The following claim charts include illustrations, photographs, and references relating to Ford Engines using the Ford “port-fuel and direct injection [PFDI] system,” including, but not limited to, the 1.5L “Dragon”
`EcoBoost Engine; Second Generation 2.7L and 3.5L EcoBoost Engines; 3.5L High Output Second Generation EcoBoost Engine; and the 3.3 Ti-VCT V6 and 5.0 Ti-VCT V8 Engines (collectively, the “Accused Products,”
`“Accused Instrumentalities,” or “Accused Engines”). The preliminary infringement contentions set forth in these charts apply to each model of Accused Products, including those identified elsewhere in Plaintiffs’ First
`Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions, as well as all models and revisions identified by Defendants. Further, unless expressly stated otherwise, the evidence of infringement identified herein should be
`understood as a non-limiting example of how Plaintiffs allege that all accused products set forth for that claim—or the claim(s) on which that claim depends—infringe.
`
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Exhibit D
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826 (Issued Nov. 27, 2018)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`The Accused Products include a fuel management system for a spark ignition engine that has a first fueling system that uses direct injection and a second fueling system that uses port fuel
`injection.
`
`The Accused Products include turbocharged and/or naturally aspirated spark-ignition engines (Exs. 1-5 [EBS-00002931 – EBS-00002961], 10 [EBS-00003071 – EBS-3084]) that include a fuel
`management system that utilizes both port fuel injection (PFI) and direct fuel injection (DI), which Ford refers to as, among other things, the “Ford port-fuel and direct-injection (PFDI)
`system.” See, e.g., Ex. 1 at 6 [EBS-00002937] (“The ultimate strategy is combining both PI and DI benefits, using each to diminish the other’s negatives.”); id. at 4 [EBS-00002935] (“Ford
`currently is the dominant player with what it calls dual-fuel, high-pressure direct injection (DI) and lower-pressure port injection (PI). Applications include turbocharged and naturally aspirated
`V-6 and V-8 gasoline engines—four in all—ranging in size from 2.7 to 5.0 liters…. Step one [of such DI system] is atomizing the liquid to fine droplets, achieved by forcing gasoline
`pressurized by a pump through tiny injector orifices.”); Ex. 4, at 2 [EBS-00002953] (“The redesigned V-6 [has] two fuel injection systems: direct injection and port fuel injection.”); Ex. 10 at 2
`[EBS-00003076] (“The 3.5L EcoBoost . . . engine delivers the F-150 best-in-class tow rating . . . . Features include the Ford port-fuel and direct-injection (PFDI) system with two injectors per
`cylinder — one in the air intake port, another inside the cylinder — to increase performance. Plus twin intercooled turbos for on-demand power with virtually no lag.”); Ex. 15, at 2 [EBS-
`00003171] (“Power for the 2018 Lincoln Navigator comes from a second-generation twin-turbo 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 . . . .”); Ex. 10 at 3 [EBS-00003077] (“Under the unique Raptor hood is
`the 24-valve, 3.5L twin-turbo HO EcoBoost with Ford port-fuel and direct injection (PFDI) system . . . .”); id. at 4 [EBS-00003078] (“The 3.3L Ti-VCT V6 delivers responsive performance
`with 290 horsepower and 265 lb.-ft. of torque. The twin independent variable cam timing (Ti-VCT) opens/closes the valves in precise duration to suit operating conditions, so power output is
`optimized at every point across the performance band. The 3.3L also has the Ford port-fuel and direct-injection (PFDI) system with two injectors per cylinder — one mounted in the air intake
`port, another inside the cylinder.”); id. (disclosing that Ford’s “5.0L TI-VCT V8” engine utilizes “the Ford port-fuel and direct-injection (PFDI) system with two injectors per cylinder — one in
`the air intake port, another inside the cylinder — to increase power and efficiency.”); Ex. 11, at 2 [EBS-00003087] (“The naturally aspirated 5.0-Liter Coyote V8 in the 2018 Ford Mustang . . .
