team Manager prior to my retirement and I was employed
`by the company for 30 years from 1987 until my retirement in 2017 My
`time was primarily involved with the design of road
`work during that
`milling machines I hold a degree from Koblenz University of Applied
`Science in the field of Mechanical Engineering
`I am a named inventor on US Patent No 8408659 referenced above the
`659 patent along with my co inventor Dieter Simons
`
`4 I have been informed and understand that the 659 Patent issued based
`upon US patent application Ser No 12985400 filed on Jan 6 2011
`which was a continuation of US Patent Application Ser No 11918247
`which was a US national stage entry of PCTEP2006060907 filed on
`March 21 2006 The application claims priority to our German Patent
`Appl DE 10 2005 017 754 filed on April 15 2005
`
`WA
`
`0012931
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 3 of 33 PageID #: 27273
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`5 I have been informed and understand that a person of ordinary skill
`in the
`technological area to which the invention pertains is known in patent law
`in the art POSITA I understand that a
`as a person of ordinary skill
`POSITA is a hypothetical person who is presumed to have known the
`relevant art at the time of the invention I also understand that a
`POSITA means a person of average skill and having ordinary creativity in
`the technology to which the invention pertains I also understand that the
`time of the invention for the 659 patent is considered to be the date of the
`filing of the original priority application in Germany on April 15 2005
`When I refer below to the priority date of the 659 patent I am referring to
`April 15 2005
`
`6 Wirtgen
`I provide my understanding
`has requested that
`of
`qualifications of a POSITA In my experience a person of ordinary skill
`in
`the art in the field of the invention described in the application which led
`to the 659 patent can be fairly described as someone with 1 a bachelors
`degree or equivalent
`in mechanical engineering or a similar field and
`two to five years of experience working on mobile construction machine
`design or in a similar field or 2 seven to ten years of experience working
`on mobile construction machine design
`
`the
`
`titled BACKGROUND OF THE
`7 In the 659 patent
`in the section
`INVENTION we discussed a typical prior art machine shown in DE
`to US Patent No 7644994
`10031195 Cl which I note corresponds
`Dieter Simons and I are also named inventors on that prior patent Fig 1
`of that prior patent is reproduced below
`
`WA
`
`0012932
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 4 of 33 PageID #: 27274
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`8 As we described in the BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION of the 659
`for machines of this type The support of the drive engine must be
`patent
`designed in a very stiff manner as this is also the support
`for the belt
`pulley of the belt drive on the drive side relative to the machine frame It
`is understood that a coaxial rigidly supported arrangement of the shafts
`the elements of
`the drive train is required and that with
`connecting
`regard to the belt drive a rigid track aligned arrangement of the belt
`pulley on the drive side and on the output side is a basic requirement for
`the functional performance and long life of such a belt drive Col 1 ll
`3038
`9 I note that a comparison of that Fig 2 of US Patent No 7644994 to Fig
`1 of the 659 patent shows the same coaxial arrangement of the shafts
`connecting the drive train components between the engine and the drive
`The difference
`in the 659 patent we added the more
`is that
`pulley
`as compared to the more
`flexible mounting 22 of the engine component
`rigid mounting 24 of the second set of components with the articulated
`But
`there is no
`coupling 20 between the two groups of components
`change in the fundamental coaxial arrangement of the shafts connecting
`the drive train components between the engine and the drive pulley And
`the further requirement for a rigid track aligned arrangement of the belt
`pulley on the drive side and on the output side Col 1 II 3537
`
`WA
`
`0012933
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 5 of 33 PageID #: 27275
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`mandates that the rotational axis of the two belt pulleys and thus of the
`engine and the milling drum aligned with them be parallel
`
`DE 10031195 ClUS 7644994
`
`US 8408659
`
`18
`
`r28L1
`
`23j2I
`
`to zp
`
`r
`
`i
`
`6
`
`1
`
`8
`
`17
`
`3
`
`A
`
`I
`
`2
`
`i
`
`A A
`
`I
`
`i
`
`5
`
`29
`