`now combines low-pressure port and high-pressure direct injection, has two new anti-knock sensors, redesigned cylinder heads and new crankshaft and connecting rod bearings.”); Ex. 3, at 2
`[EBS-00002948] (“With advanced dual port and direct-injection technology, the all-new second-generation 2.7-liter EcoBoost engine delivers a 25 lb.-ft. increase in torque, and at lower engine
`speeds compared to a traditional V8. Like the second-generation 3.5-liter EcoBoost that debuted last model year, the 2.7-liter will be paired to a segment-exclusive 10-speed automatic
`transmission for 2018.”); Ex. 10, at 1 [EBS-00003075] (“How can an engine displacing just 2.7 liters deliver a robust 325 horsepower and 400 lb.-ft of torque? Engineer it with the Ford port-
`fuel and direct-injection (PFDI) system with two injectors per cylinder . . . .”); Ex. 5 [EBS-2955, at 957] (“A new combination of port fuel injection and direct fuel injection technology [for the
`1.5L EcoBoost] helps deliver high power and responsiveness alongside reduced CO2 emissions,* with a particular increase in fuel efficiency under light engine loads.”).
`The fueling is such that there is a first torque range where both the first and second fueling system are used throughout the range.
`
`As noted above, the Accused Products include a fuel management system, which Ford identifies as, among other things, the “Ford port-fuel and direct injection (PFDI) system,” that utilizes
`both port fuel injection (PFI) and direct fuel injection (DI). Ex. 10 [EBS-00003074 – EBS-00003084]; see also, e.g., Exs. 1-5 [EBS00002931 – EBS-00002961]. As also noted above, in such
`engines, fuel delivery occurs via “PI alone at idle and at low rpm,” but that, “[a]s rpm and load increase, fuel delivery becomes a programmed blend of PI and DI.” Ex. 1, at 7 [EBS-00002938].
`
`Further, it has been reported that, at certain rpm/engine load ranges (i.e., torque), such fuel management system utilize both PFI and DI. See, e.g., Ex. 1, at 7 [EBS-00002938] (“Ford uses PI
`alone at idle and at low rpm for smooth, quiet, and efficient engine operation. As rpm and load increase, fuel delivery becomes a programmed blend of PI and DI.”); Ex. 4, at 2 [EBS-00002953]
`(“The redesigned V-6 [has] two fuel injection systems: direct injection and port fuel injection. The engine ... runs on port injection when cold and under low-load situations and switches to
`direct injection when warm or when extra power is needed .... It can also run both systems at the same time, said Jim Mazuchowski, Ford’s new V-6 engine program manager.”).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`’826 Patent Claim Element
`1[a]. A fuel management system for
`a spark ignition engine that has a
`first fueling system that uses direct
`injection and also has a second
`fueling system that uses port fuel
`injection;
`
`
`
`[1b] and where the fueling is such
`that there is a first torque range
`where both the first and second
`fueling system are used throughout
`the range;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 1
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`The above has been verified by laboratory testing performed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, “[t]he PFI system provides the fuel to the engine when the absolute engine
`load is below 40 percent. The DI system is quickly blended in above 40 percent absolute engine load. Between 60 percent to 140 percent absolute load, 80 percent to 70 percent of the fuel is
`delivered through the DI system. At absolute engine loads above 140 percent the PFI system provides an increase proportion of the fuel up to 40 percent. At the maximum absolute load above
`2,000 rpm 60 percent of the fuel is provided by the DI system and 40 percent by the PFI system that corresponds to the values shown in the maximum acceleration test in Figure 24.” Ex. 9, at
`42 [EBS-00003026] (see below).
`
`Ex. 9, at 42 [EBS-00003026].
`[1c] and where the fraction of
`fueling provided by the first fueling
`
`The fraction of fueling provided by the first fueling system is higher at the highest range of torque in the first torque range than in the lowest value of torque in the first torque range.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 2
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`system is higher at the highest value
`of torque in the first torque range
`than in the lowest value of torque in
`the first torque range;
`
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`As noted above, the Accused Instrumentalities include a fuel management system, which Ford identifies as, among other things, the “Ford port-fuel and direct injection (PFDI) system,” that
`utilizes both port fuel injection (PFI) and direct fuel injection (DI). Ex. 10 [EBS-00003074 – EBS-00003084]; see also Exs. 1-5 [EBS-00002931 – EBS-00002961]. As also noted above, in such
`engines, fuel delivery occurs via “PI alone at idle and at low rpm,” but that, “[a]s rpm and load increase, fuel delivery becomes a programmed blend of PI and DI.” Ex. 1, at 7 [EBS-00002938].
`
`For example, laboratory testing performed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has confirmed that “[t]he PFI system provides the fuel to the engine when the absolute engine
`load is below 40 percent. The DI system is quickly blended in above 40 percent absolute engine load. Between 60 percent to 140 percent absolute load, 80 percent to 70 percent of the fuel is
`delivered through the DI system. At absolute engine loads above 140 percent the PFI system provides an increase proportion of the fuel up to 40 percent. At the maximum absolute load above
`2,000 rpm 60 percent of the fuel is provided by the DI system and 40 percent by the PFI system that corresponds to the values shown in the maximum acceleration test in Figure 24.” Ex. 9, at
`42 [EBS-00003026]. Further, the chart below demonstrates that the fraction of fueling provided by DI when the DI system is first “blended in” at “above 40 percent absolute engine load” is
`less than the fraction of fuel provided by DI at the highest engine load. See, e.g., Ex. 9, at 42 [EBS-00003026].
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 3
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`Ex. 9 at 42.
`[1d] and where there is a second
`
`There is a second torque range where only the second fueling system is used.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 4
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`torque range where only the second
`fueling system is used;
`
`
`
`[1e] where when the torque is higher
`than the highest value of torque in
`the second torque range the engine is
`operated in the first torque range;
`
`
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`The Accused Products include a fuel management system, which Ford identifies as, among other things, the “Ford port-fuel and direct injection (PFDI) system,” that utilizes both port fuel
`injection (PFI) and direct fuel injection (DI). Ex. 10 [EBS-00003074 – EBS-00003084]; see also, e.g., Exs. 1-5 [EBS-00002931 – EBS-00002961].
`
`It has been reported that, at certain rpm/engine load ranges (i.e., torque), such fuel management system utilizes only PFI. See, e.g., Ex. 1 (“Ford uses PI alone at idle and at low rpm for smooth,
`quiet, and efficient engine operation.”); Ex. 4, at 2 [EBS-00002953] (“The redesigned V-6 [has] two fuel injection systems: direct injection and port fuel injection. The engine ... runs on port
`injection when cold and under low-load situations . . . .”). Further, Ford has stated that “[a]t lower loads, ‘the DI system bleeds off’ … and PFI takes priority.” Ex. 7, at 1 [EBS-00002968].
`Further, it has been reported that Ford’s use of PFI “allows engineers to shut down the direct-injection system and its mechanical pump at low speeds and under low loads, reducing friction
`losses and emissions.” Ex. 16, at 3 [EBS-00003180]. The above has been verified by laboratory testing performed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which confirmed
`that “[t]he PFI system provides the fuel to the engine when the absolute engine load is below 40 percent.” Ex. 9, at 42 [EBS-00003026].
`When the torque is higher than the highest value of torque in the second torque range the engine is operated in the first torque range.
`
`As noted above, the Accused Instrumentalities include a fuel management system, which Ford identifies as, among other things, the “Ford port-fuel and direct injection (PFDI) system,” that
`utilizes both port fuel injection (PFI) and direct fuel injection (DI). Ex. 10 [EBS-00003074 – EBS-00003084]; see also, e.g., Exs. 1-5 [EBS-00002931 – EBS-00002961]. As also noted above,
`in such engines, fuel delivery occurs via “PI alone at idle and at low rpm,” but that, “[a]s rpm and load increase, fuel delivery becomes a programmed blend of PI and DI.” Ex. 1, at 7 [EBS-
`00002938].