`2
`
`I
`
`14
`
`I
`
`r A
`
`r
`
`I
`
`I
`
`I
`
`N
`
`22
`
`I
`
`4
`
`6
`
`5
`
`2
`
`liti
`
`1
`
`1
`
`Z
`
`1
`
`1
`
`t
`
`i
`
`I
`
`AAs
`
`3
`
`2
`
`kikk1
`
`A
`
`Fig I
`
`i
`
`1
`
`1
`
`1
`
`zz
`
`i
`
`16r42
`
`Nit
`
`10As we further described in the BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION of
`the 659 patent
`the problem addressed by the 659 patent
`is one of
`unpleasant vibration experienced by the operator of the prior art machine
`described As we stated at Col 1 11 4653
`
`The stiff
`in that
`the drive train is disadvantageous
`support of
`vibrations from the drive engine are transmitted to the machine frame
`to a greater extent The vibrations are not only unpleasant
`for the
`machine operator in the form of the vibrations transmitted to him but
`impair the working conditions because larger flat machine components
`like for instance hoods or tanks are stimulated to sound vibrations
`that are disturbing during the operation of the machine
`
`11 Our solution to that problem was to provide the drive engine with flexible
`engine mounts that would help isolate the machine frame from the engine
`vibrations But that had to be done while maintaining the rigid mounting
`of the belt pulley and while maintaining the coaxial arrangement of the
`shafts connecting the various components of the drive train from the drive
`engine to the belt pulley The flexible mounting of the drive engine and
`the rigid mounting of the drive pulley required an articulated coupling
`between the two to accommodate the slight movements of the drive engine
`
`4
`
`WA
`
`0012934
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 6 of 33 PageID #: 27276
`Reissue Of 8408659
`Issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`relative to the drive pulley that would occur due to vibration of the drive
`These components were intended to be installed
`engine during operation
`such that when the engine is not running the shafts connecting
`the
`elements of the drive train from the drive engine to the drive pulley would
`be coaxial
`During operation of the machine any temporary slight
`caused
`the
`vibration of
`the
`drive
`misalignment
`by
`is
`engine
`accommodated by the articulated coupling
`
`121 have been asked to comment on the issue raised in the office action of
`Jan 29 2020 of
`the Reissue Application
`regarding the effect of
`and other manufacturing
`limitations on the
`engineering tolerances
`meaning of the terms parallel and coaxial Particularly I address my
`comments to the following passage in the office action
`
`alignment Further POSITA would appreciate that the precise parallel and coaxial
`
`arrangements recited in claims 1 12 14 21 and 35 could not be easily implemented due to
`
`engineering tolerances and other manufacturing limitations That is POSITA would understand
`
`that some deviation from the precise parallel and coaxial arrangements recited in the claims
`
`would most likely be required in a realworld scenario and would further understand that such
`
`deviation is a component of the very problem discussed in the applicants disclosure and
`
`addressed by the claimed invention
`
`in the realworld
`While I agree that a POSITA would understand that
`I disagree that this would have in
`nothing is exactly parallel or coaxial
`any way affected a POSITAs understanding of these terms in the 659
`patent When we stated in the 659 patent that a coaxial
`arrangement
`of the shafts connecting the elements of the drive train is required we of
`course made that statement in the real world context in which it would be
`understood by other engineers like myself and by a POSITA It would be
`understood that no connection of two shafts is exactly parallel or coaxial
`and that
`and installation
`there are always manufacturing
`tolerances
`tolerances involved and so long as the drive train was installed within
`to be
`its various components would be considered
`those tolerances
`coaxial and parallel
`
`PARALLEL AND CO AXIAL ISSUES
`
`131 have been asked to comment on the following language which is
`currently included in amended daim 1 of the pending reissue application
`
`WA
`
`0012935
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 7 of 33 PageID #: 27277
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`wherein the drive engine component has an output axis parallel to the
`drum rotational axis
`
`the articulated coupling has a coupling rotational axis
`wherein
`parallel to the output axis of the drive engine component
`
`wherein a rotational axis of the drive pulley is co axial with the output
`axis of the drive engine component
`