`
`Ford has stated that “[a]t lower loads, ‘the DI system bleeds off’ … and PFI takes priority.” Ex. 7, at 1 [EBS-00002968]. It also has been reported that “Ford uses PI alone at idle and at low rpm
`for smooth, quiet, and efficient engine operation” and that it is only “[a]s rpm and load increase, [that] fuel delivery becomes a programmed blend of PI and DI.” Ex. 1, at 7 [EBS-00002938]. It
`has been reported that Ford’s use of PFI “allows engineers to shut down the direct-injection system and its mechanical pump at low speeds and under low loads, reducing friction losses and
`emissions.” Ex. 16, at 3 [EBS-00003180].
`
`Further, laboratory testing performed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has confirmed that such engines operate in the second torque range at or below 40 percent engine
`load: “The PFI system provides the fuel to the engine when the absolute engine load is below 40 percent.” Ex. 9, at 42 [EBS-00003026]. Further, when the engine load exceeds such value, the
`Accused Instrumentalities operate in the first torque range: “The DI system is quickly blended in above 40 percent absolute engine load. Between 60 percent to 140 percent absolute load, 80
`percent to 70 percent of the fuel is delivered through the DI system. At absolute engine loads above 140 percent the PFI system provides an increase proportion of the fuel up to 40 percent. At
`the maximum absolute load above 2,000 rpm 60 percent of the fuel is provided by the DI system and 40 percent by the PFI system that corresponds to the values shown in the maximum
`acceleration test in Figure 24.” Ex. 9, at 42 [EBS-00003026] (see below).
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 5
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`Ex. 9 at 42.
`[1f] and where the second torque
`
`See Claim 1e.
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 6
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`range extends from zero torque to
`the highest torque in the second
`torque range.
`2. The fuel management system of
`claim 1 where the fraction of fueling
`that is provided by the first fueling
`system in the first torque range
`increases with increasing torque.
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`It also has been reported that “Ford uses PI alone at idle and at low rpm for smooth, quiet, and efficient engine operation” and that it is only “[a]s rpm and load increase, [that] fuel delivery
`becomes a programmed blend of PI and DI.” Ex. 1, at 7 [EBS-00002938].
`See Claim 1.
`
`The fraction of fueling that is provided by the first fueling system in the first torque range increases with increasing torque.
`
`As noted above, the Accused Products include a fuel management system, which Ford identifies as, among other things, the “Ford port-fuel and direct injection (PFDI) system,” that utilizes
`both port fuel injection (PFI) and direct fuel injection (DI). Ex. 10 [EBS-00003074 – EBS-00003084]; see also, e.g., Exs. 1-5 [EBS-00002931 – EBS-00002961]. As also noted above, in such
`engines, fuel delivery occurs via “PI alone at idle and at low rpm,” but that, “[a]s rpm and load increase, fuel delivery becomes a programmed blend of PI and DI.” Ex. 1, at 7 [EBS-00002938].
`It has been reported that Ford’s use of PFI “allows engineers to shut down the direct-injection system and its mechanical pump at low speeds and under low loads, reducing friction losses and
`emissions.” Ex. 16, at 3 [EBS-00003180]. Further, it also has been reported that the ratio of directly injected fuel to port injected fuel can eventually increase under such heightened load/
`torque values such that only “5 to 10 percent of the fuel delivery” is provided via port injection. Ex. 1, at 7 [EBS-00002938].
`
`In addition, laboratory testing performed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration confirmed the following: “The PFI system provides the fuel to the engine when the absolute
`engine load is below 40 percent. The DI system is quickly blended in above 40 percent absolute engine load. Between 60 percent to 140 percent absolute load, 80 percent to 70 percent of the
`fuel is delivered through the DI system.” Ex. 9, at 42 [EBS-00003026].