`141 have been asked whether I understood these features to be described in
`the original disclosure of the application for the 659 patent The answer
`and intend the original disclosure of
`is yes I did understand
`the
`application for the 659 patent
`to include those features These features
`are shown in Fig 1 of the application
`
`To an engineer such as myself and to a POSITA this drawing clearly
`shows a coaxial arrangement of the shafts connecting the elements of the
`drive train from the drive engine 10 to the drive pulley 11 as described in
`the 659 patent That coaxial arrangement also means that the rotational
`axis of the coupling 20 is co axial with and parallel to the output axis of
`the drive engine 10 and that the rotational axis of the drive pulley 11 is
`co axial with the output axis of the drive engine 10 The drawing also
`shows the rotational axis of the milling drum 6 parallel to the output axis
`of the drive engine 10
`
`15 This is further reinforced by Fig 5 of the 659 patent which is an end view
`the structure shown in Fig 1
`of a modified embodiment of
`In the
`embodiment of Fig 5 the clutch 14 of Fig 1 has been eliminated and its
`function is replaced by the pulley 32 In Fig 5 the rotational axis of drive
`pulley 11 and the drum pulley 13 are both shown normal to the plane of
`
`6
`
`WA
`
`0012936
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 8 of 33 PageID #: 27278
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`is also shown that the
`the drawing and thus parallel to each other
`It
`rotational axis of the drive pulley 11 is co axial with the rotational axis of
`the output shaft 17 from the hydraulic pump drive 16 And it
`is shown
`the drum pulley 13 is co axial with the
`the rotational axis of
`that
`rotational axis of the milling drum 6 to which it
`is attached via the drive
`shaft 15 Although we did not draw in a line for the axis of each shaft
`we illustrated and described the rotating shafts 15 and 17 and a rotating
`shaft inherently has a rotational axis a POSITA understands this
`
`16 In addition to what is shown in the drawings the specification of the 659
`patent discusses these features As noted above the BACKGROUND OF
`THE INVENTION of the 659 patent says that for machines of this type
`a coaxial rigidly supported arrangement of the shafts connecting
`the
`elements of the drive train is required Col 1 11 3335 That
`language
`was describing a feature which was present in the prior design and which
`was carried forward into the present design
`
`17And that passage continues to say and that with regard to the belt drive
`a rigid track aligned arrangement of the belt pulley on the drive side and
`on the output side is a basic requirement for the functional performance
`
`7
`
`WA
`
`0012937
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 9 of 33 PageID #: 27279
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`and long life of such a belt drive Col 1 11 3538 This is saying that
`the belt drive pulley and the driven pulley connected to the milling drum
`must be aligned which means that their rotational axes must be parallel
`See also Col 4 11 1921 which describes an output element 13 that is
`coupled in a non rotatable manner with the drive shaft 15 of the working
`drum 6
`
`18 So although the exact words of the current pending claim 1 were not in
`the original application the substance was
`It was conveyed to other
`engineers such as myself and to a POSITA reading the original
`the 659 patent
`found in the drawings
`and
`disclosure of
`as
`the
`invention includes an
`that
`the patent
`the described
`specification of
`in which a the engine 10 has an output axis parallel to a
`embodiment
`rotational axis of the drum 6 b the articulated coupling has a coupling
`to the output axis of the engine 10 and c the
`rotational axis parallel
`drive pulley 11 has a rotational axis
`coaxial with the output axis of the
`engine 10
`
`19 And I note that as of the April 15 2005 filing of the priority application on
`which the 659 patent
`is based the design for the first Wirtgen product
`incorporating this invention did in fact include those features That first
`the WR2400
`The coaxial
`a stabilizer known
`machine was
`as
`arrangement of the drive train from the drive engine to the drive pulley of
`the WR2400 is shown in the following drawing which comes from a
`January 2005 Research and Development department meeting discussing
`the WR2400 development
`The line along the axes of the drive train
`and the identifying annotation have been added for the
`components
`purposes of this declaration
`
`WA
`
`0012938
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 10 of 33 PageID #: 27280
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`Engine output shaft articulated
`coupling pump gear drive clutch
`and drive pulley are all coaxially
`arranged along this line
`
`And the parallel nature of the rotational axes for the drive pulley and
`those components coaxial with it and the driven pulley and the working
`drum coaxial with it are seen in the following drawing from that same
`meeting in which both axes are shown as perpendicular
`to the plane of
`the drawing
`
`WA
`
`0012939
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 11 of 33 PageID #: 27281
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`Axes
`driven
`of
`pulley and working
`drum
`
`F2R
`
`+
`
`201 have been asked to comment on the contention set forth in the office
`of Jan 29 2020 of
`regarding the
`action
`the Reissue Application
`a POSITA would
`have
`of
`the
`discussion
`in the
`understanding
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION with relation to the coaxial
`arrangement Particularly I address my comments to the following
`passage in the office action
`
`10
`
`WA
`
`0012940
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 12 of 33 PageID #: 27282
`Reissue Of 8408659
`Issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`The applicant
`
`further argues that the combination of the disclosure found in the
`
`applicants written description and drawings as it would be understood by a person of ordinary
`in the art POSITA provides the necessary support for the claimed parallel and coaxial
`
`skill
`
`relies upon the disclosure found at col I
`arrangements In making this argument
`the applicant
`11 3038 However as explained in item 9 above col 111 3040 is not a description of the
`
`claimed invention but rather constitutes applicants critique of the disadvantages of prior art
`
`construction machines The original disclosure specifically criticizes the prior art for its engine
`
`mounted in a very stiff manner and for its coaxial rigidly supported arrangement of the shafts
`
`The original disclosure explains that these disadvantages are overcome by the claimed invention
`
`which uses the articulated coupling to allow for a slight dynamic axle eset andor angular error
`
`and to balance the dynamic misalignment when the shafts are not permanently in precise
`
`alignment Further POSITA would appreciate that the precise parallel and coaxial
`
`that The original disclosure specifically criticizes the prior art
`The statement
`for its coaxial rigidly supported arrangement of the shafts is not correct
`in DE 10031195 Cl was
`Our criticism of our own prior art arrangement
`directed to the stiff support of the engine and the resulting vibration which is
`the problem addressed by the invention Our specific words at Col 1 11 46
`We
`47 were The stiff support of the drive train is disadvantageous
`never said the coaxial arrangement of the shafts of the drive train was
`disadvantageous We were not criticizing the coaxial arrangement of the
`As we showed in the
`shafts and the rigid support of the drive pulley
`drawings and described in the application these features should in fact be
`maintained A POSITA would have understood that
`from our description
`that a POSITA would have understood that a coaxial
`and from the fact
`arrangement of the drive train components from the drive engine to the drive
`pulley is the preferred arrangement because it is the most energy efficient
`
`21 In this regard it
`is helpful to understand the basic drive train architecture
`of a road milling machine and a recyder machine as those machines were
`understood by a POSITA at the time of the priority date of the 659 patent
`That basic architecture was already known in the prior art as shown for
`example in DE 10031195 Cl US 7644994 which is referenced at Col 1
`11 2223 of the 659 patent
`It must be kept in mind that the primary task
`of such a machine is to break up the ground surface To accomplish that
`task efficiently hundreds of horsepower must be transmitted from the
`drive engine 10 to the working drum 6 with as little
`energy loss as
`possible Any energy losses mean the machine can do less work and make
`less money for its owner The preferred drive train architecture that had
`evolved was that shown in DE 10031195 Cl US 7644994 which is based
`11
`
`WA
`
`0012941
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 13 of 33 PageID #: 27283
`Reissue Of 8408659
`Issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`on a belt drive with a coaxial arrangement of the shafts connecting the
`elements of the drive train from the drive engine 10 to the drive pulley 11