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 7
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`Ex. 9 at 42.
`3. The fuel management system of
`
`See Claim 1.
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 8
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`claim 1 where the fraction of fueling
`that is provided by the first fueling
`system in the first torque range
`increases with increasing torque in
`such a way that knock is prevented.
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`The fraction of fueling that is provided by the first fueling system in the first torque range increases with increasing torque in such a way that knock is prevented.
`
`For example, the Accused Products employ the “Ford port-fuel and direct injection (PFDI) system,” that utilizes both port fuel injection (PFI) and direct fuel injection (DI). Ex. 10 [EBS-
`00003074 – EBS-00003084]; see also, e.g., Exs. 1-5 [EBS00002931 – EBS-00002961]. As also noted above, in such engines, fuel delivery occurs via “PI alone at idle and at low rpm,” but that,
`“[a]s rpm and load increase, fuel delivery becomes a programmed blend of PI and DI.” Ex. 1, at 7 [EBS00002938].
`
`
`Ford has stated that one of the benefits of such direct injection is that “DI cools the cylinder sufficiently to maintain a high CR without high-octane unleaded.” Ex. 7, at 1 [EBS-00002968] (“At
`high load, DI cools the cylinder sufficiently to maintain a high CR without high-octane unleaded.”); see also, e.g., ’826 Patent at Col. 4:32-34 (“Direct injection of gasoline results in
`approximately a five octane number decrease in the octane number required by the engine, as discussed by Stokes, et al.”).
`
`Further, as a result of such vaporization cooling, DI is known to prevent “detonation,” i.e., knock, that otherwise would occur. See, e.g., Ex. 1, at 4 [EBS-00002935] (“Because heat is absorbed
`during this phase change, there’s a cooling effect, which can be used to improve the engine’s operating efficiency. With PI, the air flowing through the intake manifold is cooled before it
`reaches the combustion chamber. With DI, the cooling benefit occurs within the chamber itself .... With DI, the chance of detonation—premature ignition of the fuel and air mixture—is
`diminished because the phase-change cooling effect takes place during the compression stroke just before ignition.”).
`
`Further, as confirmed by laboratory testing performed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, “[t]he PFI system provides the fuel to the engine when the absolute engine load is
`below 40 percent. The DI system is quickly blended in above 40 percent absolute engine load. Between 60 percent to 140 percent absolute load, 80 percent to 70 percent of the fuel is delivered
`through the DI system. At absolute engine loads above 140 percent the PFI system provides an increase proportion of the fuel up to 40 percent. At the maximum absolute load above 2,000 rpm
`60 percent of the fuel is provided by the DI system and 40 percent by the PFI system that corresponds to the values shown in the maximum acceleration test in Figure 24.” Ex. 9, at 42 [EBS-
`00003026] (see below).
`
`In particular, and as shown below, testing by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration confirmed that as engine load increases, for “lower octane fuel the spark ignition timing is
`retarded at . . . higher loads to prevent engine knocking from occurring.” Ex. 9, at 56 [EBS-00003040]. This spark retard occurs at the engine loads at which the engines utilize increased DI, as
`shown below.
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 9
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`Ex. 9, at 42 [EBS-00003026] .
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 10
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`Ex. 9, at 43 [EBS-00003027].
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 11
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`Ex. 9 at 56.
`4. The fuel management system of
`claim 1 where the fraction of fueling
`that is provided by the first fueling
`system in the first torque range
`increases with increasing torque
`such that it is substantially equal to
`the fraction needed to prevent knock.
`
`
`
`See Claim 1.
`
`The fraction of fueling that is provided by the first fueling system in the first torque range increases with increasing torque such that it is substantially equal to the fraction needed to prevent
`knock.