`A POSITA would have understood that
`to provide the most energy
`transfer of all this horsepower from the drive engine 10 to the
`efficient
`working drum 6 the drive train should be as direct as possible This is
`why a POSITA understood that it was preferred to have the shafts of the
`in the drive train coaxially aligned and directly
`various components
`connected together as we described in the 659 patent at Col 1 11 3234
`when we stated It
`is understood that a coaxial
`arrangement of the
`shafts connecting the elements of the drive train is required
`
`22 This direct shaft to shaft connection is in contrast for example to a drive
`train including geared interfaces such as that shown in Godbersen US
`4343513 shown below The POSITA understood that such geared drive
`trains involved substantial energy losses with the typical rule of thumb
`being that there is a 10 efficiency
`loss per geared engagement See for
`example Exhibit 1 Machine Design Faulhaber A second look at Gearbox
`efficiencies June 20 2002
`
`23 This direct shaft to shaft connection is repeatedly emphasized in the 659
`patent
`
`12
`
`WA
`
`0012942
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 14 of 33 PageID #: 27284
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`a slight dynamic axle offset andor angular error of the output shaft of
`the first group with the drive engine is permissible visàvis the drive
`shaft of the second group Col 2 II 4144
`
`the coupling device permanently couples an output shaft of the drive
`engine with an input shaft of
`least one
`the device for driving the at
`hydraulic pump andor an input shaft of the device for switching the
`torque Col 3 11 4145
`
`The coupling device permanently couples an output shaft of the drive
`with an input shaft of the device for driving the at least one
`engine
`hydraulic pump or an input shaft of the device for switching the torque
`or of the second group Col 311 5458
`
`241 have also been asked to comment on the statements in the 659 patent
`discussing the temporary dynamic misalignment of the output pulley 11
`with the output axis of the drive engine which occurs during operation due
`the drive engine on its flexible motor mounts
`to the vibration of
`Specifically I have been asked to comment on the Mowing statement
`from Col 2 11 3844
`
`table as a result In doing so the first and the second group
`which are attached to the machine frame with different
`40 degrees ofrigidity are connected to one another via an articu
`lated coupling device so that a slight dynamic axle offset
`andor angular error of the output shaft of the first group with
`the drive engine is permissible visAvis the drive shaft of the
`second group
`
`And I have been asked to comment on the passage of the 659 patent found
`at Col 4 1 58 Col 5 12 which reads as follows
`
`13
`
`WA
`
`0012943
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 15 of 33 PageID #: 27285
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`The second group 5 on the other hand is attached to the
`machine frame 4 by means of springdamping elements 24
`60 showing high spring stiffness so that the second group 5 is
`attached to the machine frame 4 in a nearly rigid manner The
`different manner of support or attachment of the first and the
`second groups 35 ofthe drive train 8 has the effect that when
`in operation the not depicted output shaft of the combustion
`65 engine 10 is not permanently in precise alignment with the
`also not depicted input shaft of the pump transfer case 16
`20 balancing the
`with the articulated
`device
`coupling
`
`dynamic misalignment occurring during operation without
`the flow of power in the drive train 8 being disturbed
`
`like myself and to a POSITA
`Both of those passages convey to an engineer
`that during the operation of the drive engine the vibration of
`the drive
`on its flexible engine mounts can cause very slight dynamic
`engine
`misalignment between the output axis of the drive engine and the rotational
`These dynamic misalignments exist only for a
`the drive pulley
`axis of
`fraction of a second But by saying that these slight dynamic misalignments
`occur during operation I was saying that
`the nominal
`can
`installed
`arrangement of those components is required to be co axial as we stated in
`the Background Of The Invention at Col 1 113235
`If they are not co axial
`to start with then my statements about dynamic misalignment occurring
`during operation would be meaningless That was my understanding of my
`original disclosure and I believe that this same understanding would clearly
`be had by other engineers like myself and by a POSITA reading this