`
`Knock is a significant issue at moderate-to-high loads (also known as torques). In general, knock is what limits how much torque that a gasoline engine can make at lower engine speeds (where
`the engine is used most of the time). As a result, anything that can mitigate knock will allow the engine to create more low-speed torque. See, e.g., Ex. 1 [EBS-00002931, at 36] (“With DI, the
`chance of detonation—premature ignition of the fuel and air mixture—is diminished because the phase-change cooling effect takes place during the compression stroke just before ignition.
`Ford raised peak torque by 30 lb-ft in its new 3.5-liter V-6 by combining the new dual-injection strategy with higher boost pressure.”); Ex. 3, at 2 [EBS-00002946, at 2948] (“With advanced
`dual port and direct-injection technology, the all-new second-generation 2.7-liter EcoBoost engine delivers a 25 lb.-ft. increase in torque, and at lower engine speeds compared to a traditional
`V8.”).
`
`Direct injection mitigates knock in Ford engines by cooling the in-cylinder charge. See, e.g., Ex. 1 [EBS-00002931, at 36] (“With DI, the chance of detonation—premature ignition of the fuel
`and air mixture—is diminished because the phase-change cooling effect takes place during the compression stroke just before ignition. Ford raised peak torque by 30 lb-ft in its new 3.5-liter V-
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 12
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`6 by combining the new dual-injection strategy with higher boost pressure.”); Ex. 7 [EBS-00002968, at 68] (“Pete Dowding, Ford Powertrain’s well-travelled chief engineer, told Automotive
`Engineering the cost of moving all the F-150’s engines to the direct- and indirect-injection layout is justified by the increased fuel economy the design permits—largely because of the higher
`compression ratios (CR) available from overlaying PFI onto DI. At high load, DI cools the cylinder sufficiently to maintain a high CR without high-octane unleaded. At lower loads, “the DI
`system bleeds off,” Dowding said, and PFI takes priority ,delivering efficient cylinder-fill while still reaping the BMEP benefit of higher compression.”). However, “[t]here are downsides to
`DI . . . the higher pressure pump imposes parasitic losses,” Ex. 1 [EBS-00002931, at 37], and the processes increase emissions, see Ex. 16 [EBS-00003170, at 80].
`
`Ford’s marketing materials illustrate the use of DI only to the extent it is efficient for the engine system. See, e.g., Ex. 2 [EBS-00002940, at 942] (“The new second generation 3.5-liter
`EcoBoost gets a dual-direct and port fuel-injection system. . . . Ford says this allows for better power, efficiency, emissions.”); Ex. 10 [EBS-00003074, at 077] (use of “port-fuel and direct-
`injection” system is to “increase power and efficiency.”). Increased torque/power is enabled through the use of direct injection, since it helps mitigate knock at elevated loads. Using more
`directly injected fuel than needed is detrimental to efficiency and emissions.
`
`Additional evidence is shown in the figures below, which show that at speeds between 750 and 1500rpm (where the engine operates most of the time, and where torque is limited by knock), the
`fraction of fuel in the cylinder that is provided by the first fueling (DI) systems increases. The increase is a result of increased knock tendency as load is increased. This suggests that the
`fraction of fueling that is provided by the first fueling system in the first torque range increases with increasing torque such that it is substantially equal to the fraction needed to prevent knock.
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 13
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`Ex. 9 at 42.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 14
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`Ex. 9, at 43 [EBS-00003027].
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 15
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`
`Ex. 9, at 56 [EBS-00003040].
`5. The fuel management system of
`claim 1 where in at least part of the
`first torque range closed loop control
`using a knock detector is used to
`increase the fraction of fueling that
`is provided by the first fueling
`system in the first torque range with
`increasing torque such that it is
`substantially equal to the fraction
`needed to prevent knock.
`
`See Claim 1.
`
`In at least part of the first torque range closed loop control using a knock detector is used to increase the fraction of fueling that is provided by the first fueling system in the first torque range
`with increasing torque such that it is substantially equal to the fraction needed to prevent knock.
`
`For example, Ford employs closed loop control that utilizes sensor(s) that detect knock, including in part of the first torque range. See, e.g., Ex. 6 [EBS-00002962, at 963] (“The Ford Ecoboost
`knock detection system is one of the more complex systems out there. . . . It actually learns your fuel quality while you drive. All the EB engines we work with use this adaptive timing system.
`.… The knock detection system starts with the sensors (microphones) that pick up engine noise and are mounted to the engine block. If the engine noise falls within the correct frequency and
`window of operation (around the time the spark plug fires), the ECU registers this as knock.” (emphasis added)); Ex. 11 [EBS-00003085, at 87] (“The naturally aspirated 5.0-Liter Coyote V8 in
`the 2018 Ford Mustang may seem like an already familiar engine, but Ford has improved on it for the current model year. The cylinders have been bored out to 93.0 mm, up from 92.2 mm. The
`V8 now combines low-pressure port and high-pressure direct injection, has two new anti-knock sensors . . . and it’s more powerful than before, providing up to a peak 460 horsepower and 420
`pounds-feet of torque, up from the previous 435 hp and 400 lb-ft. That extra powers comes without sacrificing fuel economy.”).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`FORD Ex. 1036, page 16
` IPR2019-01402
`
`

`

`’826 Patent Claim Element
`
`MIT’s/EBS’s Preliminary Infringement Chart (Ex. D – U.S. Patent No. 10,138,826)
`MIT/EBS v. Ford, No. 19-cv-196 (D. Del. 2019)
`
`Preliminary Infringement Theory
`Knock is a significant issue at moderate-to-high loads (also known as torques). In general, knock is what limits how much torque a gasoline engine can make at lower engine speeds (where the
`engine is used most of the time). As a result, the engine can create more low-speed torque through methods than mitigate knock. See, e.g., Exs. 1 [EBS-00002931, at 936] (“With DI, the chance
`of detonation—premature ignition of the fuel and air mixture—is diminished because the phase-change cooling effect takes place during the compression stroke just before ignition. Lowering
`the combustion chamber’s surface temperatures enables a higher compression ratio and improved efficiency whether the engine is naturally aspirated or boosted. Ford raised peak torque by 30
`lb-ft in its new 3.5-liter V-6 by combining the new dual-injection strategy with higher boost pressure.”); Ex. 3 [EBS-00002946, at 948] (“With advanced dual port and direct-injection technology,
`the all-new second-generation 2.7-liter EcoBoost engine delivers a 25 lb.-ft. increase in torque, and at lower engine speeds compared to a traditional V8.”). Direct injection mitigates knock in
`Ford engines by cooling the in-cylinder charge. See, e.g., Ex. 1 [EBS-00002931, at 36] (“With DI, the chance of detonation—premature ignition of the fuel and air mixture—is diminished
`because the phase-change cooling effect takes place during the compression stroke just before ignition. Lowering the combustion chambers’ surface temperatures enables a higher compression
`ratio and improved efficiency whether the engine is naturally aspirated or boosted. Ford raised peak torque by 30 lb-ft in its new 3.5-liter V-6 by combining the new dual-injection strategy with
`higher boost pressure.”); Ex. 7 [EBS-00002968, at 968] (“Pete Dowding, Ford Powertrain’s well-travelled chief engineer, told Automotive Engineering the cost of moving all the F-150’s engines
`to the direct- and indirect-injection layout is justified by the increased fuel economy the designs permit—largely because of the higher compression ratios (CR) available from overlaying PFI
`onto DI. At high load, DI cools the cylinder sufficiently to maintain a high CR without high-octane unleaded. At lower loads, “the DI system bleeds off,” Dowding said, and PFI takes priority,
`delivering efficient cylinder-fill while still reaping the BMEP benefit of higher compression.”).
`
`Thus, it can be inferred that closed loop control using a knock detector is used to increase the fraction of fueling that is provided by the first fueling system in the first torque range with