`disclosure Note particularly that the passage at Col 4 11 63 66 tells the
`POSITA that when in operation
`the
`the not depicted output shaft of
`combustion engine 10 is not permanently in precise alignment with the also
`not depicted input shaft of the pump transfer case 16 The also means that
`when not
`should be aligned And if
`in operation those components
`the
`rotational axis of the output shaft of the combustion engine 10 is aligned with
`the rotational axis of the input shaft of the pump transfer case 16 then the
`20 between
`the articulated
`the
`coupling rotational axis of
`coupling
`10 and 16 must also be aligned with the rotational axes of the
`components
`10 and 16
`components
`
`14
`
`WA
`
`0012944
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 16 of 33 PageID #: 27286
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`ELASTIC AND RIGID MOUNTS ISSUE
`
`251 have also been asked to comment on what I understood and meant by
`the language in the 659 patent describing the relative stiffness of the
`mounting of the drive engine and the other components of the drive train
`to the machine frame For example in claim 1 of the 659 patent
`the
`following language is used
`b supporting the drive engine component
`frame elastically with a first spring stiffness and
`c supporting the subset of the components from the machine
`frame with a second spring stiffness the second spring stiffness being
`relatively higher than the first spring stiffness and
`
`from the machine
`
`And in claim 14 of the 659 patent the following language is used
`
`frame
`to the machine
`wherein the first
`is attached
`subset
`elastically with a lower spring stiffness so that transmission of vibrations
`to the machine frame is reduced and the second subset is attached to the
`machine frame with a higher spring stiffness or in a rigid manner
`
`26 When mounting the various components of a drive train to a machine
`frame the components are almost always bolted directly or indirectly to
`the machine frame The only question is whether the component
`is to be
`rigidly mounted by placing it
`in metal to metal contact with the machine
`frame and bolting it
`in place or whether a flexible elastic mount is to be
`placed between the drive train component and the machine frame
`
`27 What
`in the 659 patent when I referred to
`I understood and meant
`in a rigid manner was
`mounting certain components
`that
`those
`components would be supported from the machine frame either directly
`to metal contact with one or more bolts
`or indirectly through metal
`rigidly in place against the frame That is what a
`holding the component
`in the
`of drive trains of
`person like myself experienced
`design
`constructions machines and a POSITA understands when a component of
`a drive train is said to be mounted to the machine frame rigidly
`
`28What
`in the 659 patent when I referred to
`I understood and meant
`mounting certain components elastically with a first spring stiffness or
`elastically with a lower spring stiffness was that such components would
`be mounted upon the machine frame using conventional elastic mounts
`such as were well known to be commonly used for elastic mounting of
`motors and transmissions of a drive train That
`is what a person like
`myself experienced in the design of drive trains of construction machines
`
`15
`
`WA
`
`0012945
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 17 of 33 PageID #: 27287
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`and a POSITA understands when a component of a drive train is said to
`be mounted to the machine frame elastically
`
`29Shown below is a sketch I made prior to the filing of
`the original
`application for the 659 patent when I first disclosed the invention of the
`659 patent
`to Wirtgen management during one of our regularly scheduled
`design review meetings In this sketch I showed the pump gear drive
`casing being rigidly mounted by two bolts as represented by the two
`lines through the bottom flange of the pump gear drive casing
`vertical
`And I showed the drive engine being flexibly supported from the machine
`frame by elastic motor mounts which are represented by the two squiggly
`The second
`lines The first copy of this sketch below is not annotated
`copy is annotated to identify the markings I am referring to
`
`Vertical
`
`lines
`
`indicating bolts
`
`Squiggly
`lines
`elastic motor mounts
`
`indicating
`
`16
`
`WA
`
`0012946
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 18 of 33 PageID #: 27288
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`30At a later Research and Development department meeting still prior to
`the filing date of the application for the 659 patent
`I illustrated the drive
`I have added for the
`train arrangement using the following drawing
`purposes of
`the present declaration annotations identifying the bolted
`fixed connection and the elastic motor mounts
`
`XM
`
`Elastic
`mounts
`
`motor
`
`31 The selection of an appropriate elastic motor mount for a project such as
`this one is and was as of April 15 2005 a routine matter for a design
`engineer such as me and for a POSITA These are basically off the shelf
`items which are typically selected with assistance from an appropriate
`vendor Basic information regarding the engine to be mounted is provided
`vendor
`and
`elastic motor mounts
`the
`then
`are
`appropriate
`to
`recommended from their existing designs That
`is what was done as we
`the 659 patent
`implemented the design of
`in the Wirtgen soil
`first
`stabilizer machine known as the WR2400
`
`17
`
`WA
`
`0012947
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 19 of 33 PageID #: 27289
`Reissue Of 8408659
`Issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`32 One of my coworkers at Wirtgen Mr Lull who had the task of sourcing
`the WR2400
`the components
`for construction
`of
`contacted
`several
`for the elastic motor mounts and asked them for
`potential vendors
`letters were sent
`to each potential
`proposals
`Substantially identical
`vendor One representative sample of the letters is attached as Exhibit 2
`These letters are dated Dec 6 2004 The English translation of the text
`of that letter is as follows
`
`TB 0403 Motor mount
`
`Ladies and Gentlemen
`
`The model 0M502LA DC motor is designated for the project indicated
`above
`
`to decouple the motors vibration from the chassis it
`In order
`is
`planned to suspend the motor elastically The motor mount should also
`have a certain stiffness in order to minimize requirements in terms of
`elastic force takeoff compressed air lines and the exhaust duct
`
`Pictures and a schematic drawing are attached to help you understand
`the installation situation
`
`Please propose a motor mount with breakaway protection from your
`product line which meets these criteria
`
`We also request a quote for the parts that are required
`
`We are of course happy to provide any further information you may
`need
`
`Very sincerely
`WIRTGEN GmbH
`signed
`Roland Lull Design
`
`The attachments
`to that
`the
`included the following drawings of
`Mercedes Benz OM 502 LA engine which we were planning to use in the
`WR2400 The OM 502 LA is a V8 diesel engine rated at 420 kW 563 HP
`
`letter
`
`18
`
`WA
`
`0012948
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 20 of 33 PageID #: 27290
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
``1111111E
`
`WA
`
`0012949
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 21 of 33 PageID #: 27291
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`Also included in the attachments was the following drawing without
`handwritten annotations
`
`the
`
`331 have reviewed the existing files from this design effort and have found
`letters substantially like Exhibit 2 were sent
`to at
`least
`the following
`companies
`
`STS Schwingungstechnik Schuster eK
`Co KG
`Dietrich Teigler Nachf GmbH
`Trelleborg Industrie GmbH
`GMT GmbH
`Phoenix AG
`
`341 have located catalogs from two of those vendors that would have been
`current at the time of Wirtgens request to those vendors as follows
`
`GMT GmbH See Exhibit 3 dated November 2004 at page 138
`Phoenix AG See Exhibit 4 dated March 2004 at page 3
`
`35 Over a period of a few weeks each of those vendors made proposals The
`elastic motor mount which was ultimately selected for use in mounting
`the engine of the WR2400 was a simple rubber bushing from GMT a
`drawing of which is shown below
`
`20
`
`WA
`
`0012950
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 250-54 Filed 10/25/23 Page 22 of 33 PageID #: 27292
`Reissue Of 8408659
`issued April 2 2013
`Customer No 23456
`
`36It was my intention to convey to other engineers such as myself and to a
`POSITA reading the original disclosure of the 659 patent as found in the
`drawings and the specification of the patent
`that the described invention
`could include springdamping elements capable of supporting the drive
`14 andor
`10 with a low spring stiffness and the clutch
`the
`engine
`hydraulic pump drive 16 with a high spring stiffness I believe I did so
`And at the time of filing of the application for the 659 patent
`the design
`for the WR2400 machine specifically included these features as shown in
`the drawings identified above from my de